Someone has to tilt at windmills around here.Little Raven said:Yay ACLU.
They haven't a prayer, of course. But at least they're fighting the good fight.
I couldn't help but notice the irony in that statement.Little Raven said:They haven't a prayer, of course.
It's the "ultimate power corrupts ultimately" argument. Wiretapping has been abused so much in the past.Xanikk999 said:Why would you care if your being wiretapped unless you have something to hide (like you have been doing something illegal). What is the government going to do to you if you havent been saying anything suspicious anyway? I really wouldnt care being wire tapped. They can waste there time for it. The only way YOU would specifically get wire tapped if you said something stupid like "Hey you wanna bomb the white house sometime?" and somehow the feds found out. If you have nothing to hide it shouldnt concern you. This wiretapping business isnt aimed at the general public
Xanikk999 said:Why would you care if your being wiretapped unless you have something to hide (like you have been doing something illegal). What is the government going to do to you if you havent been saying anything suspicious anyway? I really wouldnt care being wire tapped. They can waste there time for it. The only way YOU would specifically get wire tapped if you said something stupid like "Hey you wanna bomb the white house sometime?" and somehow the feds found out. If you have nothing to hide it shouldnt concern you. This wiretapping business isnt aimed at the general public
The Yankee said:The Court interprets the Constitution and the laws of the land. Which is why they can also strike down laws that are unconstitutional, unless they're passed to be an amendment.
You don't remember the check and balance system between the three branches, I see. The executive is not above either the legislative or judiciary.
Apparently, few people care about that White House statement, or else you wouldn't be the first one bringing it up.
wit>trope said:The President should issue a statement saying that he and the executive branch he controls (unitive executive theory) does not recognize the authority of any court claiming to rule on the military operations of the executive branch. So then any decision by any court about it would be meaningles -- except politically at the ballot box. For it is according to the Founding Fathers the PEOPLE who are the "final arbiter" of the constitution and NOT the courts. It's amazing to me that a Hispanic Florida Woman Congressman was so ignorant of this when she claimed that the Supreme Court was the "final arbiter" (not really surprising given her background, but still disconcerting that a member of Congress would say it)
Actually now that I think about it, the President has ALREADY issued such a statement:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051230-8.html
The Yankee said:And a woman?
Who knows, who cares. This isn't about that, which has been brought up in other threads as well. Has nothing to do with the topic at hand...