Lie? or , as previously posted (who?), "doublethink"/ believe ? Been seeing that all over , and I think most of 'em have been copying each other's homework , so don't even know it's false . The curious part is that those that are most distrustful of government in general, believe this government implicitly , at it's most intrusive and secretive .

Here's an exchange at Blogs for Victo(R)y aka Blogs for Bush last night. (until my Third World-ish ISP dumped me off again ) ( bold/emphasis mine). Wish I had some magic formula to get through with some sort of fact-realization thingy.;D It's all against "THEM" , nothing on "us".

78.Mark Noonan

Diana,

Once again, you are just being dense - we’re not trying to build a criminal case, but kill enemies in war time. And we’re not trying to keep Telecom execs out of jail for 4th amendment violations, but just keeping greedy trial lawyers off their a**…

Only in the paranoid, deluded and ignorant left is there anything here other than a run-of-the-mill national security issue being hamstrung by Democrats who ask “how high” whenever the trial laywers so much as whisper “jump”.

*****************************************************************************************************

79. Diana Powe

Mark,

That’s all a crock. If the issue was really having a law adequate to the task, then the President could have asked for even more changes to FISA than he already asked for and got. However, instead, the Executive Branch chose to break the law and lie about it until they were exposed. Why did they break the law? Was it because they couldn’t get the REPUBLICAN-controlled Congress to change the law as they wanted? No. This Administration is dead-set on expanding the Executive Branch and placing it above the other two branches of the government.

We all understand that you have a financial interest in “proving” how “corrupt” the Democrats are but you can use the magical phrase “trial lawyers” all you want and it doesn’t change the fact of who is facing whom in civil court over the violations of FISA. If you think extracting money from AT&T is SO INCREDIBLE SIMPLE why don’t you just make up something and go sue them for the lost equity in your house? It should be a simple matter to shake them down for a few thousand dollars, right?

President Bush made the conscious and deliberate decision to let the PAA expire over telecom immunity. I know he doesn’t want personal responsibility for his actions. I know you don’t want him to bear personal responsibility for his actions. However, the personal responsibility is his and his alone. If he didn’t like the idea of personal responsibility then he should have stayed with the Texas Rangers Baseball Club

***********************************************************************************************************

80. mikeinportc |

“Because greedy trial laywers wish to make ever more money, Nancy Pelosi has placed Ameirca’s security at risk - for her, dead Americans are not as important as keeping a well-heeled donor-base happy”

Is that copied from Rush Limbaugh, or did he copy it from here ? There isn’t anything at risk with this, except us, from our own government . Whatever powers this president gets will be passed on to the next one . Do we really want to give a Hill-Billy, McCain or Obama administration access to ALL, and with no oversight? I sure don’t .

Re :”greedy trial lawyers” The EFF lawyers make ~ 1/3 what they could get elsewhere , and that’s ALL they’ll get from this . That whole line of argument is bs. The real question is whether or not the Constitution will continue to mean something , or just be a “quaint” wish list .

********************************************************************************************************

81. Mark Noonan |

mike,

I want the President to have the ability to monitor enemy communications in war time. I don’t care who the President is.

****************************************************************************************************

82. mikeinportc |

“If they aren’t given immunity from civil prosection, they won’t participate in data mining requests, which have already been shown not to violate FISA and certainly don’t violate any consitutional protections.”

With a warrant . Without a warrant - violates EVERYTHING (that’s pertinent) .

“they won’t participate in [ed.note: ILLEGAL!] data mining requests”

GOOD!!!

“already been shown”

PuhhhLeeeeezzz!!!!

Nothing has been shown . The telecoms say that the WH forbids it , and the WH is stonewalling too . (When do they not?)

Besides, if they’re innocent , they have nothing to fear . Right? =)))))))))

******************************************************************************************************

83. Mark Noonan |

Diana,

It wouldn’t have helped or harmed President Bush at all to allow the FISA law to be done without a shield for the telecom companies - but it would have harmed national security, and that is a concern all Americans should share. You don’t, because you’ve been gnawing an absurd bone on this subject for a couple years now…you have convinced yourself that a law was broken and that President Bush lied about it, and because you don’t want to back down from your position, you just cobble together a rationale for oppositon to anything happening on the matter of signals intelligence.

Its outrageous what is happening here and it disgusts me no end to see what depths you on the left have fallen to in quest of your hatred for President Bush. For crying out loud, let it go - the man is out of office in 11 months. Think of your country, for once.

******************************************************************************************************

84. mikeinportc |

“mike,

I want the President to have the ability to monitor enemy communications in war time. I don’t care who the President is.”

Mark , WE aren’t the “enemy ” . (Last I knew)

Yep. That's how I've thought of both Bush and The Big A(hmedinejad) for a long time . Kinda like the great uncle or neighbor or friend of a friend , that you're glad to know , but when they start talking politics , you think " I'm glad that guy's not in charge ." Unfortunately , that guy is in charge .