Letters to the Editor
DevilDawg
Published Letters: 41 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Fearmongering
[Read the article: Warrantless surveillance and the new Coretta Scott King disclosures]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"if the Democrats actually tried to make that case, rather than run from the debate and hope it disappears as quickly as possible, even more Americans would understand the need for oversight.
That is what a party does when it actually stands for something and believes in something -- it makes its case to the American public."
I agree completely. However, the Dems have been either unwilling or incapable of making a clear, effective case to the public for a long time.
While the administration continues to issues warnings and pushing fear onto the public, the Dems capitulate to the most serious issues in order to placate the 30% of Americans that still support the Administration. True patriots those guys.
-
to scathew:
[Read the article: Warrantless surveillance and the new Coretta Scott King disclosures]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You say My guess is, yes, some useful intelligence is gained through these extraordinary measures, but not so much that denying it would really be a big deal. I suspect we could find other ways that would accomplish the same things or even just live without the advantages.
The argument is not whether the government should or should not be able to wiretap individuals with potential connections to terrorists. The issue is whether Congress should institute regulations requiring the Administration to abide by the Constitution and obtain warrants before wiretapping individuals. You know, make the Administration demonstrate that the surveillance is supported with antiquated, tiresome, and troublesome ideas like facts, evidence and/or probable cause.
-
Shooter
[Read the article: Warrantless surveillance and the new Coretta Scott King disclosures]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Recission of Habeas Corpus -- not for American citizens and US residents. Happily that right has been re-affirmed.
Well, I suppose Jose Padilla (US citizen & resident) would disagree with you as he was detained for 4 years without trial as an enemy combatant.
* approval of "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- what you mean to say is that except for CIA interrogations out of the country "enhanced interrogation" has been banned and considerably restricted even for the CIA.
You're right allowing only one organization to engage is torture...ummm..."enhanced interrogation techniques" definitely needs to be propoerly caveated. Of course, the main point that you may have missed is that the CIA is part of the administration and was conveniently removed from any restrictions against torture in order to gain "intelligence".
* FISA capitulation -- FISA is still in effect as your cite of McConnell revealed, and warrants are applied for. Anything else you have already admitted numerous times, is unknown.
Yes, FISA still operates. However, as part of the patriotically named "Protect America Act", FISA is removed from the process for surveillance of communications beginning in a foreign country - regardless of probable cause, of course, just trust the administration that such a concept is maintained in full.
* the administration's increasing belligerence towards Iran -- You're going to restrict the speech of a President? What a lofty goal! I don't think so. Like it or not that is a form of diplomacy. You know, the kind of stuff you advocate.
Diplomacy (Webster's): Pronunciation: də-ˈplō-mə-sē; noun;
1) the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2) skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility.
Pretty sure that overt threats at another country does not fall within either definition.
* Either way, on the most egregious abuses of this administration, there is little to no effective opposition, -- You wouldn't entertain the thought that maybe they know something you don't would you? Perhaps the howls of impending doom really aren't valid?
They might know more, sure, but they also knew more about WMD's in Iraq and we all know how quickly those were found.
Meanwhile I see absolutely nothing about Democrat campaign finance abuses. Tsk. In the end though, if you try to scare the wits out of people by innuendo and incomplete assertions, why be surprised when you succeed? The pen is indeed mightier than the sword, but you need to be careful about where you are brandishing either.
The administrations' attempts to undermining constitutional tenets, and a Dem's campaign finance reform abuses (which are not anything I am aware of) are not even on the same page. How can you even compare the two. Sorry, but your points are poorly-informed and not even accurate. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your arguments.
-
Casual Observer
[Read the article: Warrantless surveillance and the new Coretta Scott King disclosures]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm hoping he'll spend some time diagnosing the markets
Ho won't need to. That research has already been performed by Mike Pence who discovered that Iraq was just like an Indiana Market in the summer. Everything is going swimmingly.
-
Withdrawing to the original level
[Read the article: The Iraq debate: Caving in before it begins?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This seems to be one of the lost discussions in this "debate" over troop withdrawals. Of course, by the time the troop level is reduced to 130,000 it will actually not be the same amount of troops that were located in Iraq at the beginning of last year; it won't include the brave men and women who have been killed during the period for which the administration wanted to show the surge was "working".
I can already see the following scenario playing itself out. Bush will force the Congress to capitulate to his demands once again and continue the current troop level. Then around next fall, miraculously, just in time for the election cycle, the admiinistration will acknowledge the great successes in Iraq and bring home 30,000 troops. This will allow the media and Congress to both point to the amazing new progress in Iraq and how the troops are coming home. Despite the fact that the initial troops level is maintained.