I've corrected the spelling of your screen name to reflect your true nature.

OK, I will do the same for you in the interest of going along.

And in your case it is true, rather than the little cowardly lies you tell.

You will not even support Benjerman Franklin's right to own his press; and the man is dead and can not hurt you! He would if still alive of course; cowardly collectivists like you would have been a novelty back then.

The cabal owns everything and Glenn tells us what to say, what to print and who to vote for! Even Kos takes orders from Glenn now and we all get checks from George Soros! Muhahahahaha!

Schoolboy humor makes a nice cover for the times when you just can not answer. William not answer your e-mail plea for instructions again?

It is truly odd that you do not care how often you refuse to answer even the simplest of questions. No guts, I guess.

Note: There are exactly 7 members of the cabal (including sock-puppets) and GG is not one of them. William T. is the only admissions officer.

The rampant ego exhibited in the previous posts is normal yet based in bias. Have you twits ever considered the possibility that these Dems voted for the bill because they know something you don't?

***

Doesn't a significant number of Democrats voting for something that the hated Bush wants, signal in your tiny little one-track minds, that something legitimate is transpiring?

Classic authoritarian reasoning. The government "knows things" that the unwashed masses don't, so this ipso facto makes whatever they decide proper, and criticisms thereof improper. Best advocated by a member of the unwashed masses himself.

Since you seem to be fond of the rhetorical question device, here's one for you. If our Senators are aware of such a compelling indication that an attack is imminent, so imminent that it justifies ramming legislation through the Congress with no debate or deliberation, shouldn't this information be shared with the public, and the population be constructively mobilized to head-off the threat? Or could Members of Congress be trembling at Mr. Chertoff's "gut feelings?" Better yet, could this perhaps be, oh I don't know, crass political coercion that is bound to capture the unfounded electoral fears of just enough Democrats to shove this legislation through?

You are a very good subject indeed, Shooter. You would have been perfect for 17th Century Europe.

A 'straw man challenge' says a coward who will not state that he supports Ben Franklin's right to own his press; a simple question that most Americans would answer, "Of course, so what?"

-- bully1

I've corrected the spelling of your screen name to reflect your true nature.

the 'rats...

in his (new) post up above. Enjoy.

Tell us more about Armstrong Williams' show on Air America, won't you, please?

Honestly, I've had things with more brains and character than you removed from my colon.

I am nobody's clone, but it's amusing to be called one by a John Birch Society clown. You can shove Ben Franklin's printing press, along with your other straw-man "challenges," up your deceitful, delusional, self-righteous ass.

My, my what an intellectual we have here!

A 'straw man challenge' says a coward who will not state that he supports Ben Franklin's right to own his press; a simple question that most Americans would answer, "Of course, so what?"

Then he gets all profane because he will not affirm a basic American tenet. And brings out the old Birch stuff because we see his Stalinist bent and he wants to hurl invective. Amusing.

Well, we all see you for what you are.

NOTE: I am sure you are a clone or sock-puppet made in LWM's image.

The rampant ego exhibited in the previous posts is normal yet based in bias. Have you twits ever considered the possibility that these Dems voted for the bill because they know something you don't?

You people have been wrong about the data mining, Swift Bank program, Plame, and calls between people overseas yet routed through the US. For that matter you've been wrong about the elections and the 16 words.

Doesn't a significant number of Democrats voting for something that the hated Bush wants, signal in your tiny little one-track minds, that something legitimate is transpiring?

This is just another example of how hatred can blind the mind.

Sometimes you people don't know when to keep your mouths shut, like the idiot "Kitt" that thought "news" was an acronym for north, east, west, and south.

-- shooter242

We, sometimes. You, never.

The "idiot" quickly acknowledged his error and apologized. You, being a sociopath, are incapable of even considering such a thing. If there is a gene for human decency, you were born without it.

I noticed on Balkinization that the previous bill that had been allegedly agreed to by the CIA Director, then rejected by the White House nonetheless, contained a provision subjecting these surveillance programs to Justice Department Inspector General review to ensure that they are being conducted according to the law. This was one of the few good features of that prior version.

I just did a search for the bill passed by the Senate and found no reference to the Inspector General or any oversight of this nature. Anyone else see whether this feature has been left out? This is a very dramatic omission from one version of legislation to the immediate next, to put it mildly.

What I still cannot comprehend, even after all these years of Congress' abdication of its constitutional responsibility, is how the Senate, including several Democrats, could capitulate so swiftly to such a cheap and undemocratic legislative technique - demanding legislation just before recess in order to rescue America from some glaring, impending threat. Are Republicans actually arguing that we need this FISA "fix" to prevent ourselves from being destroyed this summer? Are the Democrats actually buying it?

The bottom line is this and it is not hard to argue (just ask Sen. Feingold): this is not about giving government the tools it needs to protect America, this is about curtailing an already overreaching and unaccountable administration and standing up to its attempts to grab yet more power for itself and away from the courts, the Congress, and the people. FISA is not "out of date" - it was amended after 911, and the administration even turned down further expansions of FISA power. In the very recent wake of our Attorney General's utterly arrogant and deceptive testimony, and the abuses upon abuses of power of this administration, the President expects the Congress to rubber stamp yet another giveaway of power at the expense of our civil liberties?

Yes, he does. And they apparently will.