Letters to the Editor
-
Optional Law?
What's the point, exactly, to debating and passing a law that's optional? Of course, then again, in the eyes (and signing statements) of the President, every law seems to be optional.
-
Why Republicans Must Go
A law that gives the president the "option" of seeking a warrant. Imagine that! As things stand now, he is obligated by law to seek a warrant, but has chosen not to. Does anyone believe that this tinpot dictator will choose to seek a warrant when he merely has the "option" to do so? Is the Constitution "optional" now too?
Arlen Specter is a perfect example of why voters in the fall need to vote against Republicans to display their ire, even if "their" Republican is a seemingly reasonable person. Here, Specter's original impulse, the right one, was trumped by party politics. Specter has the votes in his committee to do the right thing. He is the chairman, and he has Democrats who would vote with him. But, apparently, being a Republican trumps being an American. This is contemptible stuff.
-
Could Specter maybe include a section for provisional carjacking?
I've got my eye on a real nice Escalade with 22" spinners, and would love to slap a 9 upside the head of the geek who drives it.
I could jack that 'lac and then if someone decides later that was against the law I'd be okay cause I was operating under Arlen's provisional amnesty.
The longer the Bush Administration continues, the less surreal Thru The Looking Glass becomes.
-
Where are the Democrats?
WHY is the issue of spying (inherently illegal) left to the nuances of Arlen Specter? Where are the Democrats on this? Is there no one at the old, tired, out-of-touch Democratic leadership group (DNC too) able to frame this issue as strong on fighting terror and just as strong on protecting our rights?
-
Arlen
chicken-shit-mother-fucker!
~steve
-
ALWAYS!!!
How many times have we seen Arlen Specter grab one sound byte after another with his tough talk and then, ever so quietly, some pressure is exerted and he gets on board the Bush-Cheney express. If push comes to shove, as it so often does, Arlen Specter will always put the Republican party first and America second.
What a shame that the people of Pennsylvania won't be able to throw this partisan hack out of office until 2010. In the meantime we should all just stand back and marvel at how he is able to walk upright when he clearly doesn't have a spine.
-
Cheney and Specter
Just a quick question, based upon Dick Cheney's response to Arlen Specter's subpoenas for telecom executives to testify about the warrantless spying program.
The excerpt below is from the Yahoo! news story on the topic:
He said Cheney had asked Republicans to oppose "any ... hearing, even a closed one" and advised lawmakers that the companies were "not to provide any information to the committee as they were prohibited from disclosing classified information."
So, my question is, if these executives are "prohibited from disclosing classified information", that logically means that they are in possession of "classified information", right? Now, if the US Justice Department cannot get security clearances for it's employees to investigate the matter, I'm wondering how these telecom execs got those clearances to lawfully possess "classified information".
If I was a congressman or Senator, I would certainly be asking how it was that these execs came to possess this information in the first place, and I would also want to see their security clearances and their applications for said clearances.
But, nobody seems to have picked up on this aspect of the story.
-
Re "Where Are the Democrats?"
Bravo, "say it ain't so"! Where ARE the Democrats? They seem to think they can coast to victory in November on the strength of the other party's unpopularity. Not so. They need to stake out positions on issues that matter to those Americans who care both about their civil rights and the fight on terrorism. Until they do, they face the possibility of another sad election postmortem.
-
I have an idea for a new law!
How about a law that allows the president to have the "option" of telling the truth when asked under oath about a consensual relationship? And any particular president who may have run afoul of previous laws related to this issue should be given amnesty.
It really blows my mind, how much different the treatment of crimes are when it's a republican president. No million dollar investigation to find out if there might have been a crime, that turns to a completely different issue several million dollars and a couple of years after it starts?
If this isn't a "rule of law" issue, what is? What happened to the president being held to a "higher standard."
-
Still Crazy After All These Years
Who would have thunk that the man who brought us the "magic bullet theory" out of all that Warren Commission brilliance some forty years ago would still be providing us with pearls like this?
Arlen, I had to be the one to tell you this but you are still anatomically incorrect....It must have something to do with your head and legs.....
-
Retceps Nelra Rotanes
I am suggesting that Arlen Specter change his name to reflect his thinking. The about face from warrantless spying on American citizens to warrantless amnesty for activist politicians who violate of the 4th Amendment is an excellent example of the Rotanes in Washington.
-
Specter always folds
He's a big man when he's attacking Democratic members of his own committee, but when it comes to standing up for the people, he always folds.
Everybody knows he's going to fold, so everything he says is discounted as not worth the air it took to get the words out.