I Am Shocked, Shocked that U.S. Gov Abused Blank Check Powers

[Koga No Goshi]

Another issue the democrats promised to address but capitulated on. What have they done with their two years besides give Barney Frank lots of power.

Hehe, 2 years of Dems in Congress didn't undue roughly 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation. The shock! The horror! ::ANGERMAN::

[Redleg]

Hehe, 2 years of Dems in Congress didn't undue roughly 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation. The shock! The horror! ::ANGERMAN::

However this was one area of the law that the Democratic controlled congress could of easily done.

So are you attempting to justify this failure of the Democratic controlled congress with the 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation that you feel is a big failure?

[HoreTore]

However this was one area of the law that the Democratic controlled congress could of easily done.

So are you attempting to justify this failure of the Democratic controlled congress with the 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation that you feel is a big failure?

Right.....

So, if I spill coffee at work, and the stain is still there the next day, the blame is on the maintenance guy who didn't clean it up, and not myself who actually made the stain....?

[Koga No Goshi]

Right.....

So, if I spill coffee at work, and the stain is still there the next day, the blame is on the maintenance guy who didn't clean it up, and not myself who actually made the stain....?

That's always the way it worked. There is no end to the litany of things "Clinton did" when Bush stopped being a lame duck and started to actively screw up the country.

[Redleg]

Right.....

So, if I spill coffee at work, and the stain is still there the next day, the blame is on the maintenance guy who didn't clean it up, and not myself who actually made the stain....?

Actually that is not what I said

You are responsible for not cleaning up your own mess

The maintenance guy is responsible for not cleaning up the mess that he knew was there.

Different types of blame, but shared nevertheless.

[PanzerJaeger]

Hehe, 2 years of Dems in Congress didn't undue roughly 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation. The shock! The horror! ::ANGERMAN::

I wasn't aware that the republicans had control of congress for the last 30 years.

[seireikhaan]

More blame game. What a shocker.

We have a civil rights crisis, and each side is so busy pointing fingers we don't even have time to even lament the problem, let alone discuss what should be done about it. Congratz all.

Besides Greg, of course, who manages to make me smile even whilst being furious.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I love how a thread titled "U.S Gov Abused Blank check powers" turned partisan instantly. It's us vs the politicians on this one, everyone in this thread is on the same side...

[Lemur]

I love how a thread titled "U.S Gov Abused Blank check powers" turned partisan instantly.

It's less than 30 days from a Presidential election, so everybody's got their fisticuffs ready. I wouldn't worry about it overmuch, same thing happened in here four years ago. Everybody calms down once the thing is decided.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Hehe, 2 years of Dems in Congress didn't undue roughly 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation. The shock! The horror! ::ANGERMAN::

Curse those unregulated truck shipping firms!

I love how a thread titled "U.S Gov Abused Blank check powers" turned partisan instantly. It's us vs the politicians on this one, everyone in this thread is on the same side...

So true. Politicians of both parties almost always love to have more power. They just go through it via different means.

CR

[Xiahou]

So wait, Americans who were in the Middle East talking on satellite phones are surprised/shocked to learn that they were being listened in on? Being DOD sat phones makes it even better.

Here's another newsflash- cell phones are also easily eavesdropped on and trackable! Shock!

Should the government be wasting it's time listening in on personal conversations of it's own personnel? No. But we're talking about government- wasting resources and invading your privacy is what it does best.

[seireikhaan]

So wait, Americans who were in the Middle East talking on satellite phones are surprised/shocked to learn that they were being listened in on? Being DOD sat phones makes it even better.

Here's another newsflash- cell phones are also easily eavesdropped on and trackable! Shock!

Should the government be wasting it's time listening in on personal conversations of it's own personnel? No. But we're talking about government- wasting resources and invading your privacy is what it does best.

Right- so its better to just pass an invasion of privacy as "something it does best" and move on, rather than proposing any change to it? Hey, taxing is what the government does best too, should we let them tax however much they want?

[drone]

Hehe, 2 years of Dems in Congress didn't undue roughly 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation. The shock! The horror! ::ANGERMAN::

What the is this supposed to mean?!? You are aware of the 2008 amendment to FISA, right?

On this bill, the Democrat-controlled Congress (check the date, the Democrats actually had majorities in both houses, plus a vast public disgust regarding the Bushies, shock/horror!) caved into the wishes of the administration, violating their duties under the Constitution and granting the executive power it does not legally have. As I said in my previous post, gutless cowards. What was the problem with (in practice, rubber-stamp) FISA court oversight? With this amendment, there is no accountability for the crimes committed by both the telco companies and the federal government. We have no true knowledge of what this surveillance covers, for all we know they tapped Democratic campaigns and congressional staff. Probably not, but nobody knows, and that is where oversight is critical. Pelosi is worthless as House Speaker, they originally rejected the bill but she caved like I knew she would. As soon as she said impeachment was off the table, Bush/Cheney knew they owned her.

And for some reason people wonder why Congress' approval ratings are lower than Bush's. Even with a mandate from the 2006 election, they do nothing. Don't even try to pass this one off on the GOP, the Democrats failed big time here.

[Koga No Goshi]

And for some reason people wonder why Congress' approval ratings are lower than Bush's. Even with a mandate from the 2006 election, they do nothing. Don't even try to pass this one off on the GOP, the Democrats failed big time here.

You guys keep lobbing this stat around. Congress is pretty much always unpopular. The rating is not so low just or only because Dems took over two years ago. It's a cumulative disgust after 8 years of policies and laws they don't like. Most of which we have your party to thank for.

[Redleg]

You guys keep lobbing this stat around. Congress is pretty much always unpopular. The rating is not so low just or only because Dems took over two years ago. It's a cumulative disgust after 8 years of policies and laws they don't like. Most of which we have your party both parties to thank for.

Correct for actually factual accuracy on who is to blame

[drone]

You guys keep lobbing this stat around. Congress is pretty much always unpopular. The rating is not so low just or only because Dems took over two years ago. It's a cumulative disgust after 8 years of policies and laws they don't like. Most of which we have your party to thank for.

My party? Again, I must state that I am an independent, registered to no party. Stop with the stereotyping and blind grouping of people who disagree with you, and actually think about the issue at hand.

How does this excuse the Democrat controlled Congress from enabling the administration on this matter?

[Koga No Goshi]

My party? Again, I must state that I am an independent, registered to no party. Stop with the stereotyping and blind grouping of people who disagree with you, and actually think about the issue at hand.

How does this excuse the Democrat controlled Congress from enabling the administration on this matter?

If you are independent, stop demanding rationales for Republican legislation that a lot of Dem lemmings got shepherded or scared or cajoled into supporting for national security purposes. I'm not happy about it, nor have I ever made a claim that Every Dem votes in lockstep with my beliefs and how I would like them to vote. But if you think looking down your nose at Congressional approval ratings and unpopular Republican pieces of legislation which haven't been retired by the Democratic Congress, and blaming it all on the Democrats, doesn't come off as markedly one-sided and partisan, you need to work on those Independent credibility ratings.

I don't like the Patriot Act, the warrantless wiretapping, etc. But neither do I like this mass export of George W. Bush's administration's most unpopular policies wholesale onto the shoulders of the Democrats. Then again I might be called left-wing even by the standards of the Democratic party, so, contrary to what many people say about me here, don't expect me to usher out some talking points to defend the Patriot Act. It's disgusting and just a return of McCarthyism, wartime hysteria and grabs of power to invade privacy and overrule civil rights and protections. But from the perspective of ending this legislation... are you suggesting I'm better off voting Rep all down the line in November? :) Don't have a lot of other choices, do I?

One of the parties is going to control the majority in January. And I don't believe in a toilet flush independent vote. When independent parties get their act together and pull their collective heads from their buttocks and stop focusing on single issues or trivial distinctions from the major parties, or refusing to compromise on one or two hard core nitpicks that prevent them from having any mainstream appeal, or actually try to work their way up the powerbase from the grassroots and local and state levels instead of just trying to decapitate the major parties with a Presidential lame duck power grab, I'll consider giving one my vote. But unless you have a compelling argument that the Republicans are more likely to overturn their own legislation, then your accusations that I'm a partisan because I'm going to continue to vote Dem despite them failing to give a hard no to Bush on several votes is worthless.

[Gregoshi]

...and blaming it all on the Democrats...

Where did you get the "all" from? I didn't read that in drone's post. He's suggesting there is shared blame. It may be a Republican turd, but the Democrats gift wrapped it.

[Koga No Goshi]

I read it

And for some reason people wonder why Congress' approval ratings are lower than Bush's. Even with a mandate from the 2006 election, they do nothing. Don't even try to pass this one off on the GOP, the Democrats failed big time here.

here. I'm not passing anything off on the GOP; it is indeed, their legislation, and a handmedown from the W administration. (Funny how we talk about it in past tense while it's still alive.)

Yes, the Democrats have failed to revolutionize and gutterdump all the legislation of the Bush Administration. Admitted. So let's get over the accusations of talking points and partisanship and discuss the issue at hand.

I think of it as the old, incredibly irresponsible owners of a house letting the paint chip and selling the house to a younger couple. Younger couple hasn't repainted the walls 3 months after moving in yet. "WHAT, WHAT??!?!?!!? YOU RUINED THIS PAINT AND HAVEN'T FIXED IT?" That's what Drone's quote sounded like. Haven't fixed it yet, yeah I'll own that. But I love how Reps and "Independents" act like the Republicans are victims of their own actions and completely without the ability to control what they do, and we have to leave that up to the Democrats to clean up all the messes and horrible legislation they pass while in the majority. And if they fail to do so in snapfinger fashion then the entire history and total existence of the legislation is their fault.

Getting back to the point, I need someone... Redleg, whoever thinks I'm just a ridiculous partisan, to give me their compelling argument as to why I should believe out of the two parties that stand any chance whatsoever of controlling the government in January, that the Republicans are the ones who are going to overturn all their own power-abusive legislation.

[drone]

If you are independent, stop demanding rationales for Republican legislation that a lot of Dem lemmings got shepherded or scared or cajoled into supporting for national security purposes. I'm not happy about it, nor have I ever made a claim that Every Dem votes in lockstep with my beliefs and how I would like them to vote. But if you think looking down your nose at Congressional approval ratings and unpopular Republican pieces of legislation which haven't been retired by the Democratic Congress, and blaming it all on the Democrats, doesn't come off as markedly one-sided and partisan, you need to work on those Independent credibility ratings.

Republican legislation? The 2008 FISA amendment (HR6304) was introduced 6/19/2008 by this guy (D-TX), to address the illegal action taken by the Bush administration and the telcos. How can you call a bill introduced in 2008 by a Democrat a Republican bill?

As to my independent standing and the uselessness of our votes, I don't believe you understand what "independent" actually means. It does not mean that I vote Constitution party, or Green party, or Libertarian party, or Socialist party. I vote for the person I think will do the best job, regardless of party affiliation. I will vote Dem or GOP if I think it's appropriate. In 2006, my "useless" vote was one of about 2000 that got Jim Webb (D-VA) elected to the Senate over Allen (R-VA). And, yes, Webb then voted for the 2008 FISA amendment, and I'm pretty ticked off about it.

[Koga No Goshi]

Republican legislation? The 2008 FISA amendment (HR6304) was introduced 6/19/2008 by this guy (D-TX), to address the illegal action taken by the Bush administration and the telcos. How can you call a bill introduced in 2008 by a Democrat a Republican bill?

As to my independent standing and the uselessness of our votes, I don't believe you understand what "independent" actually means. It does not mean that I vote Constitution party, or Green party, or Libertarian party, or Socialist party. I vote for the person I think will do the best job, regardless of party affiliation. I will vote Dem or GOP if I think it's appropriate. In 2006, my "useless" vote was one of about 2000 that got Jim Webb (D-VA) elected to the Senate over Allen (R-VA). And, yes, Webb then voted for the 2008 FISA amendment, and I'm pretty ticked off about it.

Telco wasn't brought up before, weren't we talking about the Patriot Act? Yes, agreed, bad law.

RE: Independent, what do you do when you spend all your time arguing both parties are crap and just as bad at everything? Not vote? I don't feel that will help this time around, but of course it's your vote and perogative.

Not voting, unfortunately, never helps.

[PanzerJaeger]

You guys keep lobbing this stat around. Congress is pretty much always unpopular. The rating is not so low just or only because Dems took over two years ago. It's a cumulative disgust after 8 years of policies and laws they don't like. Most of which we have your party to thank for.

Not really.

[Gregoshi]

Why are we blathering on tossing blame at Congress and the President here on this topic? Heck, we know they don't listen to We the People.

[drone]

Not really.

Ouch, I didn't know it was that bad. Hopefully a intra-party revolt is brewing...

Pelosi made for a good minority leader. Annoying and partisan, just what you want in Congress, a speed bump. She just doesn't have a clue outside that role, she needs to lead and stand up for the people, this is what the House is for.

It's Friday night, I'm mostly drunk, and I can't stay up to debate those in the Pacific time-zone. Good night all.

[Oleander Ardens]

First it is clear that the thread was derailed by me, for that I apologize to Lemur. It was a sign of bad taste and poor wit to add something insulting to some members here while I intended to insult the governing party. It is also correct that "Republican" and "ethics" are not strictly speaking oxymorons, as it is not paired as usual and is not such a plain and visible contradiction as black milk. Seamus showed here - for a Republican - surprising education and intellect.

[Lemur]

First it is clear that the thread was derailed by me, for that I apologize to Lemur.

No biggie. I should have realized that you can't talk about this sort of thing so close to an election without it becoming a partisan scrum. We can discuss the eavesdropping and surveillance powers of our government another time.

[drone]

Hehe, 2 years of Dems in Congress didn't undue roughly 30 years of Reaganomic trickle down and deregulation. The shock! The horror! ::ANGERMAN::

Then refresh my memory. What was the point of this post?

And after I detailed how the Dems screwed up (with the year and links to the law), I get this:

You guys keep lobbing this stat around. Congress is pretty much always unpopular. The rating is not so low just or only because Dems took over two years ago. It's a cumulative disgust after 8 years of policies and laws they don't like. Most of which we have your party to thank for.

And then you blame the GOP for the bill:

If you are independent, stop demanding rationales for Republican legislation that a lot of Dem lemmings got shepherded or scared or cajoled into supporting for national security purposes. I'm not happy about it, nor have I ever made a claim that Every Dem votes in lockstep with my beliefs and how I would like them to vote. But if you think looking down your nose at Congressional approval ratings and unpopular Republican pieces of legislation which haven't been retired by the Democratic Congress, and blaming it all on the Democrats, doesn't come off as markedly one-sided and partisan, you need to work on those Independent credibility ratings.

and this:

I'm not passing anything off on the GOP; it is indeed, their legislation, and a handmedown from the W administration. (Funny how we talk about it in past tense while it's still alive.)

Yes, the Democrats have failed to revolutionize and gutterdump all the legislation of the Bush Administration. Admitted. So let's get over the accusations of talking points and partisanship and discuss the issue at hand.

So finally, you admit that the Dems didn't get things done. But you are still blaming the GOP for the bill. I'm not sure where talking points and partisanship have even come into this discussion. Pretty much everyone at this point thinks both parties screwed up. Except you, who continuously try to pin in on the evil GOP. So when Redleg tries to explain that the Dems are no better, he gets:

My pained eyes can attest to the fact that I do, indeed, read what you say. And for future reference, responding to every sentence with "You did not read what I say, you fail at comprehension" does not further your argument. Especially when it's not true. :) You're just being trollish.

Since your answer was basically "we can't trust either party to do anything", and since the legislation is Republican in origin, and since there is zero chance that a third party will control the government in January, you have no call to label me a partisan for not changing my vote over the Patriot Act and wiretapping. I have more faith in what will probably end up being an even stronger Dem majority to overturn these laws or retire them, than I do in the Republican party to admit their ideas were bad an unlawful, perhaps even requiring investigations and subpoenas, and working to rectify and overturn these laws.

When the legislation, in fact, was introduced by Democrats, voted on by Democrats, and passed by Democrats. You have faith that a stronger Dem majority will overturn the laws, how much more of a majority do they need? 75%?

Not at all, this all came out of you and others calling me a partisan for saying I still felt the best chance was with the Dems, and you all smugly pulled out their recent votes and such... and I failed, and continue to fail, to see why that is an argument that any other viable path in November will likely produce the desired result of overturning these bad laws.

Redleg's argument is that neither party will overturn them. I concur. If the Dems didn't slap the White House (and the much hated W) when they had the chance, they sure won't do it when Obama moves up the street.

People are going to come out and call you blindly partisan when every post you make consistently tries to turn the argument into a GOP bash. This thread is about the illegal use of wiretaps by the Bush administration and the intelligence service. PJ brought up the fact that the Dems failed to properly address the problem once they came to power, and you jumped all over it. If you weren't happy about the way they handled the FISA amendment, why would you throw in such a rhetoric-filled partisan rant?

[Koga No Goshi]

Then refresh my memory. What was the point of this post?

And after I detailed how the Dems screwed up (with the year and links to the law), I get this:

First off, most of what I believed we were discussing did indeed originate in the Republican dominated Congress. The only exception named thus far being the Telcom bill.

Second off, most of these laws were endorsed or ball rolled from the Administration, which fostered this whole hysteria mindset of "we have to curtail civil liberties to fight terrorism" which was often followed up with "people who have nothing to hide, have nothing to worry about." Not to mention the lies that came out first... that they were only spying on international calls between non-citizens, or weren't doing any warrantless wiretapping, etc. etc. It only became clear in retrospect what all had been going on, the Bush Admin covered its rear end every step of the way and denied it was doing anything illegal or illicit over and over.

Third, yes, what you guys are condemning the Dems for is not undoing every single bit of bad legislation passed from the Republican Congress in two years time. That is precisely what you are doing. And then claiming both parties are just as bad to every extent possible. You don't even have grounds to claim that until you look at a six year track record of the Dems in power, preferrably with a President who doesn't veto everything left and right, or kill bills before even going very far because of the threat of veto. And even the Dem voices that wanted to raise large protest under Rep majority were simply threatened with arbitrary changing of the Rules of Congress, and the nuclear option (basically death to any attempted filibuster.)

So, if you want to complain about these bills, look at the whole history. The Dems also do not have a veto proof majority and that has figured into their strategy in terms of "which battles to fight right now" also. Nothing I claimed was untrue... the majority of this crap is just still in effect b.s. from the previous Congress, and yes, in the last 2 years opposition has not been as forcefully vocal as one would hope. However the pitch of this whole argument is skewed, basically that the Bush admin using the hysteria around 9/11 passed and shoved through all these bad laws with a rubberstamp congress for 6 years, and then the Dems have failed to strip the place down to the floors with a veto-vulnerable majority and opposition President. So the declaration is, they both made this mess in equal parts. That's a screwed assessment.

[drone]

First off, most of what I believed we were discussing did indeed originate in the Republican dominated Congress. The only exception named thus far being the Telcom bill.

This was the only bill we were talking about. The Dems had the chance to stop the abuse, and they failed to take it.

Second off, most of these laws were endorsed or ball rolled from the Administration, which fostered this whole hysteria mindset of "we have to curtail civil liberties to fight terrorism" which was often followed up with "people who have nothing to hide, have nothing to worry about." Not to mention the lies that came out first... that they were only spying on international calls between non-citizens, or weren't doing any warrantless wiretapping, etc. etc. It only became clear in retrospect what all had been going on, the Bush Admin covered its rear end every step of the way and denied it was doing anything illegal or illicit over and over.

There were no laws allowing warrantless wiretapping. The Bush administration just did it with no one's knowledge until the NYTimes (?) exposed it. The Protect America Act of 2007 (I forgot about this one) was the first to address the issue, again passed by Congress with a Democratic majority.

Third, yes, what you guys are condemning the Dems for is not undoing every single bit of bad legislation passed from the Republican Congress in two years time. That is precisely what you are doing. And then claiming both parties are just as bad to every extent possible. You don't even have grounds to claim that until you look at a six year track record of the Dems in power, preferrably with a President who doesn't veto everything left and right, or kill bills before even going very far because of the threat of veto. And even the Dem voices that wanted to raise large protest under Rep majority were simply threatened with arbitrary changing of the Rules of Congress, and the nuclear option (basically death to any attempted filibuster.)

No, we are condemning the Dems for caving into the White House and overlooking the illegality of it's actions with respect to the 4th Amendment. There is no legislation to overturn, the Democratic-controlled Congress passed both of them (Protect America and FISA amendment) after it all came to light. Regarding the veto, it doesn't matter. These bills allowed the president powers he didn't have, if he had vetoed them he would still be engaged in unconstitutional acts.

So, if you want to complain about these bills, look at the whole history. The Dems also do not have a veto proof majority and that has figured into their strategy in terms of "which battles to fight right now" also. Nothing I claimed was untrue... the majority of this crap is just still in effect b.s. from the previous Congress, and yes, in the last 2 years opposition has not been as forcefully vocal as one would hope. However the pitch of this whole argument is skewed, basically that the Bush admin using the hysteria around 9/11 passed and shoved through all these bad laws with a rubberstamp congress for 6 years, and then the Dems have failed to strip the place down to the floors with a veto-vulnerable majority and opposition President. So the declaration is, they both made this mess in equal parts. That's a screwed assessment.

Again, a veto has no effect here. Bush didn't have the power in the first place, without the law he would have had to revert back to the original FISA provisions, which would have be fine. Congress didn't have to do anything. Instead they gave even more power to the executive. They should have just impeached him instead.

[Koga No Goshi]

No, we are condemning the Dems for caving into the White House and overlooking the illegality of it's actions

I agree with this statement. But this statement is not the same t hing as saying the Dems are just as complicit in every inch of every abuse made in the last 8 years in the name of terrorism. They aren't. Saying they caved and gave into the Administration so they are at fault is like saying she didn't leave her husband so don't tell me she's abused. Bad analogy, but you get the point. I just resent the implication being made that both parties have been equally on board about all these bad laws to equal extent-- that is very much revisionism in favor of the Republicans, who held the majority for 6/8 years and played all kinds of sore winner b.s. tactics like nuclear option. I totally agree they've been crap in the last two years and what I hear (this is pure grapevine) is that they are letting the GOP choke itself to death to help out whoever the Dem candidate is. If that's true, it's a political game and I agree it sucks. But I also think with a real majority and/or a President who isn't going to veto anything they want to do in opposition anyhow, or exact retribution by vetoing everything if they refuse to go along with a bill he wants or a funding extension, their balls will descend a bit more.