Drudge Retort: Poll: 2-in-3 Support Phone Snoop

Friday, May 12, 2006

A majority of Americans initially support a controversial National Security Agency program to collect information on telephone calls made in the United States in an effort to identify and investigate potential terrorist threats, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Posted by VRWC at 12:18 PM | 158 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry

Bush Gets Tough On Immigration

Order: English and Spanish language merchandise from CafePress today.

...or watch the YouTube Video.

Archives

May 12, 2006
May 11, 2006
May 10, 2006
May 09, 2006
May 08, 2006
May 07, 2006
May 06, 2006
May 05, 2006
May 04, 2006
May 03, 2006
May 02, 2006
May 01, 2006
April 30, 2006
April 29, 2006

The new survey found that 63 percent of Americans said they found the NSA program to be an acceptable way to investigate terrorism, including 44 percent who strongly endorsed the effort. Another 35 percent said the program was unacceptable, which included 24 percent who strongly objected to it.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

A slightly larger majority--66 percent--said they would not be bothered if NSA collected records of personal calls they had made, the poll found.

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 08:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

Underlying those views is the belief that the need to investigate terrorism outweighs privacy concerns. According to the poll, 65 percent of those interviewed said it was more important to investigate potential terrorist threats "even if it intrudes on privacy." Three in 10--31 percent--said it was more important for the federal government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats.

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 09:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

Let lots of untrustworthy people in the country, then sit back and let the citizens give you more power to solve the problem you created. Only government works this way.

Posted by paleocon at 2006-05-12 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

In another poll, virutally 100% of Americans said that, if the president requested and was granted the authority to do the wire taps and allowed oversight by people with the proper security clearance, they would support the NSA program or even any other program to increase security. The thing that bothers some of us is not the NSA program but rather the lack of Congressional authority or oversight.
Why can't George Bush just ask Congress for the permission and have proper oversight.

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sounds like a mandate, (in Bush World(TM))!

Now if only we conservatives recognized polls as having any significance we would be all set!

But I guess our previous stand on polls ruins all that.
Principles you know.

Posted by Redneckville at 2006-05-12 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

No one has even had the time to get the facts on this story that showed up yesterday...

I will wait for the poll that comes out next week...

And I will admit I believe the 29% poll but we have had the info on Bush for 5 damn years...

PS I realize the database story actually broke in January but no one paid any attention to it...

Lets see what the facts are before making decisions bases on a SAME DAY poll....

Posted by Scarey_e at 2006-05-12 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

All the more reason to wonder why Bush had to implement this in secret. People would support a phone-snoop program where national security is the only concern. We don't know exactly what the Bushies are up to and the fact that they tried to do it on the sneak leads me to think they may have alterior motives.

Posted by Sully at 2006-05-12 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rcade! That wasn't the title of this thread

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 12:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

This will change.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 12:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

70% of Americans disapprove of Bush but only 35% of Americans disapprove of this effort. I'd love to see some statistics on the overlap between these views. My fear is that a good chunk of those 70% disapprove of Bush because he hasn't stripped us of MORE freedoms.

Anyway now comes the part where we liberals call people "sheep" and the neo-conservatives (no traditionanal conservative could support Bushie)suddenly start touting the importance of polls again. Sigh.

Posted by ppaladin123 at 2006-05-12 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

The problem is we don't really for sure what is the truth.

We've been told, "they're only collecting numbers and not listening to calls."

Ok...what kind of track record does the current administation have at telling Americans the truth about what's going on behind the scenes?

This "poll" doesn't carry much weight as far as I'm concerned since it was based on what we've been told to believe.

Posted by BillJohnson at 2006-05-12 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hell...they probably WANT us to believe they aren't listening to calls. I mean, why would they give away their hand.

Think about it.

I think the odds are pretty great we're being mislead, again.

Posted by BillJohnson at 2006-05-12 12:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Learn it, live it, love it.

P.S. Can't wait till the next Osama tape three minute hate!

Posted by Norm_ at 2006-05-12 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"This "poll" doesn't carry much weight as far as I'm concerned since it was based on what we've been told to believe."

The poll is legitmate. Its just supporting a hypothetical program. Nobody can support Bush's program because he hasn't told us what it is.

Posted by Sully at 2006-05-12 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

People who have been sold the idea that the sky is falling will hide under any rock for shelter.

Usually they'll find a Republican politician already there.

Posted by Corky at 2006-05-12 12:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

It still looks like a same day or next day poll...I don't believe the facts are out...

Last night I did watch an outraged Scarborough and an equally outraged Gingrich...

This isn't over yet

Posted by Scarey_e at 2006-05-12 12:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who the hell are they polling on this stuff??? I don't know anybody who supports wire taps.

Posted by GIMPSTER at 2006-05-12 12:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Last Nights Quick Vote Came Up With These numbers:

CNN Quick Vote

Created: Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 10:58:16 EDT
How does the report that the NSA is building a database of Americans' phone calls make you feel?

Creepy 77% 90213 votes

More secure 23% 27115 votes

Total: 117328 votes

Now This Is 180 Out From This ABC Poll

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 12:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

There is freedom within, there is freedom without
Try to catch the deluge in a paper cup
There's a battle ahead, many battles are lost
But you'll never see the end of the road
While you're traveling with me

Hey now, hey now
Don't dream it's over
Hey now, hey now
When the world comes in
They come, they come
To build a wall between us
We know they won't win

Now I'm towing my car, there's a hole in the roof
My possessions are causing me suspicion but there's no proof
In the paper today tales of war and of waste
But you turn right over to the T.V. page

Now I'm walking again to the beat of a drum
And I'm counting the steps to the door of your heart
Only shadows ahead barely clearing the roof
Get to know the feeling of liberation and relief

Hey now, hey now
Don't dream it's over
Hey now, hey now
When the world comes in
They come, they come
To build a wall between us
Don't ever let them win

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

The bush admin has been caught lying every single step of the way when it comes to NSA wiretapping. Every step.

If they say it's only call records and theyre not listening to the calls themselves...

Then the trend here would be that they ARE listening to our phone calls. And I don't doubt that shit for one moment.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2006-05-12 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sully,

Most Americans hypothetically supported the Iraq war, until we learned we weren't being told all the facts.

This hypothetical poll is probably pointless, since it's based on facts that probably don't exist, hypothetically.

Posted by BillJohnson at 2006-05-12 12:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

It almost makes me wonder if Rove didn't plan this situation, make Bush seem like the good guy for insisting on the NSA program and do it in an illegal manner when a perfectly legal method could have been easily accomplished so that anyone (Democrats) who objected to the illegality of it would seem to be against increased security. "Those Dems are soft on terrorists" could then be screamed in attack ads in November. Never assume that Bushco does ANYTHING without a political motivation.

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

I find it amusing that Rush and the rest of the gov't (wink, wink) keeps stressing that they don't get name and address info along with the phone numbers. As if they don't know where to find reverse phone books on the internet or something. Ha.

Posted by mOntecOre at 2006-05-12 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

"This hypothetical poll is probably pointless, since it's based on facts that probably don't exist, hypothetically."

I think the poll doesn't prove what the headline claims.

But it does prove that if Bush's motives for this program are as he states, then there would be no need for him to have skirted the law on it. He could have proposed the program to Congress and they would have had to approved based on overwhelming public support. There is no legitimate reason for him to continue to act in secret unless he's lying.

Posted by Sully at 2006-05-12 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Danni,

This poll would be like asking people, "now that you know the Dixie Chicks like to run down America when they visit other countries, would you support their freedom of speech if you knew they were actually spies."

huh?

This NSA poll is about as useful.

Posted by BillJohnson at 2006-05-12 12:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Montecore,

Right and I am SURE that Rush is innocent just like he said he was.

The latest is that the whitehouse is now saying that they have the right to access your e-mail and voicemail accounts.

Why does this not surprise me anymore?

Posted by JimmyWallback at 2006-05-12 12:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

The NSA program "Echelon" has been in effect for over 30 years. The Echelon system is a huge complex of Cray Super computers (at least it used to be) and was SUPPOSED to use computers to listen for words such as 'assassinate', 'bomb', 'president' and any combination of the words taken from alomost every communication in, into and out of the US. It WAS NEVER supposed to be for our govt to sit there and listen to the actual call.

There's undeniable proof that they system was corrupted under the Reagan administration when it was used to listen in on ongoing Airbus negotiations so that Boeing could get the contract (and they did). I'm more than willing to believe that the very same system is being used against those in the minority in govt as we speak.

BTW, the way the US has gotten around it's own laws that USED to forbid spying on its own citizens, was to fund an Echelon program in Autralia and England. The 'other country' spies on our citizens and we do the same for them. Plausible denial.

If ANY of this sounds too far out there, do a little homeowrk before just firing off some tired old rhetoric. Very credible sources exist for this info.

Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2006-05-12 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

www.madison.com

In a letter to Hinchey, who has been the most dogged congressional advocate for investigation of the spying program, Office of Professional Responsibility counsel H. Marshall Jarrett explained that he had closed the Justice Department probe on Tuesday because his office's requests for security clearances to conduct the investigation had been denied.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 01:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Like I Stated We Have No Idea Of What They Intruded On.

So Don't Be surprise If You Had A Tracker Injected During Your Last Flu Shot.

Ah So What Just As Long As I'm Safe !!!

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 01:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Polls are irrelevant when it comes to our rights. Individual rights are not negotiable. We have a right to privacy whether some accept it or not.

Posted by member2586 at 2006-05-12 01:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

if time were not a moving thing
And I could make it stay
This hour of love we share
Would always be
There'd be no coming day
To shine a morning light
And make us realize our night is over

When you walk away from me
There is no place to put my hand
Except to shade my eyes against the sun
That rises over the land
I watch you walk away
Somehow I have to let you go
Cause it's over

If you knew just how I really feel
You might return and yet
There are so many times
That people have to love and then forget
Oh there might have been a way somehow
I have to force myself to say
It's over

So I turn my back,
Turn my collar to the wind
Move along in silence
Trying not to think at all
I set my feet before me
Walk the silent street before me
Now it's over

If time were not a moving thing
And I could make you stay
This hour of love we share
Would always be
There'd be no coming day
To shine a morning light
And make us realize our night is over

It's over

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

""There is no legitimate reason for him to continue to act in secret unless he's lying.""

Does Carl Rove work in the White House??

Is the Pope a Catholic??

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"the whitehouse is now saying that they have the right to access your e-mail"

Bush doesn't send email, even to his daughters, because he doesn't want people reading his 'personal stuff'. - Apr. 14 '05.

So there you have it, practial advice from your friendly Commander in Chief.
If you don't want to be spied on, just don't use email, or voicemail, or the phone, or slowmail, or a telegram or a library, or a credit card...

In fact, if you don't want to be spied on, your best bet is to move to Iraq and put on a Burqa.

Posted by Norm_ at 2006-05-12 01:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Here are my thoughts and yes, I work in the communication industry.

1.) The US government dictates the maximum encryption to be used on all data transfers. Their purpose is to make all communication reasonably secure except for persons/organizations that have the time/money to spend decrypting messages. Basically, they try to remove the economic gain from private enterprises. This same cost/time element does not apply to the US government either through capturing and decrypting messages on their own (using tax payer dollars) or through working with the phone companies to save the effort of doing any decrypting (phone company provides the key).
2.) Over the last 10 years, all telephone communication is digitalized vs. transmitted using analog. If you are using analog, it is very, very difficult to automate a snooping process so you would need someone to physically sit in on the call and listen to both ends of the conversation. With digital, it is easy to use standard computer hardware to automatically screen calls for key words, etc.
3.) I think the administration is parsing words when they say they do not listen to calls' I want them to say that they do not screen calls or capture any information other than the numbers being dialed on both ends.

I personally believe that the government does indeed screen the content of all calls. I would not doubt if this was part of the data mining' that the former military guy said would have discovered many in the 9/11 plot. I think the speed with which that allegation was swept away without anything public discussion means that data was likely collected through a similar program as the NSA wiretap program.

Posted by Jacque_Strap at 2006-05-12 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Norm,

I have to wonder something about the Muslim culture.

All this about women covering their entire bodies and showing on their eyes, I have to wonder how many men in those countries have used that as a means to get around if they're up to something no good.

What a great cover. Just hide your body and only show your eyes and pass as a woman, if you don't talk.

Posted by BillJohnson at 2006-05-12 01:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Your call: Should the NSA look at phone records?
Friday, May 12, 2006; Posted: 11:53 a.m. EDT (15:53 GMT)

/>
Manage Alerts | What Is This? (CNN) -- The National Security Agency has been collecting information on millions of domestic phone calls, according to a report this week in USA Today. CNN.com asked readers whether they think it is appropriate for the government to monitor telephone records. Here is a selection of the responses, some of which have been edited:

www.cnn.com

I Just Went Back To See If There Was A Change Towards The ABC Poll And Here Are The Votes Now:

CNN Quick Vote

Created: Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 10:58:16 EDT

How does the report that the NSA is building a database of Americans' phone calls make you feel?

Creepy 75% 141185 votes

More secure 25% 45844 votes
Total: 187029 votes

The ABC Poll Took 502 and This Is At 187,029 which is more than a Huge difference. I will like to se how this Develops.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

The same 2 out of three idiots who would rush out to buy one of these.

halliburtoncontracts.com

Get them while they last!

Posted by I_AM_SAM944 at 2006-05-12 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I have to wonder how many men in those countries have used that as a means to get around if they're up to something no good."

Arafat, for one.

Posted by Zatoichi at 2006-05-12 01:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

ABC poll
Is it okay for the government to track phone calls made by you and millions of other Americans?

No, it is not acceptable no matter what the government says.
3,116
Yes, if the government says it is necessary to fight terrorism.
1,214
Total Vote: 4,330

Posted by Zatoichi at 2006-05-12 01:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Your baby doesn't love you anymore

Golden days before they end,
Whisper secrets to the wind
Your baby won't be near you anymore.

Tender nights before they fly
And falling stars that seem to cry
Your baby doesn't want you anymore
It's over.

It breaks your heart in two
To know she's been untrue
But, oh what will you do?
When she says to you there's someone new
We're through, we're through.

It's over
It's over
it's over

All the rainbows in the sky
Start to weep and say goodbye
You won't be seeing rainbows anymore.

Setting suns before they fall
They come to you. That's all, that's all
But you'll see lonely sunsets after all.

It's over, It's over, it's over
It's over

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 01:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

I hate to say it but I don't see the big deal if, in fact, they are only recording numbers. If they are tapping my phone and listening and recording I'll feel differently.

To me the big story is how easily the phone companys sold the shit. They could have asked for a subpoena but instead just sold it no questions asked. I heard one company, it's called Quest or something, refused to sell the info.

DOGMAN

Posted by dogman at 2006-05-12 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zat,

I was wondering about ABC poll it came out to Quick and So few People.

Oh did you hear Tom Cruise is going to Sponsor the Flying Restoration of the CAF's F-82 Twin Mustang ?

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 01:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

completely fake. Just another propaganda piece to make you think "well if 2/3rds agree I cant make much of a stand against it". Bullshit. I guarantee at least 75% disagree with tapping any phone calls without a warrant for any reason.

Posted by THEBULL at 2006-05-12 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

DOGMAN!

FETCH,BOY!!!

Posted by itsme at 2006-05-12 01:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

DOGMAN!

FETCH,BOY!!!

Posted by itsme at 2006-05-12 01:49 PM | Reply

Uh, what was that for?? Fuck face.

DOGMAN

Posted by dogman at 2006-05-12 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"completely fake. Just another propaganda piece "

I agree, just look at my source and you know it!!

www.washingtonpost.com

Posted by VRWC at 2006-05-12 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

QWEST didn't do it because they said it was illegal.
Want to guess how long before somebody launches a class action suit against the other companies for invasion of privacy?
I'm sure the Bushies will just borrow the money from China to idemnify them though.
Like OJ, the civil trials are gonna do what the legal system wouldn't.

Posted by northguy3 at 2006-05-12 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

The ABC Poll Took 502 and This Is At 187,029 which is more than a Huge difference. I will like to se how this Develops.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 01:28 PM | Reply

Sarge, please stop thinking that a non-scientific poll from a website means anything. It doesn't. They say so on their poll. Like it or not, CNN is viewed by the Right in this country as left-wing. Which means the majority of Republicans are at FoxNews, which means the voting population is far skewed to the left. Hence it means nothing.

To prove my point, do the live vote at FoxNews.com right now. Its basically the same question, and has about 21,000 votes. 77% of the population according to this online poll say the NSA program is good. This poll is just as much crap as the CNN one.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2006-05-12 02:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 02:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

"
Oh did you hear Tom Cruise is going to Sponsor the Flying Restoration of the CAF's F-82 Twin Mustang ?
"

No shit.
I've seen that bird up close.
Bizarre creation.

Posted by Zatoichi at 2006-05-12 02:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sarge....the problem with those "quick votes" is that they are not based on a random sample. Those polls give us the answers only of people who 1. use the internet for news. 2. specifically, read the cnn webpage. and 3. are motivated enough to respond to a "quick vote." I suspect that people who meet the above 3 criteria are on the whole a more liberal bunch.

It's odd but a truly random sample of 500 people CAN give you a good idea of what people believe (within a margin of error that grows as the sample size diminishes) while a non-random sampling of 200,000 will tell you squat.

Like the article said though...these numbers may change as people digest the information and listen to the arguments presented by commentators,politicians, etc.

I personally think this is an unwarranted intrusion given the miniscule danger of a terrorist attack but hey it is pretty easy to scare people with images of bombs and poison. The amazingly high murder rate in the U.S. seems like a more pressing concern to me but what do I know.

Posted by ppaladin123 at 2006-05-12 02:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Commonsense-
Has Australia bullied the largest telecommunications corporations in the US to turn over thair data on the call records of tens of millions of Americans? Has Australia tapped our hard lines? Or, and not to diminish your concern, has Australia monitored domestic calls? Moreover, does Australia control the intel. apparatus of the US, and its enforcement arm?

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 01:08 PM | Reply

Technically, yes. It was done IN Australia for our own govt as a way to circumvent the US laws that forbid domestic spying.

I'm not saying Autralia has done anything wrong, I'm simply poiting out the fact that we let others gather the intel for our own govts use. That's all. I don't blame Austrlia at all.

Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2006-05-12 02:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why can't George Bush just ask Congress for the permission and have proper oversight.

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 12:26 PM

Because Bush knows that when he told Congress his REAL reason -- that he wanted to collect data on his political enemies -- Congress wouldn't allow it.

Posted by CalifChris at 2006-05-12 02:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

CC:

(((Because Bush knows that when he told Congress his REAL reason -- that he wanted to collect data on his political enemies -- Congress wouldn't allow it. )))

Facts? Links? Proof?

Posted by lokisfur at 2006-05-12 02:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Northguy says, "QWEST didn't do it because they said it was illegal."

The administration and the NSA have already stated that no names would be required in the information requested. The only time that information would be sought would be if call patterns of any US citizen was to or from known or suspected al Qaeda individuals or organizations. That would be probable cause acquire a warrant, if needed.

So, no wholesale spying on US citizens is being done by the NSA, as the Left/Democrats are attempting to imply with all this hysterical, the-sky-is-falling effort to derail finding TERRORISTS!

Once again, the Left is found throwing a monkey wrench into the intelligence process, and which the 9/11 Commission indicated was so vital!

This "LEAK" is not only being used for partisan poltical purposes by the Leftist subversives, but it makes any future hope of finding call patterns of the terrorists that much more difficult; if not impossible!

Good going Democrat fear mongers and terrorist suporting creeps -- another display of support for your Islamic terrorist "freedom fighters."

"Want to guess how long before somebody launches a class action suit against the other companies for invasion of privacy?"

Never happen -- no names . . . remember? And, just stop to think about the companies that sell your phone numbers . . .

Can you actually think that hard, punk -- well can you?

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 02:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

""This "LEAK" is not only being used for partisan poltical purposes by the Leftist subversives, but it makes any future hope of finding call patterns of the terrorists that much more difficult; if not impossible!""

And just how do you know that the "LEAK"
wasn't done by Rove for the very reasons I stated, and others too, above. Just because it, so far, hasn't helped Dubya in the polls isn't our fault. And...since this administration has a history of leaking, it seems the more likely possibility.

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think the majority of Americans -- including myself -- are sort of lulled into not making a big deal about this because they feel they have nothing to hide and that their phone conversations are dull and probably of no interest at all to the NSA. I've felt that if the NSA needs to be bored to tears -- go ahead and listen to my phone calls. However, it's exactly that kind of attitude that makes it easy to give away your rights. Once we give away our rights, it's a much harder fight to get them back -- especially to a president who thinks he is above the law such as Bush.

We all know why Bush wants no Congressional oversight -- because he's using this data for other illegal purposes and not just "going after al Qaeda." I imagine it is very convenient and most helpful for Bush and those Republicans who give Bush a pass on his spying to know exactly what their political opponents are up to each year, who they speak to, how long, where their political opponents and their friends are located, in what states, etc.

Bush tells Americans "we don't know who you spoke to or what you say with these records." That's crap. Hasn't Bush ever heard of a "reverse phone directory"? Just put the phone number in on the internet "411" directory and, if the number is listed, you can get the name and address of the person(s) to whom the number belonged. Bush now has all the phone numbers -- do you really think he is not going to do other things with them?

QUESTION - Was this illegal spying how Bush was able to find out what the Minutemen were doing at their chapters thoughout the U.S. and give that info to the Mexican government? That story broke a few days ago. Just how did Bush find out all this info about the Minuteman group to be able to ILLEGALLY and TRAITOROUSLY give out the info of a private American citizen's group to a foreign country? I think I know.

Posted by CalifChris at 2006-05-12 03:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

DOGMAN
"""I hate to say it but I don't see the big deal if, in fact, they are only recording numbers."""

The problem is the word "IF." Without oversight that word will always remain a part of any opinion that is in favor of the NSA program. We need to KNOW whether they are only concentrating on potentials for terrorism and NOT any other purpose. There can't be an "IF."

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 02:47 PM | Reply

I agree completely with your statement. I simply doen't see how only collecting numbers is a big news story. The problem I see is that Bushlovers look at this story and say; Look look, the left is making a big deal about nothing AGAIN! And then they proceed to try to portray every reasonable criticism of the Bush administration (like lack of oversite) as equally overdramatic. It seems to me if critics concede on the marginal issues it increases the level of credability of the overall argument.

DOGMAN

Posted by dogman at 2006-05-12 03:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just glad that I don't have Verizon, Bell SOuth, AT&T and the other members of the Bush Ass licker society of phone companies. QWEST is the only company with the balls to stand up to Adolph Hitler Jr.
Bet it will bring them a whole lot of new customers while Verizon, et al start losing customers by the truckload.
Great! They deserve to lose money just like all of the Republican States that just got the shaft with the new Millionaire's Welfare Package Shrubbie will sign giving them $70 billion in Welfare tax cuts to those making over $100,000 while Alaska, Florida, Texas, Nevada, Wyoming, South Dakota Tennessee, Washington and New Hampshire citizens get stuck in the ass with a $500 INCREASE in their taxes to pay for it. Just rewards for supporting the Shrub. Just to right way to ensure re-election of Republicans in those states, right?

PS. The Repubs claim that those deductions for state sales tax will be restored in a later bill but fail to mention that this requires a SUPER majority of 60 votes in the Senate to pass. Since the current tax bill only received 54 votes, it is a lot less likely that the follow on bill will pass. But Shrubbie won't mention that in his press confrence announcing the Rich Folks Welfare Bill, I am willing to bet.

Posted by TheShyGuy at 2006-05-12 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Can you actually think that hard, punk -- well can you?

Ok....I just can't laugh any harder. I only wish you were joking, but it's funny all the same.

But seriously, when was the last time you were arrested by a "company" and held without trial, charges, or access to legal counsel?

Get it?

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Can you actually think that hard, punk -- well can you?

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 02:57 PM

Clint, is that you posting under the username "Tadowe"?

Posted by CalifChris at 2006-05-12 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

BOYD

We were both on top of that one at the exact same time hahahahahahahahahaha

Posted by CalifChris at 2006-05-12 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Tadowe just made my point perfectly. I think this number gathering story is a completely separate issue from congressional or judiciary oversite and mixing the two up only weakens the argument for oversite, which is a good one.

DOGMAN

Posted by dogman at 2006-05-12 03:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

I fully understand concept my question as more information comes out How the pulse of those voting develops.

My idea is how the random poll and the voted poll compare and will they begin to reflect.

Not coming down on Fox News but all of there talking heads since yesterday have been in support of it and have commented on how it will make America Safer.
I mean their Finance Guy Cavuto all the way up to Bill.
So I would not take theirs fully into effect.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 03:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Tad -
If your point is that "companies" have too much power over our lives and our information, I would agree. If your point is that thereforeit's OK for the people with guns to have the same info, I would not agree. If your point is that since corporations have this info, then the gov't should too, then I think you've been listening to too much talk radio, and have left your senses behind.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

BUT presumably the poll was conducted over the phone and x percent of the respondents may have been self-conscious of the circumstances given the subject matter so they just sputtered....

"Yeah...sure...uh...uh...I think it's okay...uh...gotta go...American Idol's on."

click.

---- kinda of like attempting to determine the nature of matter with an electronmicroscope----the measuring device can't help but affect the outcome.

Posted by cosmic_a_go_go at 2006-05-12 03:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who the hell are they polling on this stuff??? I don't know anybody who supports wire taps.

Posted by GIMPSTER at 2006-05-12 12:46 PM | Reply

Not surprising.... You have to get out of the Drudge retort and into the reality of the physical public to actually have contact with mainstream people.... I'm sure it's a scarey thought for you, but try it sometime..... you just might actually like it.... most of us don't really bite.

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 03:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 03:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Danni asks, "And just how do you know that the "LEAK" wasn't done by Rove for the very reasons I stated, and others too, above."

The reasons would be that Rove and the NSA conspire to ask for information in a way that looks illegal, so that when the Democrats use the "leak" to revile and discredit this administration, they will appear to be against increased security -- is that the Danni paranoid plot du jour?

You need help, Danni.

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Poll must be wrong, if it's common sense...MSM will re-poll, etc until they get what they want.

Posted by microciti at 2006-05-12 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

"""You need help, Danni."""

Then Mr. Tadowe, explain why they didn't go the other route, have Congress approve their plans, allow secure oversight??? Interesting that when they finally decided to allow some oversight they refused to allow a review of their activities previously. Eaves dropping on the Kerry campaign perhaps....no they would never do a thing like that....would they?????
I don't know what they were thinking and neither do you but I suspect there is a political element to this entire story, including the leaks that have revealed more about what they are doing.
I do know one thing, Carl Rove has his finger in much more than we realize.

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 03:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Couldn't be CNN has a unique viewership eh Sarge? lmao

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 03:40 PM | Reply

Right Sure, I've been watching Fox News Since 1996, so trust me I know Fox News.

There News Reporting Is Better Than CNN, The Problem Is If You Are Any Democrat You Are Fried By All Of Their Reporters.

Sorry that is the Fact, They Never Say Anything About A Democrat Positive or with out a laugh and A Smart Ass Remark.

Which if you don't like Democrats that is Fine and you find nothing wrong with it, It is Enjoyable to You.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-12 03:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Then Mr. Tadowe, explain why they didn't go the other route, have Congress approve their plans, allow secure oversight???

UMMMMM loose lips sink ships?

Interesting that when they finally decided to allow some oversight they refused to allow a review of their activities previously.

UMMMM loose lips sink ships?

Eaves dropping on the Kerry campaign perhaps....no they would never do a thing like that....would they?????

UMMMM who's Kerry? lmao

I don't know what they were thinking and neither do you but I suspect there is a political element to this entire story, including the leaks that have revealed more about what they are doing.

Ummmm looks like loose lips sink ships.

I do know one thing, Carl Rove has his finger in much more than we realize.

UMMMM but I'm sure he's never had it in you.

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 03:49 PM | Reply

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 04:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Chris maunders, "I think the majority of Americans . . . are sort of lulled into not making a big deal about this because they feel they have nothing to hide and that their phone conversations are dull and probably of no interest at all to the NSA."

I think misdirection(s) like this are equivalent to disgusting lies, Chris. Even though you know that the administration and the NSA has said that only numbers called were requested, you continue to lead the inference that it is about actual phone conversations!

Liar . . .

"I've felt that if the NSA needs to be bored to tears -- go ahead and listen to my phone calls."

BS! You do not! This is a strawman to knock down with the following crap and a literal lie; not just virtual:

"However, it's exactly that kind of attitude that makes it easy to give away your rights. Once we give away our rights, it's a much harder fight to get them back -- especially to a president who thinks he is above the law such as Bush."

You've spun reality 180 degrees! First it "seems okay" to give up rights but not really! In effect, in other words, you are saying, Whine about being listened to by the NSA/Bush bad guys -- all of us.

From the NSA requesting phone numbers, you have twisted it into listening to every US citizen's phone calls!

From a desire to find terrorists hidden in the US by NSA/Bush, you have twisted it into and theft of rights and that Bush is some sort of criminal tyrant . . .

You are a liar, someone who holds party propaganda and vilification for partisan gain more important than finding terrorists. You act as a subversive in denigrating and discrediting our intelligence service and acquisition efforts and you thereby assist the enemy, Islamic terrorists in their efforts. . .

All of you Leftist/Democrat/Liberal creeps are acting out as subversives and virtual traitors to ALL the US as you pander for votes with your lies and slimey misdirections!

Just absolutely despicable!

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 04:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Not surprising.... You have to get out of the Drudge retort and into the reality of the physical public to actually have contact with mainstream people.... I'm sure it's a scarey thought for you, but try it sometime..... you just might actually like it.... most of us don't really bite.

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 03:38 PM | Reply

---

Are you people who support this shitting me?

Retort ASIDE: I don't know ANYONE who's comfortable with the government having the legal ability to 'do what they please'. Perhaps I live in a liberal area??? Who knows.

Being a unix admin, I have access to just about every scrap of information my company has. I could use quite a bit of it for my personal gain, but I don't do it.

My point on that being: I have restraint in the face of power over people and data. I don't believe the bulk of our sitting or aspiring politicians do. IF they're willing to sell me out for a ride on a Lear Jet; they're willing to sell me out for a quick listen on the phone.

Also, I'm taking a WILD SHOT IN THE DARK that, at this point, a genuine terrorist isn't going to pick up his kitchen phone and ask for his weekly orders to carry out. Even if they did, whats to stop them from setting up some sort of tunneled VoIP network or the like using (FREE SOFTWARE) like Asterix?

In fact there a big stink over being able to monitor vonage, skype and the like going on. Until recently ... they couldn't do it.

If you want to hand over your freedom, privacy and liberty ... be my guest. Don't piss in my kool-aid though.

Posted by GIMPSTER at 2006-05-12 04:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

BTW, since when did wanting privacy make someone a liberal? Talk about a distortion of reality.

Self-proclaimed "Conservatives" make me ill.

Posted by GIMPSTER at 2006-05-12 04:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

From the NSA requesting phone numbers, you have twisted it into listening to every US citizen's phone calls!

Even newt gingrich won't defend this anymore.

If the bush admin says they aren't listening into phone calls, then they are...because this admin has lied about the NSA wiretaps every single step of the way.

First bush said that the patriot act changed nothing and that they still needed a court order to wiretap.

Then they claimed it was only foreign calls.

Now we know both were lies. And gonzo gonzales changes his story on a daily basis.

They are spying on you.

Posted by alexandrite at 2006-05-12 05:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Looking at the shit that gets typed on here and the shit that gets reported as news I don't think anyone really gives a shit what anyone else is saying or doing on a personal level. Now if you're conspiring to level buildings or blow yourself up in crowds I suppose you might have something to be concerned about....Which catagory do you fit in Alex?

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 05:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Gimp says, "Retort ASIDE: I don't know ANYONE who's comfortable with the government having the legal ability to 'do what they please'."

It is a gross exaggeration to say that government is attempting to have a legal ability to do anything they please! It means, in reality, that you haven't any reasonable complaint about collecting phone numbers called; since it doesn't involve *personal privacy,* unless you are found to be calling/getting called from al Qaeda.

"Being a unix admin, I have access to just about every scrap of information my company has. I could use quite a bit of it for my personal gain, but I don't do it."

So, if I asked your company for some of that information, what law would I be breaking? If I was gaining security for your company and you, yourself, by asking for the information -- would that be the same greed/gain you were addressing?

No . . .

"Also, I'm taking a WILD SHOT IN THE DARK that, at this point, a genuine terrorist isn't going to pick up his kitchen phone and ask for his weekly orders to carry out. Even if they did, whats to stop them from setting up some sort of tunneled VoIP network or the like using (FREE SOFTWARE) like Asterix?"

Are you trying to give security ideas, information to terrorists? What kind of unconscious idiot are you?

As for "GAIN," you are making partisan political profit from leading the inferences and spouting the terrorist supporting crap you have! It is for you and your "gang" of Progressive People's Party that you are attacking our national intelligence and administration -- just as al Jazeera and the Islamic fundamentalists with their human sacrifices attack our national intelligence and administration!

Just one more example of the faithless, anti-patriotic party of political greed and avarice for power! Whining liars and muckraking backstabbers!

Disgusting!

In fact there a big stink over being able to monitor vonage, skype and the like going on. Until recently ... they couldn't do it.

If you want to hand over your freedom, privacy and liberty ... be my guest. Don't piss in my kool-aid though.

Posted by GIMPSTER at 2006-05-12 04:09 PM | Reply

BTW, since when did wanting privacy make someone a liberal? Talk about a distortion of reality.

Self-proclaimed "Conservatives" make me ill.

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 06:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Agency personnel reportedly analyze those records to identify suspicious calling patterns but do not listen in on or record individual telephone conversations.

How do you know what the call is about if you don't listen in. What a crock of crap. Analyze what? The phone number! Yeah! ...... right! Just another lie that will come out of the wash.

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 06:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

This "poll" doesn't carry much weight as far as I'm concerned since it was based on what we've been told to believe.

Posted by BillJohnson at 2006-05-12 12:36 PM | Reply

typical reaction to a poll that doesnt say what you want...

and crassus......you have got to be kidding with your last post......you really cant understand that you can cross reference numbers to find out where someone is calling.......please tell me you just made that up?

and rcade...thank you for another place to talk about this issue.....my computer is a couple of months away from being officially declared an antique...and its too slow to get on the one approaching 1,000 posts.......and there are many other liberal lies to destroy and little time.....

it is so typical to read where some of you think that with this many people agreeing with this program that they dont have the information.....the thing is for liberals....its only when the whole story is NOT OUT THERE>.....that you can spread your lies and inuendos........nice try though......

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2006-05-12 06:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

and crassus......you have got to be kidding with your last post......you really cant understand that you can cross reference numbers to find out where someone is calling.......

You have got to be kidding. So what your saying is they know where the terrorists are and are just waiting for you to call them.

They have to listen in to monitor the call for the terrorist activity, that means active listening.

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 06:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Crassus asks, "How do you know what the call is about if you don't listen in. What a crock of crap. Analyze what? The phone number! Yeah! ...... right! Just another lie that will come out of the wash."

You make claims based on your own admitted ignorance!

They take the suspected al Jazeera number(s) and see which number(s) called it -- then they get a warrant and find out who those numbers belong to and THEN listen in on their plans to bomb the place you work!

Quit making claims that say, in effect, the same thing our enemy is saying!

Wake up and realize we are at war!

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 06:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

We see about this poll on about Wednesday next week after the discussion in congress and the real issue of listening in come out.

My kids both high school, senior and junior just told me they don't want to vote because they have absolutely no faith in the system.

What can I say to them, it is definitely not working right now with this administration.

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 06:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

They take the suspected al Jazeera number(s) and see which number(s) called it -- then they get a warrant and find out who those numbers belong to and THEN listen in on their plans to bomb the place you work!

They may do that on your planet mars, but I absolutely know they are not doing it here. Keep on in that dream state your in, I bet everything is rosey pleasant!

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 07:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

As far as the rightfundies go, you can try and laugh it up now but we shall see come wednesday or thursday when it begins to be talked about in confirmation and then we won't see one of you pandering bull shitters here for nothing but flame.

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 07:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

*TIN FOIL HAT AREA*

Is anyone really going to call into a phonepoll to say they don't support this? Won't they then know who called the "I don't support this" number?

Brought to you by the Kanrei Patent Pending Tin Foil Hat with optional Kool-Aide Drinking Cups. Now availible in Red and Blue.
Why be paranoid and thirsty?

Posted by kanrei at 2006-05-12 07:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Grass says, "They may do that on your planet mars, but I absolutely know they are not doing it here."

How do you "absolutely" know they are not doing "it" here? You were just asking about how they would know anything unless they listened? You asked what they would analyze!

I answer that they would find the pattern of calls to and from suspected terrorists and wouldn't have to "listen" until they determined a correlation between a US citizen and terrorists -- then they would get a warrant and "listen."

You mock the answer and now claim you know "absolutely" what they are doing!

Stupid LIAR!

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-12 07:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

I answer that they would find the pattern of calls to and from suspected terrorists and wouldn't have to "listen" until they determined a correlation between a US citizen and terrorists -- then they would get a warrant and "listen."

Yes, bush has sure shown a repsect for FISA, warrants, and telling the truth.

Are you naive, or just stupid?

Posted by Alexandrite at 2006-05-12 07:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

I have a few salient points...it is quite funny to see posters defend polls to the death when it says Bush at 31% yet down play the poll that says Americans support this NSA program. Another..google phone records,,and see just how many ways any private citizen can buy a record of phone numbers...another..anyone remember project Carnivore?..the FBI project iniated by Clinton to read emails without a warrant. Yet the Dems at the time defended Carnivore....I guess both sides are guilty to a certain extent of hypocrisy.

Posted by cheka at 2006-05-12 07:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Stupid LIAR!

Yep! We shall see next week shant we! I am just not as ignorant and r-fundy pandering.

You call em as yu see it, I call it as I see it and in 10 days we shall see who is right. I know it won't be you!

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 07:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

the FBI project iniated by Clinton to read emails without a warrant. Yet the Dems at the time defended Carnivore....I guess both sides are guilty to a certain extent of hypocrisy.

I don't give a fuck what Clinton did, and by the way he was impeached.

I care about what this President is doing, as you should be but I can see your worried about history instead of our future. Shall we bury you now!

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 07:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

A couple of points----

1) Bush is breaking the law with this program, "just" phone numbers being recorded regardless.

No, there isn't room for debate on this subject, unless you don't understand the meaning of "warrants".

2) This is just another example of Bush's oft stated premise, that laws do not apply to him, or apply only as they extend his advantage.

3) Bush now has an extensive record of lying about domestic spying. It's no stretch to think he's lying about more, much more, that hasn't been uncovered yet.

4)When the other things Bush is hiding come to the fore (and this will likely include spying on domestic political opponents), the last lingering benefits of the doubt the public gives the man on this subject will wither and die.

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-12 07:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oh, to the person above who stated there would be no class action lawsuits because "just" phone numbers were given to an agency that never had a legal right to request them ----

Boy are you going to be surprised. I encourage you to review the US "Pin Laws" and other relevant statutes.

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-12 08:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

1) Bush is breaking the law with this program, "just" phone numbers being recorded regardless.

No he isnt..I guess the Courts are wrong..but nevertheless...you as a private citizen can but the same damn records......

4)When the other things Bush is hiding come to the fore (and this will likely include spying on domestic political opponents), the last lingering benefits of the doubt the public gives the man on this subject will wither and die.

You mean like chuck shcumer and his staff getting a credit report thru stealin an opponents SSN...you mean like that?

No, there isn't room for debate on this subject, unless you don't understand the meaning of "warrants".

See above comment...you as a private citizen can buy the same phone records.

Posted by cheka at 2006-05-12 08:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't give a fuck what Clinton did,

Ok then why dont you say the same about Bush,,,Clinton using Carnivore did far worse than Bush ever did....this program read emails...WITH NO WARRANT EVER...and the Dems,,SUPPORTED THIS PROGRAM......what hypocrites

Posted by cheka at 2006-05-12 08:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't support that program, Cheka.

Warrants are needed for a reason and the govt shouldn't be letting agents write their own warrants(ala the KGB) or ignoring the 4th and 9th amendments for the purpose of expediency.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2006-05-12 08:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

And cheka- if what bush is doing is perfectly legal as you claim...

Why does he keep LYING about it at every point?

Posted by Alexandrite at 2006-05-12 08:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You as a private citzen can buy the same phone records...."

All I know is Congress specifically protected this very information in laws enacted for the purpose, in reaction to a Supreme Court ruling that initially opened the door to such information sharing.

Qwest balked at compliance (several times, apparently) because they were very aware of these laws.

But maybe they were just being pissy on those days. You tell me.

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-12 08:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ok then why dont you say the same about Bush,,,

Are you really slow or what? Bush is in office right now dork.

I don't care what clinton did he is gone, in the past, no longer a public official.

come into the present.

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 08:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

"""and the Dems,,SUPPORTED THIS PROGRAM."""

do you notice the pertinent information here???? The Dems obviously knew about this program, and the REpublicans did too. In other words there was OVERSIGHT.
No one wants to limit the power the government has to find terrorists, etc. but we want there to be OVERSIGHT so that the power isn't abused. Is that so hard to understand????
Hello????
Anybody home????

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 09:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I've seen that bird up close.
Bizarre creation."

Allegedly scored the first kill in the "Korean Conflict".

Posted by Dave at 2006-05-12 09:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

TAdowe,

I think your in trouble about the liar part, you are so short sighted.

Lawyer: Ex-Qwest Exec Ignored NSA Request AP - Fri May 12, 6:38 PM ET WASHINGTON

WASHINGTON - Telecommunications giant Qwest refused to provide the government with access to telephone records of its 15 million customers after deciding the request violated privacy law, a lawyer for a former company executive said Friday. For a second day, the former National Security Agency director defended the spy agency's activities. In a written statement, the attorney for former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio said the government approached the company in the fall of 2001 seeking access to the phone records of Qwest customers, with neither a warrant nor approval from a special court established to handle surveillance matters.

Posted by Crassus at 2006-05-12 09:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

And cheka- if what bush is doing is perfectly legal as you claim...

Why does he keep LYING about it at every point?

Posted by Alexandrite at 2006-05-12 08:14 PM | Reply

ummmmm , loose lips sink ships? NEWS FLASH.... he isn't lying, he's trying to keep secrets secret....dimwit

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 10:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

" he isn't lying"

I hope you're right.

Posted by Lisa at 2006-05-12 10:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

do you notice the pertinent information here???? The Dems obviously knew about this program, and the REpublicans did too. In other words there was OVERSIGHT.
No one wants to limit the power the government has to find terrorists, etc. but we want there to be OVERSIGHT so that the power isn't abused. Is that so hard to understand????
Hello????
Anybody home????

Posted by danni at 2006-05-12 09:09 PM | Reply

Do yourself a favor.... type the words DEMS BRIEFED ON NSA Programs into your search engine.... It's a real eye opener ;-)

Of course when you finish seeing the facts that there is/has been oversight you can't really bitch then..and that will ruin all your fun.... I know.... bitch on...

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-12 11:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's a fallacy dirtman...just because you know a program exists doesn't mean you know ALL about it, nor does it mean there is any legal power to regulate it.

Being given limited information about a program through a letter is not oversight.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2006-05-12 11:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course when you finish seeing the facts that there is/has been oversight you can't really bitch then..and that will ruin all your fun.... I know.... bitch on...

No. Notifying a few in congress with partial information and then swearing them to secrecy is not "oversight". Spin all you like, but your point is nonsensical.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-12 11:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Apparently Bush broke laws regulating this sort of behavior going back to 1934.

If there were Democrats accurately informed of what this was about (many already say no) they are just as guilty as Bush is.

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-12 11:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ok lemme get this correct,,,Bush gets phone records,,,no wiretaps or listening...Clinton gets all emails and can read them....hmmmm....well I guess that violating privacy rights of Americans without a warrant Bush is running a far second to Clinton. But Ill bet a dollar to a doughnut that if Bush did the EXACT SAME THING AS CLINTON AND READ EMAILS WITHOUT A WARRANT.... the howls of the Dems would drown out a tornado warning siren in Dallas.......

Posted by cheka at 2006-05-12 11:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Boyd, how do you know it was "partial information"? Were you there or do you just take the dems at their word

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-12 11:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Just take Dems at their word...."

Or perhaps just take Bush at his word. You think this is an honest man?

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-12 11:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bush avoids Congress and the Courts because he won't always get what he wants.

You can't argue this is not his pattern. You can assert it's not despotic, but you'd be wrong.

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-12 11:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Or perhaps just take Bush at his word. You think this is an honest man?"

Nice deflection Zed. It is not about me. I just thought Boyd might know something we do not know.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-12 11:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You can't argue this is not his pattern. You can assert it's not despotic, but you'd be wrong"

Where have i made any argument Zed? I asked Boyd how he knows so much about the information the congress has received.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-12 11:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

REF: Tadowe - "Wake up and realize we are at war!"

Tadowe is right......we are at war.....

....at war with ourselves over a sense of security vs. the principles of individual freedom as framed by our democratic ideology.

Some people (Tadowe) would prefer to surrender those specific rights and freedoms granted to us by our forefathers, in favor of a illusion of more security.

And and apparently we have Machiavellian leaders who will oblige those like Tadowe who can be manipulated into a belief that we are at war with illusory adversary who could be lurking next door....or on the other end of the phone line.

You can consign this "War on Terror" into the same category as the previous "amorphous" wars with which the electorate has been manipulated for purposes unrelated to the core issues....

...like the "War on Poverty" and the "War on Drugs".

These are wars that can't be won in any conventional sense, but can be used to extract some desired effect from the great unwashed masses.

Remember the Maine! CHARGE!!!!

Posted by cosmic_a_go_go at 2006-05-12 11:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Some people (Tadowe) would prefer to surrender those specific rights and freedoms granted to us by our forefathers, in favor of a illusion of more security" I would bet that Tadowe feels he has given up enough of his "rights" to the leftist redistributionist (legalized theft) w/out giving up anymore. But i will let him speak for himself.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-12 11:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was an editorial "You", Dalton. Beyond that, it may not be worthwhile to worry about fabulous creatures such as "leftist redistribution", when there's a snake in the henhouse stealing your eggs.

Posted by Zed at 2006-05-13 12:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

"fabulous creatures such as "leftist redistribution",

I don't know about "You" but i do not consider legalized theft a "faboulous" creature.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 12:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

,Bush gets phone records,,,no wiretaps or listening...Clinton gets all emails and can read them....hmmmm....well I guess that violating privacy rights of Americans without a warrant Bush is running a far second to Clinton.

Wow. You got all of that wrong. Each point is factually incorrect. Good show.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 12:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Zed, I am only referring to one giving up their individual "rights" in one way or the other. Whether it be privacy or money.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 12:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

Dalton-
Boyd, how do you know it was "partial information"? Were you there or do you just take the dems at their word

That's just what I've heard, so discount it if you wish. But in either case, notifying a few members of congress with whatever information the WH decides to provide and then swearing them to secrecy is not "oversight" even in your odd universe.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 12:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

"That's just what I've heard, so discount it if you wish"

Where did you hear "this"? No link no proof just what you "heard" boyd?

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 12:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

"We're really flying blind on the subject, and that's not a good way to approach ... the constitutional issues involving privacy," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).

LA Times...but its proprietary:
www.latimes.com

I thought you would appreciate a quote from a Republican. When I say it's "what I've heard" I of course mean it's what I've read in numerous press reports and quotes from members of congress.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

Boyd, really am i supposed to think that someone in the "Senate Judiciary Committee" is supposed to know about national security? I am sure you thought Spectors views on the judicial nominees were reliable. How about you do a little research and find someone who "knows" about the program. I'm not saying there are not any but the "judicial comitte"?

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 01:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

Now, perhaps you could explain how, in either case, this could be considered "oversight".

Especially in light of this:

www.usatoday.com

Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.

The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

www.washingtonpost.com

The Bush administration helped derail a Senate bid to investigate a warrantless eavesdropping program yesterday after signaling it would reject Congress's request to have former attorney general John D. Ashcroft and other officials testify about the program's legality. The actions underscored a dramatic and possibly permanent drop in momentum for a congressional inquiry, which had seemed likely two months ago.

Senate Democrats said the Republican-led Congress was abdicating its obligations to oversee a controversial program in which the National Security Agency has monitored perhaps thousands of phone calls and e-mails involving U.S. residents and foreign parties without obtaining warrants from a secret court that handles such matters.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

"According to the sources" Who are the sources?

"They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA "might" not agree with them," one person recalled."

That is about the worst piece of evidence i have ever seen. "This person".

"A second person confirmed this version of events" That is classic.I hope you are just passing time here Boyd.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 01:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

How about the Senate Intel Committee, as referenced above?

More from the WaPo article:

"It is more than apparent to me that the White House has applied heavy pressure in recent days, in recent weeks, to prevent the committee from doing its job," Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), vice chairman of the intelligence committee, said after the panel voted along party lines not to consider his motion for an investigation.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

Dalton-
Bush's appearance the other day in reaction to the USATODAY article would have been a good time to mention many of your concerns, don't you think?

Perhaps a denial of the veracity of the article's points with some specificity...

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

Something like...ah..."we have gone through the FISA court", or "Here's where it was cleared by the DoJ"...

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

The problem is, Dalton, that to whatever extent a few members of Congress were informed, their efforts to get more information were thwarted by the Republican dominated senate.

Of course your immediate problem is that you don't have the facts on your side.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

"It is more than apparent to me..." I did not see Rockefeller complaining when Clinton was monitoring emails and phone calls. Hell he was not even outraged when clinton and his atty gen. killed more than a dozen children at waco. which was a 0 threat to national security.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 01:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

You know Boyd. I started off w/ a conciliatory response but... I read your typical 1:43 asshole comment to no response. You are a snipe. of the worst kind. You start off w/ your "i feel" and "i heard" bullshit. then start w/ some source in the judicial committe. Then going to some partisan hack in the intelligence committe. rockefeller is a hack of the worst kind. Whend did he speak out against this before Bush? Never. And if you want to pretend it this program started under Bush then that is just further proof of the willing idiot that you are.

Posted by Dalton at 2006-05-13 01:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

I did not see Rockefeller complaining when Clinton was monitoring emails and phone calls.

That was under FISA authority. Sorry to remind you of that, but I guess it has been minutes.

Hell he was not even outraged when clinton and his atty gen. killed more than a dozen children at waco.

Would you like to talk about that since your every argument on the actual subject has been crushed? I'm sorry, I guess I thought you were about to discuss the issue at hand, but instead you resort to ad hominem and Clinton bashing...typical.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:53 AM | Reply | Flag:

Carry on, Dalton. Perhaps you can ramble about BJ's and the blue dress for a bit, or whatever...

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

You know Boyd. I started off w/ a conciliatory response but... I read your typical 1:43 asshole comment to no response.

Oh. So you realized you were wrong, but then you got mad.

OK.

Later.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 01:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

And if you want to pretend it this program started under Bush then that is just further proof of the willing idiot that you are.

OK, wait just a moment. This program did start under Bush. Are you a complete idiot?

OK..I'm good now.

Later.

Posted by Boyd at 2006-05-13 02:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

All Look At What Newt Has To Say:

Newt on the Phone Scandal: "I'm not going to defend the indefensible"

As I reported last night, Newt came out slamming the administration on the Phone Scam story on H&C.
Video-WMP Video-QT

COLMES: Then he said when it came out a little while ago that there was some wiretapping he said it only applies to international communications. And now we're finding something else. So it just seems we're not getting a consistent story here, are we?

GINGRICH: No. You're not.

COLMES: Why not?

GINGRICH: Look, I'm not-Alan, I'm not going to defend the indefensible. The Bush administration has an obligation to level with the American people. And I'm prepared to defend a very aggressive anti-terrorist campaign, and I'm prepared to defend the idea that the government ought to know who's making the calls, as long as that information is only used against terrorists, and as long as the Congress knows that it's underway.

But I don't think the way they've handled this can be defended by reasonable people. It is sloppy. It is contradictory, and frankly for normal Americans, it makes no sense to listen to these three totally different explanations.

www.crooksandliars.com

Let The Swift-Boating Begin On The Man Who Gave The GOP The Congress !!!

Who Will Be First?

My Bets Are On Loki A Starboard, Right Is Good For A Port-side Immediately After,Cheka A Bow Shot,Then The Death Shot A Stern Attack By TAD 9000 With His Ranting Of How Newt Is A Democrat Now And Is Pandering To The Left To Destroy America !

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-13 06:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hell The Administrations Own 'Relief Pitcher" Sounds of On Bush:

Scarborough: "Be Afraid, be very afraid"

Joe speaks out against the Phone scam. When republican pundits are so fiercely against this program, how long will it take for the American people to understand Jonathan Turley's outrage?
Video-WMP Video-QT

Scarborough: Now, for liberals who've long been going against almost all of these issues to defend privacy, the news has to be disturbing. But no less so the conservatives who have fought national ID cards and gun registration for years out of fear of big government.

Now, whatever you consider yourself, friends, you should be afraid. You should be very afraid. With over 200 million Americans targeted, this domestic spying program is so widespread, it is so random, it is so far removed from focusing on al Qaeda suspects that the president was talking about today, that it's hard to imagine any intelligence program in U.S. history being so susceptible to abuse...read on"

Duncan: It's important to note also, of course, that being briefed on classified programs doesn't meant that Democrats can a) tell anyone about them or b) have the power to do anything about them. So to some extent the "they were briefed" is a bit of a red herring anyway.

SusanG lists a few more Repubs asking questions.

www.crooksandliars.com

The More I see This Poll I'm Wondering If It Is Part Of The Government Program.

They Have Brought Positive News In Iraq So Why Not Here To Support Views ?

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-13 06:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

"A total of 502 randomly selected adults were interviewed Thursday night for this survey. Margin of sampling error is five percentage points for the overall results. The practical difficulties of doing a survey in a single night represents another potential source of error."

Randomly Selected From Where?

The White House Administration ?

Still This Damn Poll Came Out So Quick And Was 2:1 Where I'm Not Seeing It As This Story Develops.

Like I Said I Think It Is Part Of The Program And Was Prearranged To Squelch Objection Before it Started.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-13 07:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

This is a re-hash of the GOP modus operandi: keep us scared.

If global wiretapping has uncovered any terror plots, parade the suspects in front of TV cameras and reporters and let us hear the specifics.

Otherwise, if this massive illegal invasion of privacy has turned up nothing, admit it and stop it. It isn't working. How dumb do you think terrorists are, that they wouldn't use more arcane measures than their phones to communicate?

Posted by Mr. Peanut at 2006-05-13 07:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Created: Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 10:58:16 EDT
How does the report that the NSA is building a database of Americans' phone calls make you feel?

Creepy 75% 151032 votes

More secure 25% 49560 votes

Total: 200592 votes

Now Over 200,000 Votes And It Is Still The Same Ratio.

Now Worded Like This:

Created: Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 23:43:50 EDT
Is the U.S. government's monitoring of phone calls:

An invasion of privacy? 77% 1012 votes

A legitimate tool in the fight against terrorism? 23% 298
votes

Total: 1310 votes

I Want To See Another Poll Other Than This Washington Post One, Because It Is So Far Out Of What Even Newt and Scarborough are Saying.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-13 07:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

For SARGE

glenngreenwald.blogspot.com

Friday, May 12, 2006
Polling hysteria and the NSA program

Somehow, The Washington Post -- on the very same day most people learned about the new NSA data-collection program -- managed to conduct a poll which purports to show that "63 percent of Americans said they found the NSA program to be an acceptable way to investigate terrorism." The reaction is painfully predictable. Bush followers are celebrating with glee, as though the issue is resolved in their favor and they won, while some Democrats are quivering with caution, urging that this issue be kept at arm's length lest they take a position that isn't instantaneously and overwhelmingly popular.

When the NSA eavesdropping scandal was first disclosed, Rasmussen Reports quickly issued a blatantly flawed poll purporting to show that "Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States. " The question mentioned nothing about warrants. It mentioned nothing about FISA. And it specified that the Government would be eavesdropping only on conversations "between terrorism suspects."

Larry

Posted by LarryMohr at 2006-05-13 07:31 AM | Reply | Flag:

Now, whatever you consider yourself, friends, you should be afraid. You should be very afraid.

Gotta agree with Joe. When people on the right and on the left are against this kind of data collection, it's time for the people in the middle to wake up and start asking why?

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2006-05-13 08:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

Here's what I'm sick of.... I'm tired of my property taxes ever increasing and getting nothing of value to me in return.

I'm sick of the constant in my face queers, blacks, mexicans and feminists crying about injustices that doesn't exist.

I'm sick of a system that kills peoples ambition/spirit, that when offered a 5 or 6 dollar an hour better paying job than they have that they won't take it because it would only equal the lifestyle they now have though govt. handouts they're now receiveing... why work harder when you don't have to? I don't blame them I blame a stupid ass Govt. full of know everything done nothings.

I'm sick of the govt. use it or lose it approach to the infrastructure game.... that's right a 3 million dollar un-necessary 2nd runway for a small town public airport that has maybe 10 active private pilots.... multiply this little game times thousands across the country and you get the picture.

I'm tired of being told to wear a helmet, a seat belt, don't smoke and my kids shouldn't be allowed to have a soft drink at public schools because other people don't exercise the blessing of moderation so all others must be punished too.

I'm tired of being forced to pay into a SS system that is corruptly used to fund any program politicians think is needed but can't be funded through channels specifically for said program because public opinion isn't willing to fund it.

On and on it goes.... What I'm really sick of is liberal socialist logic and that there isn't any such thing as a conservative party anymore to represent mainstream america....

I could go on and on and on and on.... but you get the idea....so the govt. listening in my my phone convo's means squat to me. In fact maybe if they listen into enough of the peoples convos they might even get a clue.... see above

Posted by dirtman580e at 2006-05-13 10:42 AM | Reply | Flag:

Dirt,

Well I Agree With You 99%

You Have All The Points Of What The Founding Fathers Established this Country On !!!

If Those In Government Would Follow This:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

No Group Would Bitch If This Was Simply Followed.

-Sarge

Posted by Sarge at 2006-05-13 11:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

"with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life"

Liar, your party WORSHIPS at the altar of killing innocents before they are even born. Meaning you cannot believe the other two either since life comes first.

And calling them goo wil not change that.

Morons.

Posted by niceville at 2006-05-13 11:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

fear is what drives people to give up some rights -fear also is what drives people to protest the infringment of these rights -truth is i don't know what
is the right balance -the enemy hides behind our laws but if we allow our rights to be relaxed even if this admin doesn't
misuse it's power there is no guarantee that a future one won't
jasman

Posted by newjasman at 2006-05-13 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Liar, your party WORSHIPS at the altar of killing innocents before they are even born. Meaning you cannot believe the other two either since life comes first.

And calling them goo wil not change that.

Morons.

Posted by niceville at 2006-05-13 11:21 AM | Reply

My Party ?

What The Hell Are You Talking About?

Nice What Party Is My Party Nice ?

Do you Even Know ?

You Mean Rush limbaugh

"I think it should be a moral choice, decided by the people in a democratic fashion. I've suggested this to countless feminists and they all recoil in shock. I agree with the view, best articulated by Judge Robert Bork, that there is no basis in the Constitution for the privacy right which was announced as the foundational basis for the constitutional right to abortion."

-Rush Limbaugh

(The Way Things Ought To Be p.56 2 JUL 92)

www.issues2000.org

And Laura Bush

Laura Bush, the wife of President-elect George W. Bush, said Friday she believes the country could do more to minimize the number of abortions, but also indicated she doesn't believe the 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortions should be overturned.

"No, I don't think it should be overturned," Mrs. Bush told NBC's "Today Show" when asked about the high court's decision, Roe vs. Wade.

archives.cnn.com

Hey,

Nice Now Talk Shit About Rush Limbaugh And Laura Bush !!!

I Dare You !!!

Those Two Are Your Morons !!

-Sarge