Bush Bagging!!

[Steel2686]

The whole phone tapping thing is obviously not being put to good use when it takes the Florida police to bag a HOMELAND SECURITY Official for seducing a 14 year old girl. If my phone is going to be tapped, then I think everybody elses phone should be tapped, including people like Brian Doyle. Makes you wonder who's tapping the tappers, if anyone, to make sure that they're not abusing their powers. Like I mentioned earlier, it's a controversial subject.

How do we know the phone tapping isn't being put to good use? Why would the Government tap a Homeland Security official's phone? In fact, if they did, only THEN would I consider it being an abused power. The phone tapping is a necessary evil. It's object is to catch terrorist plots... Not to run pedophile sting operations.

That's the job of the police, and they did their job.

[fastTa]

Con Elite, Ryan 34, and American Z28....I like you guys, but you have a bunch to learn. I strongly suggest you read the below article. It should open your eyes as to the NSA's EIP program.

This article is by John H. Hinderaker, fairly well known attorney with a nationwide litigation practice. He is a very bright and educated man that sees things the way they are.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/012631.php

[ryan34]

Con Elite, Ryan 34, and American Z28....I like you guys, but you have a bunch to learn. I strongly suggest you read the below article. It should open your eyes as to the NSA's EIP program.

This article is by John H. Hinderaker, fairly well known attorney with a nationwide litigation practice. He is a very bright and educated man that sees things the way they are.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/012631.php

You must've missed what i was saying. I don't have a problem with the gov't tapping my phone calls because i have nothing to hide from them. Its just how easy they can do it. My point is, if it is against the constitution from them to do this then they did it VERY easily and THAT is what scares me. The fact that the gov't can do what ever they please, with out proper authorization. Now like i posted before i thought it was against the constitution for invasion of privacy, but it may have been just the way I interperated(sp?) it.

Now on to the article as I am very willing to learn anyway...

[fastTa]

You must've missed what i was saying. I don't have a problem with the gov't tapping my phone calls because i have nothing to hide from them. Its just how easy they can do it. My point is, if it is against the constitution from them to do this then they did it VERY easily and THAT is what scares me. The fact that the gov't can do what ever they please, with out proper authorization. Now like i posted before i thought it was against the constitution for invasion of privacy, but it may have been just the way I interperated(sp?) it.

Now on to the article as I am very willing to learn anyway...

No, I didn't miss a single thing. That is precisely why I included you in my little list of people. Read the article and then you will know why.

[ryan34]

Ok, so that mile long article basically said that it is not un-constitutional for the president to tap phone calls, as was ruled by the supreme court. Thats all you had to say.
But atleast my assumption that phone calls are protected(somewhat) by the constitution i.e. amendmant 4. Which basically means they can't tap my calls without a warrant for a "crime", but it the supreme court ruled that they can for national security. As long as another branch of gov't says its ok, i was fearful the president was just making an executive order to do the survailance(sp?)

[Steel2686]

The problem with a phone call being protected under privacy laws and the Constitution gets very cloudy. When using a phone, we are paying for a service through a company. The biggest argument on this subject has always been whether or not the phone company has the right to release records, allow for tapping, etc... It's an age-old debate.

If two people are talking in person, however, listening to their conversation is eves-dropping. While near impossible to prove, it is considered illegal.... Especially if you are not within earshot, and are using other devices to aid in your eves-dropping.

Either way, I always found it humorous that the people most upset about things like the Patriot Act and phone tapping, will never be the target of such things from the Government in the first place.

[zebragirl83]

The way I look at it...
All of the people that have such a problem with it... Who do you think you are? What makes you think the government gives two hoots in #*!! what's going on in your life...
Get over it... give Bush a break... Honestly... If you hate him so bad then go vote!...

[Jeff_in_Atl]

Amendmant 4: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

Would that not protect it? Of course the founding fathers didn't have the slightest clue what a telephone was so they couldn't inlcude that in there, but isn't that what the judicial branch is for. To translate the Constitution for more modern times? Well, if it doesn't cover it I'm not really bothered my the fact that they listen to me(nothing to hid) I just would of liked to see a little bit more resistance to it then it just being passed. (of course i'm assuming it was a presidential action, because with all the fuss i wouldn't imagine it passing through congress)

I see amendment 4 to pertain to personal possessions not to intellectual property like conversations. Does that apply to data stored on a computer? I think the courts have ruled yes to that but I don't think they have to a personal conversation. I could be wrong about that though. I bet there is another law somewhere limiting eves dropping. I know there is something that says if you record a conversation there has to be an audible beep every 15 seconds.

[ryan34]

Get over it... give Bush a break... Honestly... If you hate him so bad then go vote!...

Most people who do hate bush, have voted

I voted for bush last election, and i don't regret it or hate it. But i think this term has been less then stellar. Although i wouldn't go anywhere near saying it was horrible. I feel he could handle the national debt better, but i feel what we're doing in Iraq is right. And I might've handled this phone tapping thing a little differently. But who am I to say.....this is why i leave polotics to the poloticians

[Jeff_in_Atl]

Just an fyi about the phone tapping thing. Bush has handled it the same way Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan, and Carter handled it. It's the media who has blown it out of proportion with Bush. Bush has done exactly the same thing as his predecessor did.

[ryan34]

Just an fyi about the phone tapping thing. Bush has handled it the same way Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan, and Carter handled it. It's the media who has blown it out of proportion with Bush. Bush has done exactly the same thing as his predecessor did.

You are probably right...I didn't think of that, plus i was too young to care about that stuff(even with clinton, i was 15 when he left office). I wouldn't be surprised if it is all just media hype, and its been happening for years.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

You are probably right...I didn't think of that, plus i was too young to care about that stuff(even with clinton, i was 15 when he left office). I wouldn't be surprised if it is all just media hype, and its been happening for years.

The first thing I ever heard about it was Carter doing it in 1977. Congress got upset by it and passed some law about it in 1978. So this isn't something new here even though the media makes it out to be new.

[DeWynter]

I dont see what anyone in the US has to worry about dept for. If someone wants to collect, they have to fight you for it. Its so big now its to late to worry.

[ConElite]

Get over it... give Bush a break... Honestly... If you hate him so bad then go vote!...

Did he take enough breaks in Texas? lol, But yeah My brother and I did vote.
Not that it directly matters if we vote or not, but we did.

[Maverick_82]

anymore the question isn't, "who should i vote for?" its "who should i NOT vote for!?!"
what happened to the people who even if they made decisions in office u didnt agree with u still like him as president!?! i think JFK was the last one!!! we need another FDR! with or without the wheelchair! he was a democrat and much of republican party supported him!!!