Dodgey McSideSteperson

I think the next time Bush side steps something with such impressive moves, he should at least do so in a Ninja costume to complete the effect.

Bush ducked from a question hurled at his head like a Chineese throwing star, regarding the topic of the federal government keeping track of our telecommunications activities. Today Bush was asked if it is true that the NSA is keeping a huge database of phone calls placed by millions of Americans, and he smirked the following answer back:

"We do not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval…What I've told the American people is we'll protect them against an al Qaeda attack. And we'll do that within the law.”

By my count, that’s three sentences, and two lies. Although Bush has lied at a much higher ratio than this, today’s lies particularly infuriate me, because he’s flip-flopping on something as important as national security (at one time that was enough to lose you a presidential election):

First he said the government wiretaps only with a warrant. Listen:

They he said, “what I meant was, of course we wiretap without warrants, but we circumvent the law because the law is outdated.” Listen:

Now he’s saying, “actually the first thing I said is what you should pay attention to.”

Either way, Glenn Greenwald has done some A+ research regarding the hypocrisy from Bush-supporters on this issue.

It turns out that there are some archived discussions on the Free Republic web site that shed some light into how the conservative slime reacted to the news that Clinton was wiretapping during his tenure. Here’s the one major difference, and keep this in mind as you’re reading the comments below – Clinton did this legally under the FISA law, and Bush is bypassing FISA.

I realize that some reading this may be unfamiliar with the well known blogs the get a lot of attention today, so if you’re one of those people, let it be known the Free Republic is one of the more conservative, everything-you-and-I-hate-about-Republicans supporting site out there today.

Here are the exact words from some of it’s members – the same ones who blame Clinton for 9/11 – when they discovered Clinton was wiretapping with FISA approval:

This is beyond frightening. Thank you for this find…This does not bode well for continued freedom.
Posted on 11/30/2000 21:38:11 PST by logos

Any chance of Bush rolling some of this back? It sounds amazing on its face. Why didn't Wen Ho Lee just "disappear" into one of these Star Chambers, never to return?
Posted on 11/30/2000 22:22:26 PST by drlevy88

As quietly as possible (although it sometimes breaks out into the open, usually with the sound of gunfire and the death of innocents), a "shadow government" has been set up all around us my friend. It's foundation is not the constitution, but Executive Orders, Presidential Procalamations, Secret Acts, and Emergency Powers. It has all the tools to be an absolute tyranny and those behind it (on both sides of the aisle) who crave power and their form of "governance" continue to move towards it while we are distracted by so many other goings on.
Posted on 12/01/2000 05:31:21 PST by Jeff Head (jeffhead@bigplanet.com)

This is wherein the danger lies in the precedent set by the Clinton criminal administration. God only knows who will be in power next, but there are no checks and balances anymore. This is exactly the SORT of thing I've been protesting all along. Libs just don't see this! But when and where do they find this in the major media? They don't even know!
Posted on 12/01/2000 05:37:18 PST by vharlow

This is one of those ideas that has a valid purpose behind it, but is wide open to terrible abuse. And there's no way to check to see if it is abused. Like all things that don't have the light of day shining on them, you can be sure that it is being twisted to suit the purposes of those who hold the power.
Posted on 12/01/2000 07:01:09 PST by Dog Gone

Dog Gone, the article doesn't seem to say, but isn't there a Congressional subcommittee in charge of overseeing these operations? Or is Congress just passing the bills then turning its collective back?
Posted on 12/01/2000 07:18:11 PST by drlevy88

Congressional oversight of the FISA court is virtually non-existent. This is something which ought to be changed. At least a small subcommittee should have oversight on a frequent basis.
Posted on 12/01/2000 07:45:35 PST by drlevy88

Wonder how many terrorist plots they have stopped? Sounds like despite trampling Constitutional rights, this was ineffective. Maybe because x42 told them to go after movie pirates!
Posted on 09/19/2001 06:01:22 PDT by antidisestablishment

Thanks for the post. Ominous possibilities. Kafka's Trial right on. This, as all law when it breaks down from crashing into individual rights, will default to the 2nd amendment.
Posted on 12/02/2000 05:11:22 PST by PGalt

Mmmm...smell that? That's hypocrisy.

What do you think of all this privacy stuff, Mr. President?
Listen: