Do any Bush supporters want to defend him on this?

Question

When it was suggested that the government was listening to phone calls without warrants, Bush and his supporters said they weren't listening to calls of Americans so we shouldn't worry.

Then it turned out that they WERE listening to calls of Americans without warrants and his supporters said the constitution didn't apply to phone calls and if you want to communicate in private you should use the postal service.

Now it turns out that Bush made a "signing statement" saying the government could read people's mail without a court order if they want to.

What's next?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/05/washington/05postal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

To farkas419, the article which you claimed to have read carefully states that the presidents signing statement refers to the collection of intelligence, NOT inspecting for bombs.

Answer 1

I'm sure he knows what he's doing. I mean, it isn't like he's been wrong before right? Remember, you're either with him or the terrorists. *all sarcasm*

Answer 2

A couple of years ago, FBI Director Mueller announced that the greatest threat to America comes from animal rights activists.

Maybe you know someone that is an animal rights activist. Maybe that person is under surveillance. Now, you call your friend. You just called a member of a terrorist organization.

And the FBI opens a file on YOU.

Don't be so sure you have nothing to hide.

Answer 3

I don't think it suprises me that much. I mean what else could you expect from him. What does suprise me is that some people don't see anything wrong about it. We have a right which protects us from random search and seizure and he has, is, and will violate this right as long as people are willing to accept it and the Courts fail to uphold our rights. What's next, he makes another change allowing people's homes to be searched and people just let it happen?Or maybe they'll be able to record private converation in the privacy of your home. I have nothing to hide so why not doesn't cut it. I don't have anything to hide either but it doesn't mean I will willingly let the government or anyone else for that matter invade my privacy.

Answer 4

I don't know about the comment in the article about “exigent circumstances”, but i do know for a long time every piece of mail i get has been peeled up, or doesn't even arrive if it is from outside the country. The only exception to this, is if its some kind of established business, that wants to sell me something.

can't even buy yugioh cards for the kids, off ebay if they are from Canada, because they'll never arrive.

I have had nothing to worry about being caught for, but not worring about the government doing so, is only allowing fascism to rear its head.

the "you have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide" philosophy, is the dogma that all fascist regimes throughout history built their power upon, before we had to goto war with them and bring them down.

Answer 5

I think we are moving up rapidly on a Loyalty Oath and a chip in your arm. To rid society of all those who are "threat," it is necessary to give the "authorities" absolute certainty of power to intimidate anyone who might disagree, and "endanger" the nation. All those countries that have fallen for this notion of absolute Security ended up living under fascist totalitarianism. Either we stop this now, or we will end up with the same fate.

Answer 6

I never write or call like that rotund midget E.T.. I only beam my messages. Have a nice day,Earthling.

Answer 7

I don't have to. If you read the article carefully, it does it for me. It says that he ONLY restating a law that's been in effect since 1996, which is that postal inspectors can open first-class mail without a warrant, if it's thought to contain a bomb or any hazardous materials.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with this.
I would hope that they DO open a package if they think it has a bomb in it, especially if it's heading to me!
Wouldn't you agree?
Wait, no, of course not, because it's President Bush that said so, right?

I reread it, several times, and I stand by my answer. It's amazing to me how blind people are when it comes to the president. Heaven forbid we DON'T speculate on what COULD be (which you just did, by the way. Speculate, I mean.).
Just HATE HATE HATE, he's a fascist, HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE.
And don't bother to actually READ.
It mentions intelligence gathering only in accordance of the LAW.
Here, from your precious NY Times article:
“All this is saying is that there are provisions at law for, in exigent circumstances, for such inspections,” Mr. Snow said. “It has been thus. This is not a change in the law. This is not new.”

Federal law, in keeping with the constitutional prohibition on unreasonable searches, generally prohibits the government from opening first-class mail without a warrant. But a 1996 postal provision allows postal inspectors to open mail without a warrant in narrow circumstances if there is credible evidence that a package CONTAINS A BOMB OR OTHER DANGEROUS MATERIAL.

The postal service agrees, and I think they'd know the laws better than any layman:

“As has been the longstanding practice, first-class mail is protected from unreasonable search and seizure when in postal custody,” said Thomas Day, a senior vice president for the Postal Service. “Nothing in the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act changes this protection. The president is not exerting any new authority.”

Critical of three words, ignore the rest. I guess that's the Bush-bashers way, isn't it.

Answer 8

Are you serious? Do you really think they listened last night when I was talking to my mom and getting a recipe for meatloaf? Do you think they know who send me Christmas cards this year? Oh my Oh my! What has this country come to when it's citizens are so worried about the government possibly listening in on our mundane day to day lives. I say let them snoop all they want. As long as they catch the Islamic terrorist threatening our LIVES.

Answer 9

Step by step, Bush is turning this country into what Germany was 70 years ago.

Answer 10

Neither Bush nor many of his supporters are smart enough to create a Yahoo! account on their own-so don't count on much Bush support.