Cons - you trust Bush to use domestic spying powers judiciously, do you give dems the same trust?

Question

If not, don't you think maybe there's a better way to prevent terrorists from operating in this country?

If we give governments tools like this and there's a chance for abuse, I think the powers will be abused. Current adminstration included.

Answer 1

Good question. I have asked this before in a different manner. Can you imagine the out cry from Republicans and Democrats if Clinton tried to force the powers that Bush has?

Answer 2

There HAS been abuses by government officials since governments have existed. The question one needs to ask is would they rather have the abuses to happen or the terrorist attacks to happen more frequently. I give the democrats absolutely NO trust. What have they done to DESERVE any trust? You talk as if by giving these tools to the Bush administration, that, if the tools are abused, that it would be so uncommon that the tools should not be allowed. That is an illogical stance.

Answer 3

Charlie that is an superb element which you have made right here -- one that I even have reported to human beings returned and returned --- you additionally can upload that it become at that appropriate comparable time -- that Bush and his cohorts previous government orders to seal government archives far flung from the liberty of counsel Act that coated the finished regime of the Reagan years -- which become while his very own father become the vice president and extremely very nearly absolute to have had a hand interior the Iran / Contra rubbish that went on !! This become additionally a time while countless the administrations very own staffers have been quoted returned and returned making statements that have been VERY unfavourable approximately IRAN or perhaps have been quoted as asserting that it become going to be a "objective" of the administration to "deliver it around" --- this become ALL way previously there become a 9 / 11 !!! Sept eleventh 2001 has been used as a carte blanche for this administration to extremely do something that it has wanted ---- ALL interior the call of national risk-free practices --- and maximum no longer having to do with plenty else different than the setting up of important rate reductions of freedoms of the masses on the leverage of further and further misuse of ability on the Federal point !!! that is only to be stating the freaking PATRIOT ACT !! Holy Lord !!!!!! as quickly as returned the words coming from the previous people who would supply up one 2d of liberty for risk-free practices Deserve neither liberty NOR risk-free practices !!!

Answer 4

The Constitution gives these "domestic spying" powers to the commander in chief of the armed forces. George Bush, Hillary Clinton, Charles Manson or whoever else is elected has them.

That's why we have to be careful who we elect. This is also one of the many reasons I oppose any present-day Democrat seeking the presidency.

Answer 5

One of the Machiavellian goals of the Bush/Rove/Cheney administration has been to make the political divisions between Republicans and Democrats so vast that neither side will listen to the other. These Republicans have demonized Democrats to such an extent that there is no trust. Rove only planned for a world which would be dominated by the Republican Party of the US, he never considered other possibilities or the interest of the nation as a whole.

If a Democrat is elected to the WH in 2008, Republicans will immediately move to limit his or her powers in every area, and they will whine about their lost civil liberties daily.

Answer 6

Well sure because they were in power when the law passed. It was a Democratic Congress that passed the Patriot Act nimrod. You eat political rhetoric in an election year (when people are trying to confuse and divert people from fact) and so after you feast on politicians drivel and you get done chanting what the spin doctors fed you what do you think your opinion is.

Answer 7

ONLY if the domestic spying powers included spying on the United States government. Including the president and his cabinet, members of Congress and the Senate.
A fair balance I say.
Spy on me.
Spy on yourself and others to whom you are joined at the hip.

Answer 8

The Democrat Party has abused any trust it's been given. You are right that it's not just confined to one party. I do think that the domestic spying goes too far.

Answer 9

I would give any Administration the tools to protect our Country, If you are not a terrorist then why stress over phone tapping, its as simple as that.

Answer 10

Freedom and security may be mutually exclusive but it's not altogether just one or the other. There can be a reasonable balance, and I don't think tracking international phone calls is equivilant to kicking in doors and dragging people off in the night (like the liberals seem to equate it to).

Answer 11

100% percent agreed. This is the point of constitutional protections and checks and balances. I want the repeal of the entire patriot act.

That said, I wouldn't fight the terrorists with the military. I would fight them overseas and fight them with much less abandone. I would kill them with hit teams and not recognize them as legitimate combatants. (Which according to the Geneva Convention they are not). That is how you pursue assymetrical warfare.