A question for Bush supporters?

Question

Why do you think it's okay for Bush to enact policies that violate the Constitution just because your own personal rights have not been violated? In other words, when people start talking about the wiretap program, and you respond with, "Liberals can't give an example of how their rights have been violated by this program," why is that even significant? The POTENTIAL for having your rights violated is every bit as bad as having them violated.

As a follow-up... if you are pro-life, why? After all, your own life hasn't been affected by someone else's abortion...

Asdf: Sorry, not buying it. You guys favor the death penalty, too. So you don't value life, you only value that life which you, acting as God, determine is more valuable than others.

scubadog: That is EXACTLY my point, thanks for posting that. Applies to the wiretapping program too. Thank you so much!

Be Happi: You would make a very good cult member.

Wulfie: I care that my government doesn't violate the rights of American citizens. It can tap my phone all the hell it wants... AS LONG AS IT GETS A WARRANT FIRST. It isn't about Jose Padilla specifically, but since he is an American citizen, YES, I expect my government to collect all its evidence LAWFULLY.

Bill: Same Supreme Court that told him to shut down the tribunals at Gitmo? That Supreme Court???

The Supreme Court hasn't reviewed the wiretapping issue. Try researching. You're talking about a federal circuit court, which is NOT the same thing as the USSC... and that court DID, in fact, determine that Bush's wiretapping program was illegal.

Ashley: I'd be interested in what portion of the Constitution you believe says that Congress shall write no laws, since that is the primary function of Congress...

WHY DON'T ANY OF YOU UNDERSTAND YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT??? OH MY GOD!!!!

Tired: War doesn't change the Constitution. Sorry. I know you're terrified of the monster in the closet, but the monster in the White House is a far bigger threat to your country. Terrorists can't change what America is, but Bush wants to.

sgtirish: I already worry about that. Our borders are WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDE open. They could come here AT ANY TIME. I'd rather protect my rights, thanks. WIthout our rights, there's no America to protect.

Answer 1

The GOP has experianced a coup 'd etat by a very organized posse of reactionaries. Mostly these folks are people associated with the Oil/Coal/Gas/Nuke mafias, but in a general sense all of the trans-national corporations are their allies. To bring this coup about they enlisted the help of Jesus freak right who at first were happy to be the foot soldiers of the GOP, but now, to a large extent, are the colonels and generals. To get to this point they invented their own 'Emmanual Goldstein'...the 'liberals' and created mostly sexual wedge issues. Violating the spirit of the Constitution is just one more step. Hopefully these people have hit their high water mark behind the Bush Junta, but you never know. Right wing radio and FOX are hitting hard against anyone 'not them' and propaganda does work...that's why they do it. It's possible that the right has one more election cycle left in them, and frighteningly, one more may be enough to destroy 200 plus years of 'liberal' democracy. Just think...an association of government/industry and religion....a perfect petri dish to develop a fascisti regime....I don't think even the rank and file republicans want that, but its a possiblity. Don't discount it!

Answer 2

Ok, actually the federal appeals court threw out the ruling that the NSA wiretapping was illegal.

Now, as to whether the NSA wiretapping of foreign terrorist suspects, who are making phone called from overseas, to US phone numbers is against the consititution?

Clearly it is not against the constitution

The constitution clearly says " unreasonable search "

There is nothing unreasonable about wire tapping suspected terrorist who live in foreign countries. Even if the do call US phone numbers.

The federal government has always asserted the right to wiretap foreign communications, thats why we have the NSA for.

The Federal government, Congress and the Courts, have ruled that American citizens, inside trhe US may not be wiretapped, except when a warrant has been issued.

But they have also ruled, that in national security investigations, that at times, a wiretap may be used without a warrant being issued, as long as a warrant, is issed after the fact.

But when it comes to wiretapping foreign nationals, outside the US, and then the foreign national calls a US phone number, things get murky.

It is not specificly prohibited, nor is it specificly approved by current us law.

Well now it is specificly approved by US law, but not untill last month.

There never were constitutional issues involved, by legal US law isses.

Violating the law, isn't unconstitutional !!!!!

Answer 3

Well, the constitution is NOT being violated by the wiretap program by simply monitoring people's lines. Only by acting on that monitoring is the constitution being violated and that is in relation to an individual's constitutional rights.

When the government does move to violate the constitution in that manner, and it does avert a terror strike against Americans, then any reasonable person including judges would agree that said violation was worth it in terms of lives saved. Perhaps the constitution needs to be ammended to allow the government to reasonably and in the most limited way violate rights temporarily if the cause is clearly defined and the violation is minimal. Surely the framers never envisioned electronic communication and global jihadi movements!

Yes I'm pro-life simply because every conceived person deserves a shot at what we all or most of us try to preserve and better everyday... our own lives! No I'm not personally affected by someone else's abortion, but neither am I affected personally if someone else is murdered, raped or robbed, and I still would abhor such immoral conduct as I abhor abortion!

Answer 4

The only way a wiretap would violate my rights is if the organiization or and individual were to unjustly use that infromation against me or release that call to someone who does not need to see it. If I video tape you getting beat up by someone and then they use that evidence to convict the person who did it do you want the person to be able to say the film was a violation of his rights (this has been attempted by the way) would you want it thrown out? Should we sign a bill into law that says no recordings of anyone without consent?? Criminals would LOVE that.

My life HAS been or potentially could be affected by ANY abortion performed, The child that could have solved world hunger as an adult, caused world peace, inveinted the cure for cancer, or any number of possibliities could be long dead or being killed right now, when a helpless life is ended it hurts us all.

Answer 5

first of all i am personally pro life. but legally, the supreme court's ruling is unconstitutional. the constitution states that congress shall write no laws. abortion should be decided at the state level where all laws are supposed to be decided. what works in new york may not work in mississippi.

as far as being pro life. the girl had the choice when she spread her legs. i don't believe any human has the right to choose life or death over any other human even if its your own child. if a man can be punished for killing a fetus, even if accidental. then the woman carrying the child should be held to the same standard. you cannot have a double standard. if the baby has rights such as double murder if the woman is pregnant and is murdered. then the same baby should be protected from the mother/whore that wants to kill it.
we have killed 40,000,000 babies. this is one of the worst crimes of the 20th century.

lol, what an idiot!! have you ever heard of the bill of rights? perhaps the 10th amendment?
"Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

just google "state's rights". you might learn something

Answer 6

Very true - that my life has not been affected by an abortion that someone else had. However, I do truly believe that this decision is for the people involved, and what is best under the circumstances. I am not going to judge them or their decision, I am quite frankly not here to judge anyone.

I would never point fingers at any party or person - I will say that if someone wants to listen in on my household, go for it, it won't be very exciting, and I am such an upstanding citizen that they wouldn't be here long.

If I felt their listening to my every move made the country safer, then I am for it. But I do realize there must be some guidelines, otherwise no court case, or police investigation would be private. Rough call on this one.

These two issues are definitely as different as night and day!

Answer 7

The left can't make up its mind. On one hand they say that Bush ignored the signs before 9/11, so that was his fault. He tries to gather intel to stop another attack, and he is damned.
The wire tap program ONLY includes phone calls made to or from KNOWN terrorists. This is the significant point that the left keeps purposely leaving out of the debate. Now why is that? They want everyone to think that GWB is listening to grandmas phone calls, or JR's phone calls to his mistress.
As for the last question, why are you pro abortion? After all, have all those "fetus'" done anything to any one other than be conceived through no fault of there own? They had no choice in being conceived, yet they are killed for the choice of others.

Answer 8

It's funny you say that about the Patriot Act where there has yet to be a single instance of abuse cited by any court, congress or the justice departments own inspector general. There have been 1,073 complaints filed with the DOJ's inspector general. Of those only 34 complaints appeared to state a claim even remotely related to the Patriot Act and only two of those have been substantiated. Both involved verbal taunts of detainees by prison guards. What is also ironic is that most of the Patriot Act's powers were already available to fight organized crime and drug trafficking. So why not allow them to be used to fight terrorists? The Patriot Act has been able to charge more than 360 people with terror related crimes and 200 have been convicted.

I also found it funny someone wrote this:

"If somebody were to steal your car, my life wouldnt be effected. Should it be legal??

Genius.............."


So you would stop a program which has not had a single instance of abuse reported because it might affect someone else. But when it comes to abortion, "I don't want to force my views on someone else, because it doesn't effect my life."

Answer 9

#1 - Show me exactly where he violated the Constitution.

#2 - There was never any wiretapping that occured. The program only looked at who was calling who, not what they were talking about. Wiretapping means you record the conversation itself.

#3 - I don't support abortion because it is the killing of innocent children. I don't have a problem with killing convicted murderers.

Answer 10

Two questions are at work here. First, do you really care that much about Jose Padilla's phone that it should not have been tapped? Had the FBI not placed an emergency wiretap on his line we would not have had several hours of evidence that he was working with al Queda to build a dirty bomb. Why is it stupid libs think that terrorists have the right to kill???

Second; women still have the right to an abortion in America. That didn't change, did it? Quit whinning...