If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants   (news.cnet.com) divider line 781
    More: Obvious, NSA, United States, phone calls, FISA Amendments Act, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Legal liability, Internet Archive  
•       •       •

11316 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jun 2013 at 9:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



781 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-16 03:27:57 AM

R.A.Danny: bunner: You think that's bad?  Every four years, we take a couple of mooks at THEIR about everything and give them a 400k a year job.

huh?


Presidential types.  They say stuff we're supposed to believe and we elect one of them.  Whoever "took Snowdon at his word" has done a better job than the last 5, so far.
 
2013-06-16 03:29:20 AM

R.A.Danny: Smackledorfer: If I'm wrong on that, fair enough.

You're way the hell off, but do go on patting yourself on the back.


Not only did I not pat myself on the back, but I specifically said I could be wrong. It is kind of telling that this is your response to my post though.  You know, instead of actually taking an opinion on something other than "time for a second amendment solution" and "everyone should be revolting but for fat and mcdonalds" wargarble.  Nothing says 'I respect freedom and law*' like 'I'm going to shoot, or threaten to shoot, people until the democracy does what I want'. I mean hey, it is certainly an option for certain things, but you can't go calling for open revolt every time the voters don't all agree with you. I suppose it conveniently let's you insinuate that everyone else, by way of not revolting (and which political leader have you picked up your gun and marched on, btw?) absolutely loves and supports the particular issue you call for revolt over.

*yes, I said law.  Without laws you don't have 4th amendment freedoms to begin with. We can pretend all day long that rights granted by the constitution are fundamental, inherent, god-given, or whatever trite phrase we want, but ultimately it is only society deciding as a group to agree to a code that gives them any power. You don't even have property rights without a society agreeing on what can be owned, what the owner is entitled to, and what the owner currently owns at present.
 
2013-06-16 03:29:48 AM

R.A.Danny: Smackledorfer: If I'm wrong on that, fair enough.

You're way the hell off, but do go on patting yourself on the back.


Hey now! Obama never promised he was a Constitutional scholar who would bring back the rule of law!

You're just imagining that.

Obama always promised to continue the glorious Bush legacy!

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-06-16 03:31:01 AM
Laws are for the people who are compelled to live under them, not the people who draft them or install semantic loopholes in them.
 
2013-06-16 03:32:55 AM

bunner: Whoever "took Snowdon at his word" has done a better job than the last 5, so far.


Considering he didn't even check into his schooling to see if that was accurate, he did a far worse job

BullBearMS: Hey now! Obama never promised he was a Constitutional scholar who would bring back the rule of law!


Can you actually post an idea or are you so utterly without being that all you can do is mock other people to try to feel good about yourself?
 
2013-06-16 03:36:16 AM

WhyteRaven74: Can you actually post an idea or are you so utterly without being that all you can do is mock other people to try to feel good about yourself?


I'm just wondering what context ever did to him that he refuses to use it.
 
2013-06-16 03:36:39 AM

WhyteRaven74: Considering he didn't even check into his schooling to see if that was accurate, he did a far worse job


Considering that all this dime store magazine rack, spy v. spy bullsh*t crawls up the ass of semantics a week after it's exposed, I'd say "inconsequential" is the operative word, either way.
 
2013-06-16 03:38:03 AM

BullBearMS: Didn't stop the tea party from tossing incumbents on their ass.


And the Partyists who got into office are finding they have zero support to win re-election, at least the ones who didn't play ball with the GOP masters.  Although I disagree with them on a lot of their stances, I thought the pseudo-third party was a good thing for the political health of this country.  It shook things up.  What the Tea Party learned (and it was a good lesson for everyone) is that if you don't play by the party rules you are OUT.

I'm convinced that both the DNC and GOP are so fundamentally broke that neither can be repaired from within.  Scrap them both and start over.
 
2013-06-16 03:41:20 AM
This cnet story is bogus. Greenwald has walked back his original direct access storyline but the horse is out of the barn. It's all justa bunch of link bait at this point.
 
2013-06-16 03:44:08 AM
We get it! He's black!
 
2013-06-16 03:44:28 AM

WhyteRaven74: ipsofacto: What specifically is garbage about Greenwald's reporting

that he took Snowden at his word about everything


Everything. That's specific. How about the court order? Is that garbage too?
 
2013-06-16 03:46:48 AM

ipsofacto: Everything. That's specific.


well let's see, he took Snowden at his word about his pay, his education and who knows what else that hasn't come to light yet.
 
2013-06-16 03:48:08 AM

sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: GeneralJim: LordJiro: There hasn't been a progressive in office for decades. Democrats are center-right authoritarians, while Republicans are extreme-right authoritarians. Just because Fox says every Democrat is the most liberal lib EVAR doesn't make it true.
If Democrats are "center-right" and Republicans are "far-right," then who has made this country about half socialist? The problem is, YOU are a bit to the left of Che Guevara, so EVERYBODY looks like a rightist -- to you.

"Half socialist." In a country with 7% union penetration and mass privatization in every sector of government. You're beyond ridiculous.

Hey, everybody, let's get into a partisan slap fight, and ignore that we are being farked!  That always works so well.

If you can't win, you may as well be entertained.


Standard misdirection.  When the peasants are pissed at you, get them arguing with each other.  Problem solved.

This NSA shiat has actually united more on the two sides than any other situation I can remember in the recent past.  So expect something to come up that will cause a split.
 
2013-06-16 03:48:08 AM

BullBearMS: whidbey: Honestly, if we had thrown every ounce of our support to the Democratic Party, telling the Republicans to fark off and holding Obama et al to a high standard of transparency, this country would be sailing along a lot farther than it is now.

We should demand Obama live up to his promises!

whidbey: It really doesn't help the cause of progressiveness for its proponents to be divided, and that's what you're doing.

But don't you dare criticize him when he farks up!


[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 450x600]


Hey, where did you get Whidbeys 6th grade picture? His mom told me I was one of the few to have a copy.
 
2013-06-16 03:49:39 AM

OgreMagi: What the Tea Party learned (and it was a good lesson for everyone) is that if you don't play by the party rules you are OUT.


Play by the party rules? sure. Follow lockstep? Not really.  They still aren't following lockstep in the Republican Party, and Democrats are even more free to move around within the party when it comes to individual issues.

The real problem here is that regardless of parties you still have hundreds of elected officials, all of whom need campaign funds to get and stay elected, all of whom have to make backdoor deals to get signatures on their bills, etc.  Then you figure in the 300 million individual minds they are trying to represent, and they will always look, to any one individual, bad. Even in the best-case scenario I can imagine regarding the behavior of elected officials, we would still have an internet full of people furious with their actions.  All compromises of "vote for my bill and I'll vote for yours" will always be seen as the elected stabbing the voters in the back to some extent. I don't think deleting the parties and starting over would change much of anything. You might see a short-term surge in voter turnout, but that is about it.

Mind you, I'm not saying Obama's views on the NSA are a compromise, nor am I denying that it flies in the face of his campaign rhetoric.
 
2013-06-16 03:50:02 AM

WhyteRaven74: ipsofacto: Everything. That's specific.

well let's see, he took Snowden at his word about his pay, his education and who knows what else that hasn't come to light yet.


How about the court order? Is that garbage too?
 
2013-06-16 03:50:58 AM

OgreMagi: BullBearMS: Didn't stop the tea party from tossing incumbents on their ass.

And the Partyists who got into office are finding they have zero support to win re-election, at least the ones who didn't play ball with the GOP masters.  Although I disagree with them on a lot of their stances, I thought the pseudo-third party was a good thing for the political health of this country.  It shook things up.  What the Tea Party learned (and it was a good lesson for everyone) is that if you don't play by the party rules you are OUT.

I'm convinced that both the DNC and GOP are so fundamentally broke that neither can be repaired from within.  Scrap them both and start over.


The DNC and the GOP are wholly owned by the same wealthy donor friends.

They like to go on and on about how they oppose what the other is doing, but when we're talking about something their wealthy masters want the leadership of both parties get bipartisan damn quick.
 
2013-06-16 03:55:52 AM

ipsofacto: How about the court order? Is that garbage too?


Who knows, also The Guardian has never said Snowden was the one who provided the court order.
 
2013-06-16 03:58:48 AM

BullBearMS: OgreMagi: BullBearMS: Didn't stop the tea party from tossing incumbents on their ass.

And the Partyists who got into office are finding they have zero support to win re-election, at least the ones who didn't play ball with the GOP masters.  Although I disagree with them on a lot of their stances, I thought the pseudo-third party was a good thing for the political health of this country.  It shook things up.  What the Tea Party learned (and it was a good lesson for everyone) is that if you don't play by the party rules you are OUT.

I'm convinced that both the DNC and GOP are so fundamentally broke that neither can be repaired from within.  Scrap them both and start over.

The DNC and the GOP are wholly owned by the same wealthy donor friends.

They like to go on and on about how they oppose what the other is doing, but when we're talking about something their wealthy masters want the leadership of both parties get bipartisan damn quick.


I figured that out a long time ago.  I thought more people would figure that out when the Credit Card Reform Act was passed (or whatever it's official name was).  It was supposed to fix the most outrageous abuses be the credit card companies.  By the time it passed, it had become the "Credit Card Profit Protection Act".  Instead of stopping the abuses, it made it nearly impossible for massive credit card debt to be discharged via bankruptcy.
 
2013-06-16 03:59:15 AM

WhyteRaven74: ipsofacto: How about the court order? Is that garbage too?

Who knows, also The Guardian has never said Snowden was the one who provided the court order.


Aside from saying he was the source of the leaked information, you mean?
 
2013-06-16 03:59:33 AM
That being said I'm all for NSA reform. I also want these private spook firms to keep their money out of govt something Greenwald disagrees with.
 
2013-06-16 03:59:46 AM

OgreMagi:

cptjeff: OgreMagi: Look at how things were done under Bush. Compare them to how things are now being done under Obama. Do you see a difference? No, you don't.

Yes, I do. I see quite a few differences. Not as many as I'd like to see on this issue, but if you can't see quite a few very major differences between Bush and Obama, then I'm glad you're choosing to remove yourself from even the tiny levels of influence you might have had.

There is no difference where it matters.

We still have the government spying without probably cause.
We're still getting involved in foreign wars that are none of our farking business.
The rich still don't get prosecuted for raping financial institutions for immense profits.
Corporations still control our political process.

I could go on, but I doubt you actually care because you are happily part of the problem.

I was just watching a news report while I assembled an office chair, and retired NSA agent interviews were being discussed.  They said that the retired NSA agents were startled by all the stuff they were doing now -- that is, they couldn't do all that stuff when Bush was President.  Apparently Obama is not "just as bad as Bush," but worse.  How exciting.
 
2013-06-16 04:00:06 AM

WhyteRaven74: ipsofacto: How about the court order? Is that garbage too?

Who knows, also The Guardian has never said Snowden was the one who provided the court order.


Has the authenticity of the order been denied? Snowden may very well not have been the source for it, but we were talking about Greenwald's reporting..
 
2013-06-16 04:03:30 AM

OgreMagi: BullBearMS: OgreMagi: BullBearMS: Didn't stop the tea party from tossing incumbents on their ass.

And the Partyists who got into office are finding they have zero support to win re-election, at least the ones who didn't play ball with the GOP masters.  Although I disagree with them on a lot of their stances, I thought the pseudo-third party was a good thing for the political health of this country.  It shook things up.  What the Tea Party learned (and it was a good lesson for everyone) is that if you don't play by the party rules you are OUT.

I'm convinced that both the DNC and GOP are so fundamentally broke that neither can be repaired from within.  Scrap them both and start over.

The DNC and the GOP are wholly owned by the same wealthy donor friends.

They like to go on and on about how they oppose what the other is doing, but when we're talking about something their wealthy masters want the leadership of both parties get bipartisan damn quick.

I figured that out a long time ago.  I thought more people would figure that out when the Credit Card Reform Act was passed (or whatever it's official name was).  It was supposed to fix the most outrageous abuses be the credit card companies.  By the time it passed, it had become the "Credit Card Profit Protection Act".  Instead of stopping the abuses, it made it nearly impossible for massive credit card debt to be discharged via bankruptcy.


The recent one I remember is right after it became public knowledge that the banks were using fraudulent documents in all 50 states to take people's homes away from them.

Suddenly, without any sort of debate, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would absolve them of liability for this.
 
2013-06-16 04:06:26 AM

BullBearMS: Suddenly, without any sort of debate, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would absolve them of liability for this.


Almost sounds like collusion and racketeering.  But, I mean, he banks don't WANT all those homes.  Not that actual wealth of property.  They just want the no good bastards who took out those mortgages they offered them and couldn't pay to mail the bank notes that  the Fed just sends them on demand, anyway.  Wealth.  pfft.  That's for suckers.
 
2013-06-16 04:06:39 AM

BullBearMS: OgreMagi: BullBearMS: OgreMagi: BullBearMS: Didn't stop the tea party from tossing incumbents on their ass.

And the Partyists who got into office are finding they have zero support to win re-election, at least the ones who didn't play ball with the GOP masters.  Although I disagree with them on a lot of their stances, I thought the pseudo-third party was a good thing for the political health of this country.  It shook things up.  What the Tea Party learned (and it was a good lesson for everyone) is that if you don't play by the party rules you are OUT.

I'm convinced that both the DNC and GOP are so fundamentally broke that neither can be repaired from within.  Scrap them both and start over.

The DNC and the GOP are wholly owned by the same wealthy donor friends.

They like to go on and on about how they oppose what the other is doing, but when we're talking about something their wealthy masters want the leadership of both parties get bipartisan damn quick.

I figured that out a long time ago.  I thought more people would figure that out when the Credit Card Reform Act was passed (or whatever it's official name was).  It was supposed to fix the most outrageous abuses be the credit card companies.  By the time it passed, it had become the "Credit Card Profit Protection Act".  Instead of stopping the abuses, it made it nearly impossible for massive credit card debt to be discharged via bankruptcy.

The recent one I remember is right after it became public knowledge that the banks were using fraudulent documents in all 50 states to take people's homes away from them.

Suddenly, without any sort of debate, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would absolve them of liability for this.


Funny how they can't get together to help people suffering, but the moment some rich bastard's money gets threatened, they are a model of cooperation.

Tree, rope, politician.  Some assembly required.
 
2013-06-16 04:07:11 AM

GeneralJim: They said that the retired NSA agents were startled by all the stuff they were doing now -- that is, they couldn't do all that stuff when Bush was President.


Before 9/11 they couldn't spy on Americans without a warrant no matter who was President.

After 9/11 they could.

As a matter of fact, at one point much of the Justice Department under Bush threatened to resign en mass if they didn't change something that was going on. Exactly what they were doing never leaked out, but the threat to resign as a group sure did.
 
2013-06-16 04:09:22 AM
From this
thefightforfreedomchronicles.files.wordpress.comupload.wikimedia.org
To this
 
2013-06-16 04:09:37 AM

GeneralJim: OgreMagi: cptjeff: OgreMagi: Look at how things were done under Bush. Compare them to how things are now being done under Obama. Do you see a difference? No, you don't.

Yes, I do. I see quite a few differences. Not as many as I'd like to see on this issue, but if you can't see quite a few very major differences between Bush and Obama, then I'm glad you're choosing to remove yourself from even the tiny levels of influence you might have had.

There is no difference where it matters.

We still have the government spying without probably cause.
We're still getting involved in foreign wars that are none of our farking business.
The rich still don't get prosecuted for raping financial institutions for immense profits.
Corporations still control our political process.

I could go on, but I doubt you actually care because you are happily part of the problem.
I was just watching a news report while I assembled an office chair, and retired NSA agent interviews were being discussed.  They said that the retired NSA agents were startled by all the stuff they were doing now -- that is, they couldn't do all that stuff when Bush was President.  Apparently Obama is not "just as bad as Bush," but worse.  How exciting.


Technology is constantly improving.  That's why is was a bad idea to not worry about the NSA gathering all that data because "it's not technologically possible."   Maybe not today, but tomorrow they will figure out how to do it and we became complacent and won't notice until it's too late.
 
2013-06-16 04:10:28 AM

OgreMagi: Funny how they can't get together to help people suffering, but the moment some rich bastard's money gets threatened, they are a model of cooperation.


That or if they need to make America more nearly fascist, as with the NDAA's implementation of indefinite detention for Americans without a trial.
 
2013-06-16 04:12:08 AM

BullBearMS: Before 9/11 they couldn't spy on Americans without a warrant no matter who was President.

After 9/11 they could.


Causative pivot points are handy when you're selling an agenda.

t0.gstatic.com
 
2013-06-16 04:15:00 AM

WhyteRaven74: ipsofacto: What specifically is garbage about Greenwald's reporting

that he took Snowden at his word about everything


... he also directly quoted the NSA's own document ("direct server access").  The guy deserves a Pulitzer.  Snowden should be Time's Man of the Year; it's a no brainer.
 
2013-06-16 04:15:36 AM
 
2013-06-16 04:17:23 AM

PDid: This cnet story is bogus. Greenwald has walked back his original direct access storyline but the horse is out of the barn. It's all justa bunch of link bait at this point.


You mean his "original direct access" storyline direct quote of the NSA's own document?
 
2013-06-16 04:20:10 AM

BullBearMS: GeneralJim: They said that the retired NSA agents were startled by all the stuff they were doing now -- that is, they couldn't do all that stuff when Bush was President.

Before 9/11 they couldn't spy on Americans without a warrant no matter who was President.

After 9/11 they could.

As a matter of fact, at one point much of the Justice Department under Bush threatened to resign en mass if they didn't change something that was going on. Exactly what they were doing never leaked out, but the threat to resign as a group sure did.


I was in the Justice Department under Bush and I assure this is fiction.
 
2013-06-16 04:21:59 AM

BullBearMS: bunner: BullBearMS: Before 9/11 they couldn't spy on Americans without a warrant no matter who was President.

After 9/11 they could.

Causative pivot points are handy when you're selling an agenda.

[t0.gstatic.com image 246x205]

Here. Found a citation.

Bush agreed to unspecified changes to the program


Well, then what on earth are we worried about?
 
2013-06-16 04:23:50 AM

SunsetLament: I assure this is fiction.


Then how did this fiction find purchase in history?
 
2013-06-16 04:25:13 AM

bunner: BullBearMS: bunner: BullBearMS: Before 9/11 they couldn't spy on Americans without a warrant no matter who was President.

After 9/11 they could.

Causative pivot points are handy when you're selling an agenda.

[t0.gstatic.com image 246x205]

Here. Found a citation.

Bush agreed to unspecified changes to the program

Well, then what on earth are we worried about?


What in the hell was going on that people willing to ignore torture threatened to resign en masse over???
 
2013-06-16 04:26:19 AM
(Thread TLDR) You're all wrong!
 
2013-06-16 04:29:05 AM

bunner: SunsetLament: I assure this is fiction.

Then how did this fiction find purchase in history?


One guy (Comey) exaggerated a story (his threatening to resign turned into "a large mass of people considering resigning") and it was the story the media wanted to hear.  It's the same way all kinds of bullshiat political stories find purchase in history.

80% of the country who knows who Sarah Palin is thinks she said "I can see Russia from my house" and thinks that Bush used the word "strategery".
 
2013-06-16 04:29:46 AM

BullBearMS: firefly212: Oldiron_79: Insert the DNC apologists saying "Its not fascism when WE do it" here.

I don't think we're gonna see a whole lot of that... I'm a dyed-in-the-wool liberal... and this practice is absolutely indefensible... IDGAF whether we're talking about the people who voted for it like Peter King and Diane Feinstein, or the people who implemented it like Bush and Obama... it's an absolutely terrible practice that violates everything the fourth amendment is all about, and to some extent even the first. These people who would use the losses of 9/11 as a rationale for torching our constitution have no place in government, not a farking one of them, regardless of party.

None of the real liberals are doing anything but condemning this in the strongest possible terms.

It's the Democratic party shills who are but, but, but Bushing about it and making other lame ass excuses.

Obama promised to end this.

He lied.

It's indefensible.


So are you "real liberals™" gonna vote against the bums that did this shiat in '14 and '16 or are you gonna vote for them anyways and say"well our guys did shiat that makes watergate look beneign, but I cant risk letting the republicans win by voting 3rd party"?

I voted 3rd party in the 08, 10, and 12 cycles because of the shenanigans of the Schrub administration, I wasnt gonna vote dem but as a true conservative the GOP had went too far to the dark side for me to follow.
 
2013-06-16 04:32:04 AM

MaliFinn: (Thread TLDR) You're all wrong!


Whoa, thanks!  I feel better now.  Please visit the cashier to have your posture of unimpeachable rectitude re-inflated!  :  )
 
2013-06-16 04:32:29 AM

Gyrfalcon:

GeneralJim: Gyrfalcon: Nabb1: I'm sure the bootlickers will be here soon enough to tell us we have no reason to be upset.

Well, so much for having a rational discussion on the topic.

Hey, don't let his insensitive comment deter you -- lick away.


[theraf69.files.wordpress.com image 400x400]

Your boots are facing the wrong way.

I bow to your superior knowledge of NAZI minutiae.  Groß Danke.
 
2013-06-16 04:35:46 AM

SunsetLament: 80% of the country who knows who Sarah Palin is thinks she said "I can see Russia from my house"


Yeah, "you an actually see land in Russia from here in Alaska" bespeaks an incisive political acuity that "from my house" never could.
 
2013-06-16 04:36:01 AM
I'll bet there are a couple of "trusted analysts" with a few million bucks in a Cayman Islands bank account from the CEO conversations they sold into the corporate spook world.

Also, the Gubmint could save themselves a lot of headaches if they just went back to claiming that the NSA does not exist.

/There is No Such Agency.
 
2013-06-16 04:38:18 AM

PDid: That being said I'm all for NSA reform. I also want these private spook firms to keep their money out of govt something Greenwald disagrees with.


I just heard in an interview on the CBC that 10s of billions of dollars of the NSA's annual budget (50 to 70%) goes to private contractors like Booz Allan et al.

How could Greenwald disagree with keeping their influence minimized?

What I keep coming back to is the potential for abuse of this power.

What if America's enemies bribe their way to accessing it?

This time the leak went to a noted lefty journo by a guy concerned about what was going on.

Next time it might be info garnered by a less civic minded private contractor and sold to an AQ type group or corporate/foreign spy or a politician digging for dirt on an opponent.

If this hasn't happened already.
 
2013-06-16 04:38:43 AM

Oldiron_79: So are you "real liberals™" gonna vote against the bums that did this shiat in '14 and '16 or are you gonna vote for them anyways and say"well our guys did shiat that makes watergate look beneign, but I cant risk letting the republicans win by voting 3rd party"?


I supported Jill Stein quite publicly in the last election.
 
2013-06-16 04:41:08 AM

BullBearMS: Oldiron_79: So are you "real liberals™" gonna vote against the bums that did this shiat in '14 and '16 or are you gonna vote for them anyways and say"well our guys did shiat that makes watergate look beneign, but I cant risk letting the republicans win by voting 3rd party"?

I supported Jill Stein quite publicly in the last election.


I plan on pissing through the endless web pages of hype and pretending, for a couple of nanoseconds, that who wins matters at all.
 
2013-06-16 04:42:31 AM

Wrencher: I'll bet there are a couple of "trusted analysts" with a few million bucks in a Cayman Islands bank account from the CEO conversations they sold into the corporate spook world.

Also, the Gubmint could save themselves a lot of headaches if they just went back to claiming that the NSA does not exist.

/There is No Such Agency.


Spying on Americans has become one of the favorite new ways to get rich if you're a private contractor.

PBS would be happy to fill you in, if you want to know more.
 
2013-06-16 04:44:16 AM

djkutch:

GeneralJim: djkutch: Bin Laden got every thing he wanted. Good job, America.

And, for the bootlickers mentioned by Nabb1, it starts with the Patriot Act. Obama isn't innocent, but please remember the administration and party that was in power that started it all.

Personally, I prefer to remember the candidate who promised to end it, and extended and deepened it instead. Besides that, the USA PATRIOT Act passed the House 357 to 66, and passed the Senate by 98 to 1. Truly bipartisan bullshiat, despite your need to blame Bush.

So, you admit it was mistake, pre-Obama?


Admit? Hell, I PROCLAIMED it. Yes, I have been vehemently against it since I heard of it.  It is unconstitutional, and a slap in the face to everything good in America.  At ANY time since then, the correct action would have been to repeal it.  If there is something that is questionable in terms of taking away rights, and it has bi-partisan support, run, don't walk away from it.
 
Displayed 50 of 781 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report