The Leftie Blogs Are All A-Twitter…
…over that Al Gore speech today. Boy, you’d think some sort of news was made here, or something! Come on, now, people, is it really big news that Al Gore, who has spent the time since his embarrassing loss to the current occupant of the White House either (a) sulking, (b) playing the mountain man, growing a beard, and disappearing into an obscure job, or (c) ranting like a raving lunatic in his public speeches, has engaged in some rhetorical target practice with President Bush?
This would be like people treating it as big news that Michael Jackson said or did something weird and/or possibly illegal…wait, that’s a poor example…
What is ironic is that a Rat was president when King was under surveillance. Did Al mention that fact? Gore has become the Rats “space boy”. When they need a spaced out speech about a particular subject, Al’s their boy.
I’d sulk too if I had won the popular vote and not been elected :-p
So it’s not news that Bush broke the law with warrantless wiretapping and continues to advocate for torture and extraordinary rendition?
Glad you admit it!
Ooooh, you got me…come now, Anne, even if I buy your extremely partisan wording, Al Gore’s speech didn’t break any of those stories…just more blah-blah-blah from yet another failed politician who couldn’t win the big one, that’s all…
Anne your man Gore had basically a breakdown after losing. Yet the Dems still rally around his madness. Also, whether the wiretapping is legal or not has yet to be determined. Bush’s attorneys feel it is. I am sure you would prefer to wait for all the information to come in before convicting him. Nah you wouldn’t you are a hypocrite I imagine.
“Incredibly, the Administration claims instead that the surveillance was implicitly authorized when Congress voted to use force against those who attacked us on September 11th.
This argument just does not hold any water. Without getting into the legal intricacies, it faces a number of embarrassing facts. First, another admission by the Attorney General: he concedes that the Administration knew that the NSA project was prohibited by existing law and that they consulted with some members of Congress about changing the statute. Gonzalez says that they were told this probably would not be possible. So how can they now argue that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force somehow implicitly authorized it all along? Second, when the Authorization was being debated, the Administration did in fact seek to have language inserted in it that would have authorized them to use military force domestically – and the Congress did not agree. Senator Ted Stevens and Representative Jim McGovern, among others, made statements during the Authorization debate clearly restating that that Authorization did not operate domestically.”
Now why would they need to do that if it WERE LEGAL TO DOMESTICALLY WIRETAP? Get your head out of your a$$. I guess all you Shrubbies welcome Big Brother with open arms. Not me.
Don’t_Tread_On_Me, you seem to be quoting from something, but you didn’t give use the source…care to enlighten us?
This is a direct quote from the Al Gore speech given this past Monday. I would have assumed that you all read this, since you are criticizing it.
Al Gore is not mad. At least someone is speaking out for the preservation of democracy and the balance of power in this country.
Oh, I should have recognized the hectoring tone…
I, for one, have suggested that the NSA surveillance program may in fact have been illegal…and I’ve also argued that we need to clear this up and set the parameters, because it is a vital issue. That’s why I welcomed the ACLU lawsuit.
That’s my whole point – Al Gore’s speech is nothing new…we’ve been having the same debate (with a lot more nuance, I might add) here…