columnist noted
Posted By: nuance on 2007-10-19
In Reply to:
Gore had his presidency taken away by the Repub-stacked Supreme Court and went on to win a Nobel Peace Prize. GW was handed the presidency and started a disastrous, pointless war. Keep on keepin' on, my fellow Dems. Our time is just over the horizon. Maybe this time the country will appreciate the wisdom of the Clinton presidency(ies).
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Kathleen Parker is a columnist, a big
time conservative columnist, I believe. She reashes a lot of people as I think her column is syndicated. She also frequently makes appearances on O'Reilly's show. A lot of people do listen to her. She is not some democrat flying off. She was in support of Palin until recent days it seems.
Well, here's a liberal columnist at the Chicago Tribune defining FISA
again, and the Chicago Tribune is hardly a conservative paper...and note what Clinton's deputy Atty General Jamie Gorelick said
*****
The passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978 did not alter the constitutional situation. That law created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that can authorize surveillance directed at an agent of a foreign power, which includes a foreign terrorist group. Thus, Congress put its weight behind the constitutionality of such surveillance in compliance with the law's procedures.
But as the 2002 Court of Review noted, if the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches, FISA could not encroach on the president's constitutional power.
Every president since FISA's passage has asserted that he retained inherent power to go beyond the act's terms. Under President Clinton, deputy Atty. Gen. Jamie Gorelick testified that the Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes.
FISA contains a provision making it illegal to engage in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute. The term electronic surveillance is defined to exclude interception outside the U.S., as done by the NSA, unless there is interception of a communication sent by or intended to be received by a particular, known United States person (a U.S. citizen or permanent resident) and the communication is intercepted by intentionally targeting that United States person. The cryptic descriptions of the NSA program leave unclear whether it involves targeting of identified U.S. citizens. If the surveillance is based upon other kinds of evidence, it would fall outside what a FISA court could authorize and also outside the act's prohibition on electronic surveillance.
*****
So the writer of the article determined, as backed up by Dep. Atty. General, Jamie Gorelick that FISA really left an open loophole, and the ultimate decision on how far to persue a particular person lies with the president.
Few were noted
According to the author, an American who has lived there for the last 4 years, there are issues, the most obvious a tax rate that seems crazy to us here (52%). However, as the article pointed out, that 52% includes social security (which we pay in addition to our taxes here), and there are no state and local taxes. Real estate taxes are lower. Mentally, the author states, it was a jaw-dropper when he first learned the tax rate, but it took little time for him to start having tangible benefit from that tax rate.
Frankly, after reading the article, it sounds as though the biggest problems with the Dutch system are coming from non-Dutch people moving in and complaining about a system that has worked for the natives for centuries.
As noted previously...(sm)
Blair house is about 70,000 sq feet, comprised of townhouses, 110 rooms, 35 bathrooms. I doubt the visiting has-been from Australia (who, by the way, got kicked out of office because of aligning himself with Bush) would really need that much room. There were no other visitors scheduled.
This guy is also supposed to be a good friend of Bush's. If that's the case, why didn't Bush just ask him to stay at the White House? Maybe there wasn't enough room there either.....
As noted in a discussion below about this...(sm)
I don't care what his views are or what he is. What I do care about his what he teaches kids. Sending them to his conservative website for homework in my opinion is way out of line.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the language used by the poster above, which is what I was talking about before you tried to change the subject, as usual.
Should be noted that this is not a scientific poll
It's one those click here to vote deals. Not credible in the least.
Same sentiment and type of comments are noted on
nm
It has been noted as a casual aside on many search sites......
That the mega-wealthy are trying to "hide" their wealth. Clothing catalogs for the rich are pushing "dressing down." Those fancy cars are getting garage duty. They did the same thing during the depression - no one drove their Duesenberg (sp?), i.e., "made to order" cars. They can sit out decades in relative comfort, they have high-tech security on their homes. Wouldn't it suck if we didn't dare venture out of our homes? What kind of "freedom" is that!!!!
|
