Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The court ruling on NSA wiretaps means NOTHING

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:04 PM
Original message
The court ruling on NSA wiretaps means NOTHING
For it to have any meaningful impact, BushCo would first have to accept that it is required to act within the confines of the law and the Constitution. They do not. They answer to "a higher power," as Bush once said. Jump up and down and cheer all you want. This court ruling will change NOTHING until the law-breaker is removed from office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. The laws need to be ENFORCED to do any good. And the laws aren't
being enforced. We would need a Congress that has respect for the laws and the work ethic to do what it's supposed to do. Right now, we don't have such a Congress, which in my mind makes them complicit in the illegal activities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Congress IS complicit. They are guilty as hell!
Yet people around here have a fit if we say anything bad about those supposedly on our side. :eyes:

Sorry, but if they aren't part of the solution then they are part of the problem. Which makes them criminals too. Wonder how long they wait before they start trying to save their own asses?! Or will they continue to push everything to the max and see how much they can get away with? :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. There is one possibility, it's stretching it, but it's a possibility.
Perhaps those in Congress on our side are waiting for the right moment to take action. Perhaps there's more going on behind the scenes than we know, and they don't want to tip their hat.

I know it's a shaky theory, but it is a possibility.

Like the search for Jon Benet Ramsey's killer, everything had to be kept hush hush until the right time.

I agree that Congress as a whole needs to be held accountable for their non-action, each and every one of them has an oath to uphold. And everyday that passes without action is another day their have broken their oath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rubberducky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. Agree 100%!!
When I first saw the story I thought hooray!! But, on reflection, when has a little thing like the law ever deterred this administration? NEVER!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mccoyn Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Perhaps one good thing.
A court has ruled its illegal + the administration doesn't stop = Canidates get elected on the grounds that they will enforce the law and impeach an unpopular president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. NOTHING eh?
You can tell someone has a strong argument when they feel they need to use all caps to emphasize their point.

Does it mean that the wiretapping program is over? Probably not. Does it mean that the bush administration will now be forced to act within the law? Again probably not. Does that mean it means NOTHING? God no!

What it means is the move to reject Bush style policies is, well, moving. It's a set back because it is seen as a set back; it is a setback because it provides further grounds for impeachment should the opportunity present itself. And it is a setback because it shows the Bush policies for what they are, unconstitutional and illegal.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Oh.
:eyes:

I typed "eyes" in lower case, btw.

Sheesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Good response
Nice to see you won't let anything get in the way of your cynical doomsaying. It's almost like you hope to dishearten your fellow DUers on a day when some justifiably good news comes out. Now why would you want to do that?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I wouldn't. Why would you want to make shit up like that?
Maybe you'll provide me with the list of the number of times Bush has changed anything he's done base on a mere court ruling. Anything. Name one of his programs, anything Bush has done that indicates his willingness to comply with the law. I'll wait.

Justifiably good news? Good one! The NEWS is goods. The changes which take place as a result of this news will still be -- sadly -- nothing. Bush has plans, and no crummy court will stop him.

Again, though...you can offer all the proof you want to refute my point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Proof, eh?
For one thign, why don't we have privatized Social Security right now? President Bush made it clear that he wanted and required the Social Security phase out, if he is so all powerful and above political concerns, as you describe him, how come he failed?

How come we haven't reinstated the draft? Bush and his supporters have made it clear that they are unwilling to wait too much longer on invading Iran; if he cares so little for public opinion, why not just reinstate the draft so he can build up the army he needs to occupy Syria and Iran?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. You take two policy issues and contrast them to court rulings?
The policy issues failed because the public didn't like them. The draft issued failed because it hasn't even been a formal "issue" yet. The trouble with your comparisons is that they're based upon public opinion polls. The thread was about court rulings. I am astonished, actually, that you seem to think the two have some sort of equal weight, especially to BushCo!

You DO understand that we're talking about a court ruling, and not the latest Rasumussen, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. This is the part where I have to quote your original post to you
Always a pain.

"The court ruling on NSA wiretaps means NOTHING
For it to have any meaningful impact, BushCo would first have to accept that it is required to act within the confines of the law and the Constitution. They do not. They answer to "a higher power," as Bush once said. Jump up and down and cheer all you want. This court ruling will change NOTHING until the law-breaker is removed from office.
"

You're original argument was that this ruling means NOTHING (and that we shouldn't be happy with it, apparently). Your current argument seems to be From a legal standpoint this ruling means nothing.

Even in my initial response, which you clearly didn't bother to read, I admitted as much. But that doesn't mean that this ruling means NOTHING in an absolute sense. Which is my point; even if this ruling isn't going to stop the program entirely and immediately, it is another sign of where the country is going and another clear indication that President Bush is choosing to operate outside the law. We've known this for some time, but there's nothing wrong with underlining it for the general public.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Okay, Bryant. Okay. Sure, you're right, Bryant.
We're saying the same things. Bush will not stop wiretapping just because the court says he has to. Bush doesn't abide by the law. He's demonstrated that over and over again, and you seem to concur. So now, "NOTHING" is more of a metaphysical thing, eh? It will mean "SOMETHING" on a larger, cosmic level. It will mean the people are waking up. *YAWN*. If I had a nickel for every time I've read post by DUers that "the people are waking up," I'd have Skinner's next two fund drives already in the bag.

You add these stupid parenthetical asides which I never said ("and that we shouldn't be happy with it, apparently") to make your point. I "clearly didn't bother to read" your response. Now the court's purpose is merely to "underline" things for the general public, but their rulings don't actually have to have any consequence. As long as the public sees it's UNDERLINED.

Maybe the SCOTUS will even use a yellow HIGHLIGHTER PEN! That will show 'em!


Sure, Bryant. Sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. If you want to believe this means nothing that's your right as an
American. I have a different opinion - but then I'm not a defeatist (most of the time anyway).

I'm sorry you don't like my parantheses (but I don't intend to quit using them).

Bryant
check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. It means alot. Especially if you want those that
violate the constitution to be prosecuted because it shows legal standing to prosecute them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. And if you think these guys will be prosecuted...
...I've got a ranch in Crawford I'd like to sell you. "Showing a legal standing" and actually doing something to enforce it are two entirely different matters. In the end, I predict, this ruling will mean about as much to Bush as did the will of the people in 2000. Nothing. Lower case, even.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. But they can be and we don't know if no one will try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
21. LOL...
you just said the ruling means NOTHING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Yes, it is very meaningful
Having your actions judged unconstitutional is a heavy burden to overcome. Now hundreds of cases can go to court without the gummint being able to shut them down before they are heard.

The SC will get this one fast, and will rule against Smirky et al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
16. His true believers in congress and the press will protect him.
If that fails the Republican controlled Supreme Court will shut down any attempt at holding bush responsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
19. let's win in November before pessismism enters the frey >
Bushco will be investigated from every angle and most assuredly will quit due to healt "issues" once he understands he has no more power after house & senate turn DEM!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-17-06 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
20. It's on the record now. That's not nothing.
It may take a while for it to be meaningful, though - maybe after he's finally arrested for his crimes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 10th 2024, 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC