Go to sarooster on politics
- Add a comment
- Go to That was some discussion; more of my thoughts
Yes Offbeats,
Blanche and I have been having a civil conversation. I think we do well. It can turn cantankerous at any moment.
posted by
sarooster
on February 6, 2006 at 6:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Sarooster
O boy...I could say a few things here, but I see you have already responded!!
posted by
Offy
on February 6, 2006 at 5:56 PM
| link to this | reply
I can agree with this comment!
Ames was caught red-handed and that is good. But one big problem with that......much damage had already been done. He compromised American security pretty big time. We need to do whatever it takes to stop that before it happens. I know the technology is getting better and better and we have to be on guard. I have no way to answer not getting warrants, even after the fact. They are always granted; well in a few instances they were not. I just don't want us to let our guard down. The bad guys are trying to get at us and I think , in total, we are doing a good job of keeping them at bay. It's Super Bowl time.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 3:15 PM
| link to this | reply
Sarooster,
The key differences between the Aldrich Ames case and the NSA electronics eavesdropping are
1. It was a physical search (although warrantless), they searched his home.
2. They had reasonable cause to think that he was a spy for the Russians, which was eventually convicted of, and sentenced to life for.
3. Electronic surveillance is like a fishing trawler scooping up all the fish in the ocean instead of catching one fish. It's much wider, broader in scope, and therefore open to abuses.
My point is that if the Administration has reason to believe that there are terrorists having conversations with persons within the country, they can get a warrant, up to 72 hous afterward, very easily. Why don't they? Is it because they don't want even the secret FISA court to know they may be spying on people thy couldn't possibly justify spying on?
Besides, does blaming Clinton really justify espionage, the stakes are getting higher, the technology so much more invasive. It's a really big concern.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 3:08 PM
| link to this | reply
Again, Blanche and I must say this......
former administrations did the same thing. Aldrich Ames' house was invaded and our government did not have a warrant. So if this was OK then, then I say it's OK now just to make sure communications lines are being checked out for suspicous activity.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 3:02 PM
| link to this | reply
I agree, Sarooster,
The reasons for getting into Iraq and staying there have become muddied. I still think it's possible to fight terorrists without giving up all our rights and turning over all power to the Executive Branch. I believe that the checks and balances of the Constitution are as necessary as they were in 1776, and that it still works.
We don't have to let the President break the law to keep us safe by invading countries without Congressional authority or wiretapping without a warrant to keep us safe effectively from terrorist. The average citizen gets caught between fear of a threat of terrorism and a fear of being under the microscope of the government and nobody could stand up to that kind of scrutiny.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 2:58 PM
| link to this | reply
Blanche,
The thing that divides us at this point is George W. Bush and his election, or OK if you are a liberal appointment in 2000. We should all be mad at the Congress for giving up their right to declare war and handing it to the President. The Congress voted overwhelmingly to do that and now, mostly Democrats, want to complain about the war and act like they never voted like they did. Lamar Smith is my Congressman and I wrote to him at that point and chasitsed him for doing what he did and he is a solid conservative. I think we need to take care of people like Saddam and such, but there has to be some agreement between sides on what to do. We needed Congress to take much more of a role in the Iraq war before it started. Bush is the reason we disagree for the most part.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 2:50 PM
| link to this | reply
and thank you for the reminder that it's not good to judge a book
by its cover, because truthfully, I think people from right and left have more in common than most think.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 2:43 PM
| link to this | reply
Sarooster,
I can respect someone who has convictions, either right or left, because both have merit. It's the ones who are all about the money and power that worry me.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 2:41 PM
| link to this | reply
Blanche,
You can believe Justice Alito is solidly conservative. I think he will vote his mind and surprise us at times, but by and large he is going to be leaning to the right. And I don't think that is a bad thing. We have leaned left for many years. It will do the country good to lean right for a bit. I have been paying attention for a long, long time. I used to be a solid Democrat and a hard core liberal in my younger days. I have changed over the years. I still have some liberal bents when it comes to labor and abortion though. I may lean left more than most people think I do.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 2:38 PM
| link to this | reply
Good point, Sarooster,
I don't remember Henry Gonzalez, I probably wasn't paying much attention at the time. It's only in the last few years, I've gotten more concerned about the way things are going. i'm not sure I'm about being fair, just that I want the highest court in the land, the one that is going to make decisions for the rest of my life to be clear about what they believe and what they stand for.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 1:49 PM
| link to this | reply
I know what you mean Blanche,
but I am not going to hold my guys feet over the fire when everyone else has gotten away with murder. I remember back a few years when Henry Gonzales was chairman of some committee in the house. The committee was going to hold hearings, but the Democrats still controlled the House. I don't remember the issue though. The committee brought in something like 10 of President's Clinton's people to testify, all at once, and allowd about half an hour of questions or something along those lines. My figures might be off, but it was some kind of travesty such as that. So I say let me guys have the same thing. When the score gets a bit even I'll call for people to be fair and such. In some cases, to me, two wrongs are OK. It's not right. It was not right in the first case and its not right now.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 1:42 PM
| link to this | reply
Yes, Professor,
that is a good observation. There are other issues that also trouble me on the move from blue states to red even though in general I like the electoral comment by Corbin. I am only liberal on a few issues and one of them is labor. In a lot of, if not most of the red states, unions are not very strong. They are almost non-existent in Texas. Even though things such as houses and all are cheap down here there are tremendous battles about companies paying a "living wage" to workers. Those lower end workers will never get a really decent wage without someone to represent them. They are largely undereducated or have no education at all. I realize unions are not the best in all situations, but some people do need help. So even though the red states are gaining population at faster rates than blue states it may be at cost to workers in some instances. Of course, if you take advantage of all this great country has to offer you don't have to stay in that situation for long. That was a bit long and rambling, but that's how it came out.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 1:38 PM
| link to this | reply
Sarooster,
I don't agree with President Clinton's actions, but two wrongs don't make a right. Justice Alito didn't answer the questions about his beliefs and background. Scoop usually does get his facts right, which is what I like about him.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 1:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Occam's Razor
state's that usually, the simples answer is best. Maybe, just maybe, "red" states are gaining population and "blue" states are losing population because red states are, in general, in the south (florida is expected to pass NY as 3rd most populous) AND ARE WARM PLACES!!! As the demographics age, more and more older people will be seeking a warmer climate. Doesn't explain California, though. But as "Northeners" move south, red states will become less and less red, maybe more of a "purple"
posted by
Professor_Peabody
on February 5, 2006 at 1:31 PM
| link to this | reply
Blanche,
Yes, your comment is very good. Scoop is almost always right to start off with. I know you can't lump us all together but in general we are either conservative or liberal. The perjury thing and not being able to recall things were brought to new heights by President Clinton and his crowd. Is it wrong? Darn straight it is! But I am willing to allow it now if it was fine then. Thanks for the read and comment.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 1:29 PM
| link to this | reply
Scoop's right, Sarooster,
There's a whole wide range of Democrats and Republicans, you can't lump all Dems together any more than you can all Republicans. It may not be perjury to lie to the Senate Judiciary Committe, but if a Supreme Court Justice is not a man of honor enough to tell the truth under oath about his beliefs, then it's wrong.
posted by
Blanche.
on February 5, 2006 at 11:38 AM
| link to this | reply
Beats,
Thanks for the read. Yes, I am sure we will get a few comments. Either way, if we do or don't, I just wanted to get some things down in my journal which I always upload to the site. So these are some of my thoughts from everyday life that I put on here. I do make them fit the situation of people do comment. My home in in San Antonio and I love living here. It's a very big city with still a small town feel. We are a bit country and maybe not as intellectual as they are in some of the blue states though! Thanks for reading and commenting.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 7:56 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin,
I know you were kidding. The comments may or may not begin and either way is fine with me. Thanks for reading!
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 7:53 AM
| link to this | reply
sarooster
O boy...here we go again! I loved living in the Dallas area, I miss it, and I can't blame anyone for being proud of that " Whole Other Country"
I really try to be a good commenter. Lately I have found when I leave a comment especially in this environment, a direct attack usually follows. What I find interesting is they don't address you in your own post! The same thing can be witnessed over in Corbins.. It is bizarre behavior at best.
O and did I mention I am directing this comment to you? LOL~
posted by
Offy
on February 5, 2006 at 6:59 AM
| link to this | reply
I hear ya.........I was kidding with you......it's funny sometimes though when you suddenly feel like your a moderator, instead of someone expressing your opinions......
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on February 5, 2006 at 6:47 AM
| link to this | reply
corbin,
When I began this post I was going to make it an attempt to mollify, is that a good word or what, both sides. We can agree to disagree. As I started getting down the page I began thinking, I don't want to do that anymore. Your comment about people moving to red states was a classic. People are beginning to realize that lower taxes and stuff like that count for a lot. I think my last line will bring out the worst in some of the people here. I am not going to put aside my thoughts and beliefs so someone can call us morons! We will see what kind of comments we get.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 6:25 AM
| link to this | reply
scoop,
You are correct all the way around. Judge Alito is a fine man and will vote as he sees fit on each case. I know there are idiots in both parties and I don't preclude myself from being one. A lot of my justification for the Republicans and conservatives doing certain things is the Democrats had reign for many decades. Now it's my sides turn and let the chips fall where they may. Thanks for the read.
posted by
sarooster
on February 5, 2006 at 6:21 AM
| link to this | reply
Sarooster there are idiots in both parties
and liberals and democrats are just as different as conservatives and republicans.
When Judge Alito voted to block the lethal injection of an inmate the other day, I think it showed us he is his own man and will make his decisions case by case.
posted by
scoop
on February 5, 2006 at 6:14 AM
| link to this | reply
Round 2???
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on February 5, 2006 at 6:13 AM
| link to this | reply