Bush's merry go round

tyreay · 03-08-2006, 12:34 PM

I've been saying it for months, Bush has each division of our government in his pocket. It is a conflict of interest for our rebublican politicians to make this decision!!! They won't do anything to make their party look bad.
Our government is starting to look more and more like a dictatorship than the picture of Democracy we make ourselves out to be. Give me a break.
Vote out the Rebublican criminals in November!!!!!!!

Posted on Wed, Mar. 08, 2006
Domestic spying restrictions advance
But senators block call for inquiry
By JAMES KUHNHENN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an investigation into President Bush’s secret domestic spying program, but agreed to expand congressional oversight of the surveillance system in the future.
At the same time, four Senate Republicans began circulating legislation that would restrict the administration’s ability to eavesdrop on U.S. residents without court approval.
The legislation would require the administration to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on U.S. residents unless the attorney general certified to House and Senate intelligence subcommittees that seeking court approval would hurt intelligence gathering.
The legislation was sponsored by Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
The legislation emerged as the Senate Intelligence Committee voted behind closed doors to block a Democratic demand for a full investigation into the program. The surveillance, which is carried out by the National Security Agency, tracks communications between al-Qaida suspects overseas and U.S. residents, according to the administration.
Democrats complained that the committee chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, was doing the White House’s bidding.
But Roberts, in an interview with Knight Ridder, said he had to persuade the White House to accept his proposal for a sub-panel of his committee to receive detailed briefings about operations of the secret program. Until now, the White House has occasionally briefed only eight members of Congress — the four Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and the Senate, and the chairmen and vice chairmen of both houses’ intelligence committees.
“My message to the White House was that the status quo was not satisfactory,” Roberts said. “They were pretty intransigent. I kept saying, ‘You’re not facing reality.’ ”
Roberts said he argued that if the White House didn’t yield on Congress’ assertion of greater oversight authority, Democrats would succeed in getting a broader investigation that could result in subpoenas, claims of executive privilege, and, potentially, a court clash between Congress and the White House.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reach James Kuhnhenn, send e-mail to jkuhnhenn@ krwashington.com

tyreay · 03-08-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyreay

I've been saying it for months, Bush has each division of our government in his pocket. It is a conflict of interest for our rebublican politicians to make this decision!!! They won't do anything to make their party look bad.
Our government is starting to look more and more like a dictatorship than the picture of Democracy we make ourselves out to be. Give me a break.
Vote out the Rebublican criminals in November!!!!!!!

Posted on Wed, Mar. 08, 2006
Domestic spying restrictions advance
But senators block call for inquiry
By JAMES KUHNHENN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an investigation into President Bush’s secret domestic spying program, but agreed to expand congressional oversight of the surveillance system in the future.
At the same time, four Senate Republicans began circulating legislation that would restrict the administration’s ability to eavesdrop on U.S. residents without court approval.
The legislation would require the administration to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on U.S. residents unless the attorney general certified to House and Senate intelligence subcommittees that seeking court approval would hurt intelligence gathering.
The legislation was sponsored by Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
The legislation emerged as the Senate Intelligence Committee voted behind closed doors to block a Democratic demand for a full investigation into the program. The surveillance, which is carried out by the National Security Agency, tracks communications between al-Qaida suspects overseas and U.S. residents, according to the administration.
Democrats complained that the committee chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, was doing the White House’s bidding.
But Roberts, in an interview with Knight Ridder, said he had to persuade the White House to accept his proposal for a sub-panel of his committee to receive detailed briefings about operations of the secret program. Until now, the White House has occasionally briefed only eight members of Congress — the four Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and the Senate, and the chairmen and vice chairmen of both houses’ intelligence committees.
“My message to the White House was that the status quo was not satisfactory,” Roberts said. “They were pretty intransigent. I kept saying, ‘You’re not facing reality.’ ”
Roberts said he argued that if the White House didn’t yield on Congress’ assertion of greater oversight authority, Democrats would succeed in getting a broader investigation that could result in subpoenas, claims of executive privilege, and, potentially, a court clash between Congress and the White House.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reach James Kuhnhenn, send e-mail to jkuhnhenn@ krwashington.com

This is the most important post on here today. Is no one else concerned that Bush has the people in charge of investigating him in his pocket?
It is not like they investigated him at all! They blocked the investigation so that means that no legal conclusion can be drawn about the spy program. Gonzalez has already said he could not say if the spy program was directed towards innocent US citizens. We have reached a point in time where it can not be denied that the checks and balances are not in place. Our present administration is above the law.

hevusa · 03-08-2006, 07:04 PM

What can I say man.

Is our system fucked beyond repair?

Time to remove the republicans? Time for more than 2 parties??

It is a sad day when our President can avoid justice in such a manner.

Dylan · 03-08-2006, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyreay

I've been saying it for months, Bush has each division of our government in his pocket. It is a conflict of interest for our rebublican politicians to make this decision!!! They won't do anything to make their party look bad.
Our government is starting to look more and more like a dictatorship than the picture of Democracy we make ourselves out to be. Give me a break.
Vote out the Rebublican criminals in November!!!!!!!

Posted on Wed, Mar. 08, 2006
Domestic spying restrictions advance
But senators block call for inquiry
By JAMES KUHNHENN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an investigation into President Bush’s secret domestic spying program, but agreed to expand congressional oversight of the surveillance system in the future.
At the same time, four Senate Republicans began circulating legislation that would restrict the administration’s ability to eavesdrop on U.S. residents without court approval.
The legislation would require the administration to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on U.S. residents unless the attorney general certified to House and Senate intelligence subcommittees that seeking court approval would hurt intelligence gathering.
The legislation was sponsored by Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
The legislation emerged as the Senate Intelligence Committee voted behind closed doors to block a Democratic demand for a full investigation into the program. The surveillance, which is carried out by the National Security Agency, tracks communications between al-Qaida suspects overseas and U.S. residents, according to the administration.
Democrats complained that the committee chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, was doing the White House’s bidding.
But Roberts, in an interview with Knight Ridder, said he had to persuade the White House to accept his proposal for a sub-panel of his committee to receive detailed briefings about operations of the secret program. Until now, the White House has occasionally briefed only eight members of Congress — the four Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and the Senate, and the chairmen and vice chairmen of both houses’ intelligence committees.
“My message to the White House was that the status quo was not satisfactory,” Roberts said. “They were pretty intransigent. I kept saying, ‘You’re not facing reality.’ ”
Roberts said he argued that if the White House didn’t yield on Congress’ assertion of greater oversight authority, Democrats would succeed in getting a broader investigation that could result in subpoenas, claims of executive privilege, and, potentially, a court clash between Congress and the White House.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reach James Kuhnhenn, send e-mail to jkuhnhenn@ krwashington.com

Knight Ridder Newspaper? Are you kidding? Dude, you need to get real sources. How about Associated Press, or Reuters, or the New York Times or something?

tyreay · 03-09-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyreay

I've been saying it for months, Bush has each division of our government in his pocket. It is a conflict of interest for our rebublican politicians to make this decision!!! They won't do anything to make their party look bad.
Our government is starting to look more and more like a dictatorship than the picture of Democracy we make ourselves out to be. Give me a break.
Vote out the Rebublican criminals in November!!!!!!!

Posted on Wed, Mar. 08, 2006
Domestic spying restrictions advance
But senators block call for inquiry
By JAMES KUHNHENN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an investigation into President Bush’s secret domestic spying program, but agreed to expand congressional oversight of the surveillance system in the future.
At the same time, four Senate Republicans began circulating legislation that would restrict the administration’s ability to eavesdrop on U.S. residents without court approval.
The legislation would require the administration to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on U.S. residents unless the attorney general certified to House and Senate intelligence subcommittees that seeking court approval would hurt intelligence gathering.
The legislation was sponsored by Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
The legislation emerged as the Senate Intelligence Committee voted behind closed doors to block a Democratic demand for a full investigation into the program. The surveillance, which is carried out by the National Security Agency, tracks communications between al-Qaida suspects overseas and U.S. residents, according to the administration.
Democrats complained that the committee chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, was doing the White House’s bidding.
But Roberts, in an interview with Knight Ridder, said he had to persuade the White House to accept his proposal for a sub-panel of his committee to receive detailed briefings about operations of the secret program. Until now, the White House has occasionally briefed only eight members of Congress — the four Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and the Senate, and the chairmen and vice chairmen of both houses’ intelligence committees.
“My message to the White House was that the status quo was not satisfactory,” Roberts said. “They were pretty intransigent. I kept saying, ‘You’re not facing reality.’ ”
Roberts said he argued that if the White House didn’t yield on Congress’ assertion of greater oversight authority, Democrats would succeed in getting a broader investigation that could result in subpoenas, claims of executive privilege, and, potentially, a court clash between Congress and the White House.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reach James Kuhnhenn, send e-mail to jkuhnhenn@ krwashington.com

Knight Ridder Newspaper? Are you kidding? Dude, you need to get real sources. How about Associated Press, or Reuters, or the New York Times or something?

Once again more blah blah blah opinion without a link. Show something to refute my story or something to show that this is a bad source.

Knight Ridder's primary businesses are newspaper and Internet publishing. The company is one of the nation's leading providers of news, information and advertising, in print and online. The company publishes 32 daily newspapers in 29 U.S. markets, with a readership of 8.1 million daily and 11.5 million Sunday. It owns more large-city newspapers than any other media company.

Quality journalism is a hallmark of Knight Ridder; its newspapers have won 84 Pulitzer Prizes, including 14 Gold Medals for Meritorious Public Service.

Supporting the newspapers is the award-winning Knight Ridder Washington Bureau, with 34 correspondents and 10 bureaus in world capitals. The Washington Bureau has been widely lauded for its groundbreaking coverage of U.S. involvement in Iraq; it was the first to report that the Administration's decision to go to war was based on faulty intelligence, and that there was no plan for post-war Iraq.

http://www.knightridder.com/papers/

Looks good to me.

tyreay · 03-09-2006, 03:25 PM

This is from moveOn.org. It tells what will happen if we vote in democrats in November. This was sent to my E-mail but I thought I would share it here.
Taking just the House of Representatives, here is a small slice of who will be leading:

Nancy Pelosi—a progressive—becomes Speaker of the House of Representatives.

John Murtha—a veteran and anti-war champion—would become chair of the House subcommittee on defense appropriations. He would be in charge of the budget for the war in Iraq.

John Conyers—who forced a national debate on the Downing Street Memos—would be chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Henry Waxman would be chairman of the Government Reform committee—he has a bulls-eye on war profiteers like Halliburton.

Barney Frank—who has led efforts to rein in out-of-control CEO pay—would be in charge of the Financial Services Committee.

David Obey—who led opposition to the Republican budget—would be chair of the House Appropriations committee—protecting Medicaid, food stamps, veteran's benefits, student loans and more.

Charles Rangel—who predicted the Medicare debacle—would be chair of the House Ways and Means committee—protecting Social Security.

George Miller—a big advocate for working people—would be chair of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and could bring a vote to raise the minimum wage.
That is just a sample—six of these eight are either members or founders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Put aside for a minute any disappointment you might have in the Democrats overall—these leaders are what we'll get if we win in November. They are champions on issues we all care about.

Tom Matzzie, www.MoveOn.org Political Action

Once again, Vote Out the Republicans in November!

Dylan · 03-09-2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyreay

I've been saying it for months, Bush has each division of our government in his pocket. It is a conflict of interest for our rebublican politicians to make this decision!!! They won't do anything to make their party look bad.
Our government is starting to look more and more like a dictatorship than the picture of Democracy we make ourselves out to be. Give me a break.
Vote out the Rebublican criminals in November!!!!!!!

Posted on Wed, Mar. 08, 2006
Domestic spying restrictions advance
But senators block call for inquiry
By JAMES KUHNHENN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an investigation into President Bush’s secret domestic spying program, but agreed to expand congressional oversight of the surveillance system in the future.
At the same time, four Senate Republicans began circulating legislation that would restrict the administration’s ability to eavesdrop on U.S. residents without court approval.
The legislation would require the administration to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on U.S. residents unless the attorney general certified to House and Senate intelligence subcommittees that seeking court approval would hurt intelligence gathering.
The legislation was sponsored by Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
The legislation emerged as the Senate Intelligence Committee voted behind closed doors to block a Democratic demand for a full investigation into the program. The surveillance, which is carried out by the National Security Agency, tracks communications between al-Qaida suspects overseas and U.S. residents, according to the administration.
Democrats complained that the committee chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, was doing the White House’s bidding.
But Roberts, in an interview with Knight Ridder, said he had to persuade the White House to accept his proposal for a sub-panel of his committee to receive detailed briefings about operations of the secret program. Until now, the White House has occasionally briefed only eight members of Congress — the four Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and the Senate, and the chairmen and vice chairmen of both houses’ intelligence committees.
“My message to the White House was that the status quo was not satisfactory,” Roberts said. “They were pretty intransigent. I kept saying, ‘You’re not facing reality.’ ”
Roberts said he argued that if the White House didn’t yield on Congress’ assertion of greater oversight authority, Democrats would succeed in getting a broader investigation that could result in subpoenas, claims of executive privilege, and, potentially, a court clash between Congress and the White House.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reach James Kuhnhenn, send e-mail to jkuhnhenn@ krwashington.com

Knight Ridder Newspaper? Are you kidding? Dude, you need to get real sources. How about Associated Press, or Reuters, or the New York Times or something?

Wow, what a prestigious list of newspapers. How could I possibly discount the Aberdeen News, or the Idaho Statesman?

NEWSPAPER SITES
(Aberdeen, S.D.) AberdeenNews.com
(Akron) Ohio.com
(Belleville, Ill.) BellevilleNewsDemocrat.com
(Bellingham, Wash.) BellinghamHerald.com
(Biloxi, Miss.) SunHerald.com
(Boise) IdahoStatesman.com
(Bradenton, Fla.) HeraldToday.com
(Charlotte, N.C.) Charlotte.com
(Columbia, S.C.) TheState.com
(Columbus, Ga.) Ledger-Enquirer.com
(Contra Costa, Calif.) ContraCostaTimes.com
(Duluth, Minn.) DuluthNewsTribune.com
FortWayne.com
(Fort Worth) Star-Telegram.com
(Grand Forks, N.D.) GrandForksHerald.com KansasCity.com
(Lexington, Ky.) Kentucky.com
(Macon, Ga.) MaconTelegraph.com
MiamiHerald.com
MontereyHerald.com
(Myrtle Beach, S.C.) MyrtleBeachOnline.com
(Olympia, Wash.) TheOlympian.com
(Philadelphia) Philly.com
(St. Paul) TwinCities.com
(San Jose, Calif.) MercuryNews.com
(San Luis Obispo, Calif.) SanLuisObispo.com
(State College, Pa.) CentreDaily.com
(Washington D.C.) KRWashington.com
(Wichita, Kan.) Kansas.com
(Wilkes-Barre, Pa.) TimesLeader.com

tyreay · 03-10-2006, 05:38 AM

Once again, discredit the info in the post if you think it is wrong. Are you saying there was a great investigation and this post is wrong? Why do you always want to argue about stuff that has nothing to do with the post? If this story is correct than who cares? Do you care to comment concerning Bush having control of all three sections of our government? Do you think a fair investigation is possible or has taken place?
It is funny when you say things like "how could I possibly discount such a prestigous list of newspapers" and then not even say anything to actually discount them. Once again(and I really hate to have to repeat this over and over) more Blah Blah Blah. Do you know what Blah Blah Blah is? It is when you just talk to hear yourself talk with out any links to back you. Discount the story or the link, with a link, not just more complaining.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode