Bush and Cheney on 911 interviewed behind closed doors, refused to take an oath, refused to allow tape recordings and ensured no transcript be kept but they tell us (citizens) they can spy on who ever they choose. Tell Congress to do their job as they pledged to the American people and God to do! Impeach and Indict this administration for TREASON! Remember any PEOPLE are responsible for the regime they are willing to put up with!

List of All Presidential Signing Statements 2001-2008

I'd actually like to see the rest of that.

Now bush is kind of a wanker and deserves that all anyway now doesn't he?

The guy just repeated the same thing he had heard the leadership of the Democratic Party say along with a request for an apology. It is he and the anti American Democrats and the liberal media that should apologize.

President Bush welcomed his stupidity and accepted it as coming from a brainwashed liberal puke. He answered the comment quite well and I wish the video had gone on to allow him to answer the remaining concerns also but I guess the person that made the video found too much common sense in his answer to allow it to enter into the hate for America display.

Later this week congress will approve FISA legislation that allows the US government to listen to terrorists from overseas speaking to "persons" (probably terrorists) that are in America. Imagine that dick head that thinks this action requires an apology. Do you or anyone who "thanked you" think the American government shouldn't be able to listen to terrorists conversations in America? Do you hate Bush or America?

Do I think Bush should have a blank check to spy on Americans? Absolutely not. If they can prove that the people they are listening too are terrorists, then they should be granted a wire tap by the courts. But if there is any doubt, then they don't need a wire tap.

Those who would give up eseential liberty for a little security, deserve neither liberty nor security.

Democrats aren't "anti-American" and the media isn't "liberal." This guy was correct in a lot of what he said to the Torturer-in-Chief.

"Probably" doesn't cut it. The government needs to be absolutely sure they're listening to terrorists before they invade someone's privacy. Catching a few terrorists isn't worth scrapping our constitutional rights.

Imagine a "dickhead" that thinks we should be eviscerating our Bill of Rights simply because some terrorists attacked us seven years ago. Osama has probably got a "mission accomplished" sign hanging in his cave. He has succeeded in changing us.

I don't care about listening to "terrorists." However anyone spying on innocent Americans should be thrown in prison for a long, long time.

I despise Bush and I'm sick to my stomach at what Bush has done to our country.

So you believe if this guy calls this guy who happens to be inside the borders of the US that the US government should have to prove that the guy with the red scarf is a terrorist? To get a warrant from a judge you need to provide probable cause... what is your probable cause that the guy in the red head scarf is a terrorist? What if your protect the guy in the red head scarf's US constitutional rights and he then blows up the Sears Tower because you had no probable cause he "may" be a terrorist?

Do you give up your constitutional rights when you allow the US government to listen to these two individuals conversations? Or, do you give up your constitutional rights when you travel to Paris and return to the US and the US Customs Agent inspects your dirty underwear in front of other people in the line?

Does the government need a warrant if Bin Laden calls or not? What if you have no PC on the red scarf dude and can't listen?

One, clearly any calls from Osama bin Laden would be listened in on...

But, if we do not know that the man in the red scarf is a terrorist, and we do not know who it is that is calling him, then we can not listen to his calls simply by virtue of him looking scary. That's preposterous. He has rights, scary looking or not.