Posted by zeugma on February 10, 2006, at 21:25:37
In reply to Re: George W Bush » zeugma, posted by 10derHeart on February 10, 2006, at 20:49:00
> >...a caring tender-hearted individual<
>
> That would be Auntie Mel, and/or Dr. Bob and all of the deputies? I agree with your characterization of them.
>
There was no personal aspersion meant, if that's what you're getting at. I'm glad the civility policies work for you. I don't like them (the policies, that is) but they are the way the board operates.
> >It brings up the interesting question of why anyone would vote for a candidate who needs reminders to obey the law<
>
> This brings up the interesting question of why this sentence, with its interesting phraseology, was included in such an informative post?
>
astute. my revised draft of the post would have rephrased because of the time line as you mention. see my revision below.> I'm possibly ignorant, at the least, confused. I thought this issue only came to light two months ago..? Could voters in the last election have been aware of this potential problem, i.e., that GWB [allegedly] needed (or rather, would need in the future?) reminders to obey the law?
>
good points.
what i would say in response is this:
GWB at the time was stating that no such programs as what NSA has become existed. I was not following GWB's utterances as closely at the time(2004 in the lead-up to the elections). But he was saying it, which indicates that the question must have arisen. Now it has been leaked, and he has said that its mere disclosure endangers national security. That would make his prior statements that it didn't exist mere white lies that could be justified on the grounds of national security (depending on how candid one expects a President to be, and how plausible the claim itself is). But I do not see how the mere disclosure that the White House has such a program could tip off al Qaeda in a meaningful way. I am as clueless as to what the NSA methods are as, presumably, any enemies of America. It seems to me to claim that even leaking the mere existence of a program has America's enemies laughing (as Alberto Gonzales said) is implausible. It was foolish of the CIA to make public their amusement, during the Clinton Presidency, at intercepting bin Laden's calls home to Saudi Arabia. the bush Presidency has bragged about how tight-lipped they are in comparison. Interesting, then, that I.Lewis Libby now alleges that none other than Dick Cheney ordered him to leak a CIA operative's name. I might remind you that the CIA itself ordered Fitzgerald's probe of the Plame affair.> I got lost there. I guess I felt a bit provoked, too.
>
these are provoking times. especially for Americans.Respectfully answering,
-z
>
>
>
>
poster:zeugma
thread:608261
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20060204/msgs/608506.html