But, I have to agree with Chris, and I’m part of the GOP – I’m really sick of my fellow party mates bringing up Clinton… What was he, a role model?

http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/mitchellclintoncartersmackdowndec2105.wmv

What people are really losing sight of is what the debate is about. It’s a red herring for the Republicans to respond to the charges against Bush with arguments for why we need wiretaps. The President has the power to wiretap American citizens. He just needs to go through the FISA court to do it, and can even go to the court after the fact. All of the emotional “we’re at war” sturm und drang is pointless. This isn’t about whether to wiretap; it’s about whether the President can whip up enough fear so he feels comfortable completely circumventing the law.

And if the frightened Republicans want to give up their rights, go ahead. They still don’t have the right to give up mine. And by the way, neither do Jay Rockefeller or Nancy Pelosi, not that I think they did.

Not true. The plan you were talking about had already been abandoned by the time the suspect in question was picked up, basically because it was a very stupid idea.

Secret Prisons outside of US – Clinton started that in the mid 1990′s along with the rendition policy….

Foreign Intelligence Surveillence Act was signed into law by Carter in ’78, it was used by every President since then. This isn’t anything new.. Clinton no only had the Echleon program but he had the Carnivore program to monitor the internet e-mails, etc. also.

There have been cases brought before the courts in the past over this very same thing, the Federal courts have always upheld the Constitutional Authority that the President has to warrentless searches for foreign intelligence, they have even said that the FISA creation, in and of itself cannot infringe on or limit the Constitutional Authority that the President already has.

Put this into context here, In the past we have had Presidents that rounded up over 100,000 Japanese Americans and lock them up, without any kind of charge, until the war was over. We have had a President that tried a Congress member with being an Agitator, found him guilty and deported him to the Confederate States, he also had 9 Maryland Congressmen arrested so they couldn’t pull out of the Union. Not to mention he had some reporters arrested and put in jail for writing against him during a war and being agitators….

our Republic never fell down around our ears over these things, because we can be realistic about what needs to be done. What on earth makes you think that it will now???? Those very same ‘wiretaps’ that you are claiming are illegal are what saved the Brooklyn Bridge in NY from being targeted. They have led to addtional captures of terrorists.

Instead of being ‘rational’ we have people being political…. it’s like selling your soul to the Devil.

This crap has already gone through the Federal Courts – it is legal.

As for the name, this isn’t “Centerfield” or “The Moderate Voice”, this is “Donklephant”. The imagery is of 2 party lines rather than moderation.

- Why wasn’t there the hue and cry then, almost 12 years ago, that’s being demonstrated today?

- What’s so dramatically different now?

Because that dog won’t hunt. Look, I am not non-biased, I think W is an incompetent slacker. But this site looks to be named Donklephant. So I expect some middle road. All I am seeing is Denise parroting GOP talking points.

From KOS
CLINTON DID NOT ORDER WARRANTLESS SEARCHES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS
Here’s what Clinton signed:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) [50 U.S.C. 1822(a)] of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section.

You don’t have to be a lawyer to understand that Clinton allowed warrantless searches if and only if the AG followed section 302(a)(1). What does section 1822(a) require?
• the “physical search is solely directed at premises, information, material, or property used exclusively by, or under the open and exclusive control of, a foreign power or powers.” Translation: You can’t search American citizens.
• and there is “no substantial likelihood that the physical search will involve the premises, information, material, or property of a United States person.” Translation: You can’t search American citizens.

Moreover, Clinton’s warrant waiver consistent with FISA refers only to physical searches. “Physical searches,” as defined by 1821(5), exclude electronic surveillance.

I think that this might be the dramatic difference you seek.

If there is more attention being paid to Bush’s actions now, I would think that it is because this practice has apparently been used by the Bush adminstration hundreds or thousands of times. Meanwhile, from what I can gather from the article that Denise links to, there was only a single confirmed instance of Clinton using these methods.

But as others said, this issue has more urgency because Bush went farther than Clinton ever did. How much of that was due to 9/11, we’ll never know. But we do know that the Bush Administration favored expanding executive privilege even before 9/11.

I swear to God that the GOP needs to change it’s descriptive from the “daddy party” to the “I want my mommy party.” Your cowardice is a disgrace to the people who founded this country.

But with a president panicked by 9/11 and determined to try to scare the American people into ceding power to him? Different situation.