When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
It is as impossible for the Bush haters to give him any credit for what went right as it will be for these same people to blame Obama for anything that goes wrong on his watch. No matter what happens, it will still be Bush’s fault.
GaffaUK
15 years ago
@Rockhead
not true…here goes…
Credit for Bush for:
1. Not striking out immediately after 9/11 but actually investigating what happened
2. Afghanistan and kicking the Taliban out and taking on Al Queda
3. Giving aid to Africa
4. Establishing better relationship with India
5. For winning the Iraq War (yes you know I don’t agree with the reasons but still wanted the US/UK etc to win)
6. For bolstering the troops with the surge to minimise the insurgency
7. For preventing attacks since 9/11 on US soil
8. For having good grace with the hand-over to Obama
9. His humour
10. For admitting he has made mistakes and some things could of been handled better.
Can I add getting rid of Rumsfeld and Bolton?
Missy
15 years ago
Heh,
“The Wiretap Vindication
FISA sets the record straight.
Ever since the Bush Administration’s warrantless wiretapping program was exposed in 2005, critics have denounced it as illegal and unconstitutional. Those allegations rested solely on the fact that the Administration did not first get permission from the special court created by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Well, as it happens, the same FISA court would beg to differ.
In a major August 2008 decision released yesterday in redacted form, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, the FISA appellate panel, affirmed the government’s Constitutional authority to collect national-security intelligence without judicial approval. The case was not made public before yesterday, and its details remain classified. An unnamed telecom company refused to comply with the National Security Agency’s monitoring requests and claimed the program violated the Fourth Amendment’s restrictions on search and seizure.
But the Constitution bans only “unreasonable” search and seizure, not all searches and seizures, and the Fourth Amendment allows for exceptions such as those under a President’s Article II war powers. The courts have been explicit on this point. In 1980, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Truong that “the Executive need not always obtain a warrant for foreign intelligence surveillance.” The FISA appeals court said in its 2002 opinion In re Sealed Case that the President has “inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information” and took “for granted” that “FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power.”
FISA established a process by which certain domestic wiretaps in the context of the Cold War could be approved, not a limit on what wiretaps were ever allowed. Though the decision applies only to the stopgap FISA measure in place between 2007 and 2008, it sets a precedent.
For all the political hysteria and media dishonesty about George W. Bush “spying on Americans,” this fight was never about anything other than staging an ideological raid on the President’s war powers. Barack Obama ought to be thankful that the FISA court has knocked the bottom out of this gambit, just in time for him to take office.”
It’s amazing that after campaigning against the “failed policies” of the Bush Administration Obama will leave much of what the left thought was the worst in place.
Many of us have long said that unwarrantless monitoring of foreign telecommunications was legal and yet the Bush hating fools kept calling it “domestic spying.”
And yet, when Obama does the same thing these Bush haters won’t say a word.
What idiots!
Missy
15 years ago
Here’s another Mike. Years of derision toward President Bush for his comment regarding the capture and killing of bin Laden as no longer important months after the dead or alive remark. Who tightened the noose? Who met the goal of protecting America? It would be nice if all Obama has to do is walk in and sit down following everything put in place by the former occupant, but reality is not so nice, Obama will also face rough times ahead. But, being as though President Bush has been so gracious toward the incoming administration, nice would be Obama giving credit to the noose tightener that has made part of his new employment a bit easier.
excerpt
“Barack Obama: it is no longer essential to kill Osama bin Laden
Barack Obama suggested last night that removing Osama bin Laden from the battlefield was no longer essential and that America’s security goals could be achieved merely by keeping al-Qaeda “on the run”.
“My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him,” he said. “But if we have so tightened the noose that he’s in a cave somewhere and can’t even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America.”
His comments, in a CBS interview, represent a significant watering down of the “dead or alive” policy pursued by President Bush since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. They also appear to contradict Mr Obama’s own statements made in the election campaign. ”
Missy: Another good example of how Obama will follow what he recently called a “failed policy.”
It would be funny to watch his supporters scream about their betrayal but we all know they have no principles but the pursuit of political power and hence, could not care less that Obama will now become George Bush III.
Totally agree Nice Post Mike
It is as impossible for the Bush haters to give him any credit for what went right as it will be for these same people to blame Obama for anything that goes wrong on his watch. No matter what happens, it will still be Bush’s fault.
@Rockhead
not true…here goes…
Credit for Bush for:
1. Not striking out immediately after 9/11 but actually investigating what happened
2. Afghanistan and kicking the Taliban out and taking on Al Queda
3. Giving aid to Africa
4. Establishing better relationship with India
5. For winning the Iraq War (yes you know I don’t agree with the reasons but still wanted the US/UK etc to win)
6. For bolstering the troops with the surge to minimise the insurgency
7. For preventing attacks since 9/11 on US soil
8. For having good grace with the hand-over to Obama
9. His humour
10. For admitting he has made mistakes and some things could of been handled better.
Can I add getting rid of Rumsfeld and Bolton?
Heh,
“The Wiretap Vindication
FISA sets the record straight.
Ever since the Bush Administration’s warrantless wiretapping program was exposed in 2005, critics have denounced it as illegal and unconstitutional. Those allegations rested solely on the fact that the Administration did not first get permission from the special court created by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Well, as it happens, the same FISA court would beg to differ.
In a major August 2008 decision released yesterday in redacted form, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, the FISA appellate panel, affirmed the government’s Constitutional authority to collect national-security intelligence without judicial approval. The case was not made public before yesterday, and its details remain classified. An unnamed telecom company refused to comply with the National Security Agency’s monitoring requests and claimed the program violated the Fourth Amendment’s restrictions on search and seizure.
But the Constitution bans only “unreasonable” search and seizure, not all searches and seizures, and the Fourth Amendment allows for exceptions such as those under a President’s Article II war powers. The courts have been explicit on this point. In 1980, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Truong that “the Executive need not always obtain a warrant for foreign intelligence surveillance.” The FISA appeals court said in its 2002 opinion In re Sealed Case that the President has “inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information” and took “for granted” that “FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power.”
FISA established a process by which certain domestic wiretaps in the context of the Cold War could be approved, not a limit on what wiretaps were ever allowed. Though the decision applies only to the stopgap FISA measure in place between 2007 and 2008, it sets a precedent.
For all the political hysteria and media dishonesty about George W. Bush “spying on Americans,” this fight was never about anything other than staging an ideological raid on the President’s war powers. Barack Obama ought to be thankful that the FISA court has knocked the bottom out of this gambit, just in time for him to take office.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123206822799888351.html
And:
Bushes Imminent Rehab
by Charles Krauthammer
http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/01/16/bushs_imminent_rehab
Thanks for both of those articles Missy.
It’s amazing that after campaigning against the “failed policies” of the Bush Administration Obama will leave much of what the left thought was the worst in place.
Many of us have long said that unwarrantless monitoring of foreign telecommunications was legal and yet the Bush hating fools kept calling it “domestic spying.”
And yet, when Obama does the same thing these Bush haters won’t say a word.
What idiots!
Here’s another Mike. Years of derision toward President Bush for his comment regarding the capture and killing of bin Laden as no longer important months after the dead or alive remark. Who tightened the noose? Who met the goal of protecting America? It would be nice if all Obama has to do is walk in and sit down following everything put in place by the former occupant, but reality is not so nice, Obama will also face rough times ahead. But, being as though President Bush has been so gracious toward the incoming administration, nice would be Obama giving credit to the noose tightener that has made part of his new employment a bit easier.
excerpt
“Barack Obama: it is no longer essential to kill Osama bin Laden
Barack Obama suggested last night that removing Osama bin Laden from the battlefield was no longer essential and that America’s security goals could be achieved merely by keeping al-Qaeda “on the run”.
“My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him,” he said. “But if we have so tightened the noose that he’s in a cave somewhere and can’t even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America.”
His comments, in a CBS interview, represent a significant watering down of the “dead or alive” policy pursued by President Bush since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. They also appear to contradict Mr Obama’s own statements made in the election campaign. ”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5520116.ece
Missy: Another good example of how Obama will follow what he recently called a “failed policy.”
It would be funny to watch his supporters scream about their betrayal but we all know they have no principles but the pursuit of political power and hence, could not care less that Obama will now become George Bush III.