Why is it if the Bush administration makes any kind of change in plans or compromises on anything or if they get their way in a way that does not mean someone else is loses...then it is always considered a loss?

This program was misrepresented by the media from the first day it was leaked and it is still being misrepresented. I think most people, Democrats and libertarians alike came to realize that there was going to have to be some kind of changes in FISA, the fight was over what kind of changes. If it gets the job done, who cares?

I EXPECT this sort of idiocy from the MSM and other Democrats; since they are to all intents and purposes traitors to the current war effort, I'd expect them to lie even if they were smart enough to figure out that Bush has won YET AGAIN.

What I truly find disturbing is the number of CONSERVATIVE commentators who fall for this kind of MSM spin, including this time, this Dittohead is sad to admit, one Rush Limbaugh on today's program.

Serial conservative doubters, hear my voice. What has George W. Bush EVER DONE to make you doubt his serious commitment to fighting the War on Terror with every tool at his disposal?

If it helps, doubters, try to think of George W. Bush as the Jack Bauer of the War on Terror -- despite being continually surrounded by, ignored by, and betrayed by fools and traitors, he NEVER gives up...

and he NEVER will.

I can honestly say I have never listened to Rush. I know a lot of people like the guy, but I just can not listen to a whole program.

In reply to FredTownWard,

One thing that he lacks, in the WOT, is his refusal to secure our borders. However, I will never doubt his desire and willingness to fight the WOT. It is the last thing that I still trust Bush on.

I take that back I still trust him on WOT and Supreme Court picks.

As for Rush, I often listened to him several years ago but his "I am brilliant and you are mud" attitude turned me off.

Oh yeah, if Bush just waved his securing the border magic wand, voila...thousands of miles of fence, tens of thousands of trained agents, hundreds of detention centers, thousands of additional law enforcement personell, not to mention hundreds of additional judges and courts etc etc would just materialize.

Bush has put more people, resources, money etc on that border than any president in history. After all the border has only been open for 140 years.

I think Bush has tried to deal with the problem in an incremental and realistic fashion.

And when it comes to things like watching and listening for terrorists Bush has made a real effort to stop new attacks.

the FISA court has finally stepped up and issued orders allowing the very same program to proceed with judicial support, making it virtually impossible for majority Democrats to kill off.

Democrats never objected to the FISA program; they objected to Bush breaking the law and circumventing checks and balances.

[One sentence deleted for obscene language and for launching a personal attack on the site owner. - the Mgt.]

I EXPECT this sort of idiocy from the MSM and other Democrats; since they are to all intents and purposes traitors to the current war effort, I'd expect them to lie even if they were smart enough to figure out that Bush has won YET AGAIN.

This is. Just amazing. If there is a god, he will ensure that this is forwarded around the blogosphere post-haste.

Excellent post, Dafydd, and it makes me feel much better. The first clue I had that anything was happening was A J Strata's post, which reached the same conclusion you reach without providing nearly as much detail to back up the conclusion. Then Capt Ed and Allahpundit and a lot of others started in with their songs of woe and had me worried. I'm all better now. I excerpted and linked.

[Sentence deleted for same reasons as in the original. - the Mgt.]

Strike one.

Bush breaking the law

Strike two. Although the specifics of this case have not been litigated, the AUMF and case law say not.

circumventing checks and balances.

Strike three. Members of the intelligence committees were informed of the program.

If the breaking-the-law charge had any merit, it's a given that the Democrats in Congress would not have put forward any action that would address such a serious issue as the president knowingly and willfully violating the law -- such as articles of impeachment.

But since they are so eager to show how committed they are to ending an illegal and immoral war by thinking about considering the introduction of a non-binding resolution that would express their extreme dismay over the continuation of said war, you'd think they would have shown at least an equal amount of fortitude by putting forth a resolution censuring the president.

Either they lacked the courage to do little more than wag their fingers publicly at the president, or they knew their accusations lacked merit.

Diffus:

There is no talking with a guy like jpe and my guess is that when Dafydd sees the post he will strike it. Just a guess.

Terrye:

There is no talking with a guy like jpe and my guess is that when Dafydd sees the post he will strike it.

Nah; just the obscene part and the personal attack. If JPE continues in that vein, further response will be warranted.

But if he (or she) just sticks to posting an argument, such as the rest of the post, then no problem. We're pretty easy here!

Dafydd

Dafydd:

Darn, I was hoping you would squish him like a bug.

Skywatch wrote: "As for Rush, I often listened to him several years ago but his "I am brilliant and you are mud" attitude turned me off."

Um, you ARE aware that when Rush exhibits that attitude he is JOKING, right? For all the seriousness of the topics he opines upon, Rush has just about the most warped and in your face sense of humor of any commentator. He STILL regularly delights in deliberately saying things just to get the tinfoil hat conservatives into a froth, but in this particular case he was overreacting to moronic MSM news coverage, which he ought to know better than to do by now.

JPE wrote: "This is. Just amazing. If there is a god, he will ensure that this is forwarded around the blogosphere post-haste."

I'm glad to see that you think so, JPE, since you apparently AGREE with it, having failed to refute it in any way.

JPE wrote: "Democrats never objected to the FISA program; they objected to Bush breaking the law and circumventing checks and balances."

The only time Democrats object to breaking the law and circumventing checks and balances is when NON-Democrats are accused of doing it. They are perfectly OK with DEMOCRATS breaking the law and circumventing checks and balances...

especially if it involves sex.

Bush = Jack Bauer. I love it.

What is Jack's favorite quote "Dammit -----, I don't have time for this!"

So appropriate.

The "illegal" wiretaps thing was a joke, invented to help the Democrats win elections. I think the media is using the recent events as a graceful way to drop the issue entirely.

There have been a number of occasions where the Bush administration have won (got their way) quite major parts of their policies. Each time the MSM and pundits rail that the Administration has been defeated.

The Administration moves on. I believe Bush does not care what is said providing they get done what needs to get done.

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)