OT - Re: Bush's wiretaps - legal or illegal? (was Even Oprah now believes in the truth)

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:42:18 -0700, Chris J. <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:31:24 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa
>Chuck@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:59:30 -0700, Chris J. <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:28:33 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa
>>>Chuck@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Do you know that right now in this country over 50% of the people
>>>>think he should be impeached for the domestic spying that he keeps
>>>>telling us is legal, even though almost everyone knows it is not?
>>>
>>>Do you have any opinion polls whatsoever that reflect that claim?
>>
>>I read it in this morning's newspaper - which by the way is a
>>newspaper that almost always supports Republicans in it editorials,
>>etc.
>
>Ugh, I hate slanted news sources, regardless of which way they slant.
>
>Let me guess, they don't cite a source?

It would be more accurate to say that I don't pay close enough
attention to notice what the sources are. After all it is a newspaper.

>
>I tend to trust pollingreport.com, they are supposedly non-partisan,
>and best of all they publish the question asked, as well as the
>details of the sample.
>
>Their polling on this roughly matches what I've been seeing;
>
>"After 9/11, President Bush authorized government wiretaps on some
>phone calls in the U.S. without getting court warrants, saying this
>was necessary in order to reduce the threat of terrorism. Do you
>approve or disapprove of the President doing this?"
>
> Approve Disapprove Unsure
>
> ALL adults 53 46 1
> Republicans 83 16 1
> Democrats 37 62 1
> Independents 45 53 2
>
>BTW, I'm not stating a position on the wiretaps, or on Bush.

I guess I have been exposed to more independently conservative people
here in Iowa when it comes to our guaranteed rights. Speaking
collectively here from what I have observed; we Iowans are very
diligent in guarding our privacy rights as provided under our
Constitution and Bill of Rights. What Bush is doing is clearly a
violation of those rights and if it isn't against some specific law
then one needs to be passed which makes it illegal under any and all
circumstances.
--
Grandpa Chuck
-ô¿ô-
~

The following information is given with the utmost respect
for the armed forces and civilians who have died in the
current war in Iraq. According to http://icasualties.org/oif/
The number of Americans killed in Iraq as of Jan. 28, 2006 is 2,242.
United Kingdom = 98
Other = 103
Iraqi deaths in excess of 30,000
according to President Bush - probably many more.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Would Ponting be punished this time?
    ... within his rights to reverse a decision, ... For that matter he can be all three - a livid, sleepy, ... Well the idiots voted for him, so that makes him President Bush. ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Re: Of course Barbara Walters Thinks Rush Limbaugh Is "Fascinating"
    ... rights to not only having the number 1 talk program on radio, ... you President Bush! ... Lush is fascinating only in that there is anyone that wants to ...
    (misc.news.internet.discuss)
  • Re: Do you approve of this too jaybird?
    ... rights to assemble do not outweigh the rights of others not ... Show me where they were blocking people not involved in the protest. ... So every march down a public street is unconstitutional, ... "If you don't read the newspaper, ...
    (rec.autos.driving)
  • Re: Do you approve of this too jaybird?
    ... you can do everything the constitution allows but you cannot do ... non-Constitutional rights. ... an inconvenience is not a right denied. ... "If you don't read the newspaper, ...
    (rec.autos.driving)
  • Re: Tab in Java
    ... If that Dean refuses to help, there are rights ... newspaper. ... No "progressive" Uni likes to see itself doing anything ...
    (Debian-User)