Welcome to PatsFans.com

Why are liberals such hypocrites?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by ELOrocks17, Jan 17, 2006.

  1. ELOrocks17

    ELOrocks17 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I am so sick and tired of these jerkoff libs in congress sittin up there with thier snooty nose in the air thinking they are better than everyone else...yet they are such friggin hypocrytes! Look at that King size embarrasment Ted Kennedy sitting there grilling Alito over ALLEGEDLY belonging to a club that was exclusionary while he himself was just caught in such a club. Will that fat bastar d apologize to Alito, his constituents, or the American people???? HELL NO HE WONT!!!! He will no doubt blame the "Vast right wing conspiracy"


    Also, we have that Demo-crap loser Al Gore *****in about Bush illegally wiretapping. THATS THE SAME SH*T HE AND CLINTON DID DURING THEYRE RIEGN OF TERROR.


    There are hundreds of other examples. Why in the hell do these dem losers think they can get away with this???
     
  2. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,768
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +494 / 20 / -17

    You have your facts wrong, ELOrocks. Clinton worked through FISA to get wiretaps. I haven't seen any evidence otherwise. Have you? As far as Kennedy goes, yes, he should not have belonged, but what I've read is that he now quit and it was a social club, as opposed to one that had a political agenda like CAP. But, again, if there is evidence that Clinton authorized wiretaps without going to court, then I would say that he was wrong, too. That said, I did realize a legal analysis saying that in the days following 9/11, a case could be made for wiretaps, but the real issue involves those taps made after the Patriot and Homeland Security acts were passed. It will be interesting to see how this pans out, and whether people like you will continue to cling to the questionable two wrongs make a right argument.
     
  3. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Ok, but by the same token, "conservative" Republicans are also full of sh!t.

    Fiscally responsible? Nope.

    Compassionate? Nope.

    Against Nation Building? Nope.

    Moral High Ground? Nope.

    Defenders of the Constitution? Nope.

    States Rights? Nope.

    Individual Liberties? Nope.


    If Gore illegally wiretapped thousands of americans, I'd love to see this. C'mon, give us the scoop.
     
  4. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Ah, Rule #2 of the liberal playbook; When called out on something, instead of either denying it or defending it, resort to trying to find a remote instance when "the other side" did wrong.

    Because as we all know, 2 wrongs make right.
     
  5. ELOrocks17

    ELOrocks17 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0



    HAAHAHAHAHAH!!! LOL You understand the liberal playbook well! Maybe we should start a thread about the rules of the liberal playbook...
     
  6. ELOrocks17

    ELOrocks17 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/17/D8F6GR08O.html


    quote--

    McClellan said the Clinton-Gore administration had engaged in warrantless physical searches, and he cited an FBI search of the home of CIA turncoat Aldrich Ames without permission from a judge. He said Clinton's deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick, had testified before Congress that the president had the inherent authority to engage in physical searches without warrants.



    Well...I await your next alleged discrepancy...
     
  7. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Well, in the same token, the original poster was only attacking liberals when he knows both sides are equally guilty.

    To answer the original question: all politicians, regardless of political stripes, are hypocrites. Go look at our congress. 535 hypocrites. Happy?
     
  8. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,269
    Likes Received:
    255
    Ratings:
    +993 / 2 / -9

    Having Uncle Teddy, Lahey and Biden on that commitee of Idiots that were going after Alito was the best thing that ever happend for the Republicans, those Democrat Clowns made complete fools of themselves in front of the whole world.

    Can you Imagine a "Swine" like Kennedy questioning someone elses "Ethics and Integrity", it was like something right out of Saturday Night Live.

    Instead of destroying Alito Kennedy made him an American Hero. :singing:
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2006
  9. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Oh now I see the comparison. You are comparing the investigation of a single traitor to the broad sweeping illegal evesdropping on thousands of unsuspecting citizens.

    Wow. I'm impressed. It was even a statement made by reliable source Scott "Gannons My Man" McClellan. Thats very reliable.
     
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,768
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +494 / 20 / -17

    LOL, Turd, you really don't get it. ELOrocks argument seems to be that since Clinton authorized warrantless wiretaps, it's okay that Bush did it too. So, you are right, two wrongs don't make a right. If Clinton broke the law (and I don't believe he did), he's absolutely as wrong as Bush. It's people like you who are using Clinton to defend Bush's illegal actions. Since neither you nor ELOrocks have obviously read about the issue, here's a good nonbiased article to help get you up to speed:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/19/AR2005121901884.html

    "The issue here is this," said Jamie Gorelick, who served as deputy attorney general under President Bill Clinton and as a member of the Sept. 11 commission. "If you're John McCain and you just got Congress to agree to limits on interrogation techniques, why would you think that limits anything if the executive branch can ignore it by asserting its inherent authority?"
     
  11. PatsFanInMaine

    PatsFanInMaine Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Paging Mrs. Gorelick......


    The Washington Post Archives | August 5, 1994 | Jamie Gorelick, Dpy. Atty. General



    The Post's editorial asserts that warrantless searches to gather intelligence on the activities of foreign powers or their agents in the United States are "sharply at odds with the Fourth Amendment.



    The federal courts of appeal have recognized that such searches, carried out since the earliest days of our republic, are a valid exercise of the president's constitutional responsibilities to conduct foreign affairs and protect national security and fall within an exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement.

    Electronic surveillance and physical searches of property provide critical information about the conduct of foreign powers that threaten our national security. They were instrumental in stopping Aldrich Ames and the Walker spy ring. They have frustrated terrorist plots to strike targets within the United States. It is critical to the success of such operations that the hostile power remain unaware that its activities have been discovered. Criminal warrant requirements would negate the purpose of the search. In addition, these searches often must be conducted before the government has enough information about the activities under investigation to specify precisely what would be found in the premises to be searched -- which is a requirement for a criminal warrant.
     
  12. pats-blue

    pats-blue Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    OK Patters, since you are using Clintons Deputy Atty Gen as someone you would use to bolster your point how is this article. The whole article deals with the FISA and wiretaps and such and the conduct of MANY Presidents.

    Anyway here is the quote from Jamie Gorelick...

    "Every president since FISA's passage has asserted that he retained inherent power to go beyond the act's terms. Under President Clinton, deputy Atty. Gen. Jamie Gorelick testified that "the Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes."

    link to very interesting article...http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...3632.story?coll=chi-newsopinioncommentary-hed

    Well how about a response to that Patters?
     
  13. pats-blue

    pats-blue Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    OK Patters, since you are using Clintons Deputy Atty Gen as someone you would use to bolster your point how is this article. The whole article deals with the FISA and wiretaps and such and the conduct of MANY Presidents.

    Anyway here is the quote from Jamie Gorelick in this article...

    Every president since FISA's passage has asserted that he retained inherent power to go beyond the act's terms. Under President Clinton, deputy Atty. Gen. Jamie Gorelick testified that "the Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes."

    link to very interesting article...http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...3632.story?coll=chi-newsopinioncommentary-hed

    Well how about a response to that Patters?
     
  14. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,768
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +494 / 20 / -17

    JLC, Political parties are alway simplifying the issue. What Bush did is not as clearcut as what Nixon did, for instance, but it raises important Constitutional questions.

    As I understand it, FISA includes provisions that allow a President to ask for more authority and flexibility. The President simply chose to circumvent FISA and the Congress. The danger here is that if the president is allowed to do whatever he wants based on his perception of a situation, then where are the checks and balances? Congress negotiated and gave him his Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act, but why should they bother if the President can simply ignore their intentions? The President has ignored the courts and ignored Congress. What is to stop him from going out and ordering that people be shot? Don't you think there needs to be some checks and balances?

    As far as the column, what I've read is that many experts feel the President had a strong case in the days after 9/11, when the apparatus was simply not set up to deal with such a terrorist strike. But, once the legislation was passed, the President had no legal right to ignore the intent of Congress. He, in effect, acted like a dictator would. And now there's evidence that he was engaged in wiretapping before 9/11 as well, but I haven't seen anything definitive yet.

    JLC, I oppose the President on many issues, but this is by far the most serious issue, because he's threatening our rights and our freedom, and trying to usurp too much power. There's no guarantee that power won't be abused unless checks and balances are in place. It's true that Clinton too argued for more power, but basically gave in. He worked through the system, lost, and agreed to checks and balances. That's the marvel of the American system of government ... up until Bush came along.
     
  15. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    The difference as I see it is simply foreign vs. domestic spying. FISA established greater leniency for foreign surveillance- no question. The illegality comes with domestic eavesdropping, which is currently being argued as an extension of foreign eavesdropping. Pats-blues quote specifically refers to foreign intel.
     
  16. ELOrocks17

    ELOrocks17 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well, its quite clear that the liberals on this board want to make absolutly sure that we get hit again. Why else would they complain about EVERY EFFORT TO STOP TERRORISM??????

    They whine about the patriot act
    they whine about Wiretapping
    they whine about securing our border
    they whine about the war on terrorism


    WTF??? Get with the freekin program.

    Oh, and by the way, NEM keeps on harping about "clinton handing bin laden to Bush. THAT IS TOTAL BULLSH*T!!!! CLINTON HAD 3 CHANCES TO GET BIN LADEN, BUT HE WAS TOO BUSY GETTING THAT "BLOWJOB"
     
  17. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    "You're either with us or you're with the terrorists" is utterly moronic. I don't think there's one person on this board, from NEM to Harry Boy, who doesn't want what they think is best for America. You're not scoring any points or discrediting anyone by accusing them of wanting America to be attacked, you're just showing ignorance of the fact that reasonable people can reasonably disagree.
     
  18. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    ELo, do you think Bob Barr is a liberal?
     
  19. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,864
    Likes Received:
    48
    Ratings:
    +116 / 10 / -15

    #37 Jersey

    I find it funny that you throw that name out of the air that is against wire tapping. How about you read his book "The meaning of Is" since you are such a Clinton rump sucker.
     
  20. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    This only proves AAB's point. Bob Barr is by no means a liberal and even he's concerned and outraged over President Bush, a member of his own party, spying on Americans.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>