Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jan 16, 2006.
Does that qualify for meaningless claim of the decade?
You know, I might not mind being spied upon if only they got a warrant. Not even first, just eventually. Because then I'd know they had a reason and weren't just going off a tip by my ex girlfriend or something. Of course, we all know that they got nothing. And even if they did, they'd have a tough time convicting because of due process. I wonder why ~30% of Americans don't get stuff like this.
But then, if Clinton did it, those same people would be outraged. Outraged. So I think I just answered my own question.
But haven't you heard? Clinton did the same thing! At least that's the righty talking point. Something about unauthorized physical searches of Aldrich Ames... probably a load of hooey I'm sure.
well, whatdya know:
"I think his hypocrisy knows no bounds," Thomas Veil said of McClellan.
Look! We're as bad as Clinton was. No, wait... Clinton is as bad as we are. No that's not it either... Wait I got it... We're better than Clinton for doing the same thing -- even though he didn't actually do what we did.
I think that's how they justify it anyway...
Just because it wasn't illegal, it was still bad for Clinton to do. But he rectified it himself when he signed that law. And electronic surveilance without a warrant is illegal, as is physical now since Clinton apparently signed it into law in '95. Plus Bush did it multiple times. Then hid it. Then lied about it. But this is just like the Abramoff thing. Dems are just as guilty, if not worse, for kinda doing the same things a little bit, only not really. Wait, what!?!