[Coellacag]

www.ithacajournal.com

The more articles that appear like this in the news, the sooner we can get America back to being America again.

On Bush: It's Time to Say 'Enough'
by Marty Luster

As if the lies that took us to Iraq were not enough. As if the knowing use of bad intelligence wasn't enough. As if the ever- shifting justifications for this war were not enough. As if the use of torture by and at the behest of the United States was not enough. As if the disclosure of classified information to retaliate against a critic of the war policy was not enough. As if the shroud of secrecy that binds this administration was not enough. As if the squandering of hundreds of billions of dollars in support of this war at a time when we can't find the money to rebuild one of our great cities, when millions of us go without health care and when the federal government has reneged on its commitment to public education was not enough.

Now, after all that, now we have the disclosure that the president personally ordered and continues to order the interception of telephone and e-mail communications of thousands of U.S. citizens and residents on U.S. soil without search warrants, without court authorization of any sort and without any basis in the constitution or laws of this land.

Now we have had enough.

The president has defended his action in signing repeated executive orders directing the spying upon U.S. citizens by his National Security Agency on the ground that such activities are only used in cases were the subject has a “known link” to terrorist organizations abroad. However, he is silent when it comes to identifying the process for determining if a subject of eavesdropping is part of such link and he is infuriatingly vague when challenged on the legal and constitutional authority for those actions. He has assured us that his actions are both legal and protective of our civil liberties, but somehow many Americans, of all political parties, take little comfort in those assurances.

That discomfort is not only warranted by this president's history of deception, distortion and manipulation, it is compounded by the outright obfuscation of his fast-talking secretary of state. When asked on “Meet the Press” on Dec. 18 for the legal basis for the president's actions, Ms. Rice offered, in her usual glib and slick manner, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Based upon that response, one might expect to find in that legislation some clear directive that permits the president to spy upon U.S. citizens in the United States. Surely Attorney General Gonzales, and before him, Attorney General Ashcroft, as well as ace presidential counsel, former Supreme Court nominee Harriet Myers, studied FISA, or at least looked at it, before advising the president that he was free to look at our e-mails and listen to our telephone conversations without the inconvenience of applying for a court order permitting such intrusions. Sadly, it appears that that was not the case.

FISA was enacted in 1978 in reaction to the over-reaching of the federal government in spying on Americans during the Vietnam War. Its purpose was to erect a “wall' between criminal prosecution, on the one hand, and the collection of ‘foreign intelligence” on the other. The asserted reason for this distinction is that in criminal prosecutions the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against a search or seizure without a court ordered warrant controls, whereas, in non-criminal intelligence operations, the bounds of the Fourth Amendment are less clear. Instead of a warrant executed by the usual court having jurisdiction, FISA established a secret court to review the Attorney General's applications for authorization of electronic surveillance targeted at foreign intelligence information. These applications come nowhere close to the detailed and well-established standards for the issuance of search warrants (e.g., there is no requirement for a finding of “probable cause”), they are processed secretly and are sealed from public view.


This presidency has three more years to run. We cannot afford to wait that long for a change in leadership. We can no longer risk our values, our history and our liberty.

We have, finally, had enough.

It's time for Congress to begin proceedings under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution to impeach and remove George W. Bush and his Vice President from office.

[OpVJokl8]

Wonderful post! That made my Boxing Day.

[Txaizdxx]

You can call for this all you want, but it aint going to happen. So instead why not focus efforts at getting moderate Repubs and Dems into office in 06 and 08.

[Lebybynctisee]

www.ithacajournal.com

The more articles that appear like this in the news, the sooner we can get America back to being America again.

On Bush: It's Time to Say 'Enough'
by Marty Luster

I agree, but unfortunately. I don't think it will be that simple. I beleive that we will likely have to wait until the 2006 elections, and get rid of the presently dominant Republican majorities.

Either that, or have some of the more moderate republicans realize that we need a change of leadership. This could be accomplished and still retain their republican leadership. TO WIT.

Impeach Chenny, then elect a replacement, then impeach Bush, and the new elected replacement would become president. I have no particular objection to a repubican president. AS LONG AS IT ISN"T EITHER BUSH OR CHENNY.

[bettingonosports]

I agree, but unfortunately. I don't think it will be that simple. I beleive that we will likely have to wait until the 2006 elections, and get rid of the presently dominant Republican majorities.

Either that, or have some of the more moderate republicans realize that we need a change of leadership. This could be accomplished and still retain their republican leadership. TO WIT.

Impeach Chenny, then elect a replacement, then impeach Bush, and the new elected replacement would become president. I have no particular objection to a repubican president. AS LONG AS IT ISN"T EITHER BUSH OR CHENNY.

Uh you might want to go back and review a little history on how Cheney would be replaced. Hint - Election plays no part in it

[mylittlejewelaa]

Uh you might want to go back and review a little history on how Cheney would be replaced. Hint - Election plays no part in it

How do you think Ford got in office?? he was elected---by the congress

[robinthesearchmasterh]

How do you think Ford got in office?? he was elected---by the congress

He was chosen by Nixon. The Congress can't nominate.

[husartrof]

Wa ha ha ha ha. Listen to you people. It’s ended man, game over.
Any powers the R.I.P., D.N.C. had lied, cheated and stolen from the American people out of is gone.
These medial blogs are merely giving you false senses of hope so you’ll still finance and support there lavish lifestyles. The greedy rich always were the democrats and liberals. It was a smoke and mirror the whole time.

[paydayloanfasters]

www.ithacajournal.com

The more articles that appear like this in the news, the sooner we can get America back to being America again.

On Bush: It's Time to Say 'Enough'
by Marty Luster

Cut'n'paste spam post/rant.

If I wanted to read the Ithaca Journal, I'd go to their website.

[ssyyyrruho]

You can call for this all you want, but it aint going to happen. So instead why not focus efforts at getting moderate Repubs and Dems into office in 06 and 08. Or if you Really want America to get back to being America, focus on getting Libertarians into any office possible, as soon as possible. Spreading the 'lesser of two evils' from the final election to the primaries is still promoting evil.

[Sheefeadalfuh]

Or if you Really want America to get back to being America, focus on getting Libertarians into any office possible, as soon as possible. Spreading the 'lesser of two evils' from the final election to the primaries is still promoting evil.

And choosing a third evil is supposed to be the solution?

I prefer that capital rules at arm's length. Giving capital formal authority to rule seems like greater madness than the status quo.

[swwatch]

Wa ha ha ha ha. Listen to you people. It’s ended man, game over.
Any powers the R.I.P., D.N.C. had lied, cheated and stolen from the American people out of is gone.
These medial blogs are merely giving you false senses of hope so you’ll still finance and support there lavish lifestyles. The greedy rich always were the democrats and liberals. It was a smoke and mirror the whole time.

Hold on a second Hank. Do you really think that all of the Republicans are trustworthy.

Hank in the real world you have crooks in all party's.

[KahiroSamo]

WOW

Another cut n-paste rant by atomicbeandog..will wonders ever cease?
It is so unlike this poster to do this

[sam]

www.ithacajournal.com

The more articles that appear like this in the news, the sooner we can get America back to being America again.

On Bush: It's Time to Say 'Enough'
by Marty Luster

And the one-note band beats off - er, on.

Could you, perhaps, formulate a thought of your own instead of regurgitating the same tired bleat over and over and over and over again?

Makes for a much more interesting conversation.

Matt

[cigsstorenick]

Bush may be impeached, but that's a long shot.

Far more probable is that civil war we so luckily avoided in the 1890's and 1941.

[Paybeskf]

Bush may be impeached, but that's a long shot.

Far more probable is that civil war we so luckily avoided in the 1890's and 1941.

More probable still:

1. Aliens will land and take over the world.
2. Hillary will come clean and admit Chelsea is her and Vince Foster's love child.
3. Disco will make a comeback and I'll buy bell-bottoms.
4. The French will win a war.
5. Teddy Kennedy will stop drinking.
6. Nostradamus will come back from the dead to write another book.
7. Monkies will fly out of my ass and type the collected works of Shapespeare on a matchbox.

Really, Joao, where do you get this stiff? Civil was is more probable? Humbug!

Matt

[Sotmoigma]

Matt,

Tell me what you know about the situation in Iowa (other Midwestern locales as well, but Iowa is the best documented) in 1940-41.

[9uWzBx4l]

Well, for starters, it was 64+ years ago.....

You claimed a civil was was "more probable" today.

Rather than dig back 6 decades, why not try to support you claim as the situation stands today?

Matt

[Affiltavajefe]

I 'dig back' 64 (+/-) years because the situation then is so similiar to todays.

FYI, remember Harry Reasoner?

CBS News- when that title still meant something.

[vioppyskype]

In other words, you have no useful information relating to this supposedly imminent civil war today?

Matt