| The Advocate published an article today on how the Repewblican candidates in the Repewblican primary are trashing national Democrats.
Let's deal with the easy one first:
"It's really about money being wasted in Washington. Regardless of who's in it, I'm the kind of person who will call the White House."
Ms. Calongne is talking about her somewhat stupid spoof on the 3 A.M. ad of Hillary Clinton's. It's a dumb ad for the following reason - the Democrats have not been running up the nation's deficit over the last 7 years ... that would be our current occupant of the White House - George W. Bush. Matter of fact, when the last Democratic President left office, he left the nation with a surplus, which President Bush managed to turn into a mind-boggling deficit.
But the quote misses the point too ... as I'm not so sure that Ms. Calongne quite gets it. See, the President can only veto bills. He or she does have not have the power of the line-item veto. Thus, the people Ms. Calongne ought to be calling at 3 A.M. are Members of Congress, though I highly doubt they will take kindly to be called at 3 A.M.
Now, Mr. Jenkins laments the fact that the national Democratic Party was opposed to wiretapping without a court order and giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped the Bush Administration spy on the American people. I quote:
"Without that capability, we're in serious risk, serious danger."
Hmmm ... if only Mr. Jenkins knew about the law currently in effect - the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. That allows the government to wiretap an individual without a court order for up to 72 hours. Within that 72 hour time period, they have to go to a special court and get a warrant to listen in on that person's conversations. And you know what? It's actually worked quite well ... as the FISA Court, as it's called, has rejected the Administration's requests for warrants in 2005 were rejected all of one of 2,176 requests, thus approving 2,175; and in 2006, the court rejected none of the requests for warrants, approving 2,176. More importantly, from 2001 to 2006, the FISA court has rejected a mere 4 applications for warrants, while approving at least 4,351 requests. Yeah, we're in danger, y'all because the FISA court is rejecting a whole lot of warrant requests.
I am aware that Mr. Jenkins has a law degree from LSU Law. He should be aware of the 4th Amendment as a graduate from that illustrious institution. If not, here it is:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I know that he missed having Professor John Baker for Constitutional Law, but I would very surprised to learn that a conservative like Woody is not aware of the famous maxim of Benjamin Franklin, a man who lived under the threat of losing his head as one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence:
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
Further, why in the hell should the telecommunications industry get a free pass for violating the rights of American citizens by giving the government all of our information, and allowing them to listen in on our conversations without our knowledge? |
