Awww... poor republicans Options

[pebkac]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/...-gop-stage.html

Wow... the democrats finally stand up to the republicans and now they're acting like children.

[rabble]

I'm on my phone so I can't do the quote stuff but I need to respond to this point in perticular, i know it won't change your mind because it is already set, but I feel it highlights where you are wrong.

You posted something to this effect: "its not wiretapping without warrants, its wiretapping suspected national security threats without warrants"

The key word here is suspect, why does the national security part modify the fact that its still wiretapping a suspect without a warrant, and if he IS a suspect then it should be easy enough to get a warrant. In fact, The FISA act allows for leeway for immediate wiretapping when a warrant is still in the process of being issued. So imediate action can be taken as long as a warrant is secured within a reasonable time.

The only logical explanation for the need for warrantless wiretaps is so that the government can wiretap everyone, run it through a computer looking for keywords (which I beleive they already do) and then be able to take that information and use it in a court of law against citizens. They cannot do this now because the unwarranted wiretaps would be thrown out, so they are trying to change the law. Stopping a terrorist is one thing, because they are more than likely not a citizen and therefore considered enemy combatants and sent to Cuba, but this sounds too much like trying to quell dissent in the citizen population by being able to charge joe blow in a court of law with whatever he talks about on the phone, and I am not comfortable with that.

[blaarg]

The only logical explanation for the need for warrantless wiretaps is so that the government can wiretap everyone, run it through a computer looking for keywords (which I beleive they already do)

dude, they CAN do that. Haven't you seen "The Bourne Supremacy"!