DNC lists conservatives who question Bush on wiretapping. DLC cautious.

[madfloridian]

(I edited the subject line to show that the chairman of the DLC, a think tank, not the party...is urging caution in criticizing the president. Meanwhile the DNC is showing how ironic that is. Several Democrats have spoken out clearly on this, so there is no excuse for this fear and caution.)

Conservatives Condemn Bush's Domestic Spying Scandal

This is a partial list of those who have spoken out against the NSA spying. Be sure to read their statements at the link.

http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/02/bi-partisan_con.php

Senator Lindsey Graham

Senator Chuck Hagel
"Americans can be protected against terrorism without violating the law or ignoring civil rights…No president is ever above the law."

Senator Larry Craig

Senator Olympia Snowe
"I believe the Congress -- as a coequal branch of government -- must immediately and expeditiously review the use of this practice."

Senator Sam Brownback

Senator Lincoln Chafee

Senator John McCain

Sen. Mike DeWine: "We clearly have to take a look at this," DeWine said. "This is part of our job in oversight. It's our responsibility."

Senator John Sununu

Representative C.L. "Butch" Otter

George Will

Norm Ornstein, American Enterprise Institute (AEI)
"I think if we're going to be intellectually honest here, this really is the kind of thing that Alexander Hamilton was referring to when impeachment was discussed."

Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform

Former U.S. Rep. Bob Barr

Paul Weyrich, Chairman and CEO, Free Congress Foundation
"I believe that our executive branch cannot continue to operate without the checks of the other branches."

Robert Levy, Constitutional Scholar and Federalist Society Board Member

Bruce Fein, Constitutional Scholar And Former Deputy Attorney General In The Reagan Administration

David Keene, chairman, American Conservative Union

Alan Gottlieb, Founder, Second Amendment Foundation

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Vilsack, chair of the DLC says this:

"Gov. Tom Vilsack said Monday that Democrats risk political backlash if they object to the Bush administration's wiretapping but cannot show that Americans' civil liberties are at risk.

The Democratic governor, who is weighing a 2008 presidential bid, said the party will suffer if it continues to be perceived as weaker than Republicans on national security."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060131/NEWS09/601310392

[MrBenchley]

1. And what is wrong with what Vilsack said?

It's up to the Democrats to make the case....

But as usual, some people are more interested in attacking Democrats than actually advancing the cause.

[mmonk]

2. Yes, be careful in criticizing illegal activity

by the administration. We might be perceived as weak on security. What's wrong with this approach isn't obvious?

[MrBenchley]

6. Hey, feel free to fly off the handle and spout silly empty rhetoric

It's of a piece with the other childish crap from our progressive purists lately.

[mmonk]

11. My question isn't flying off the handle,

it is real. A party too nervous to attack the opposition in clear abuses of power serves no citizen, just themselves.

[MrBenchley]

12. You didn't ask any question....

One wonders why somebody who hates Democrats so would clog a Democratic forum just to attack Democrats....and then the answer dawns.

[mmonk]

14. Question marks denote questions.

So, someone who thinks the democrats should attack the republican administration on its abuse of power in the case of wiretapping is just on a forum to attack democrats? (Note, a question mark).

[MrBenchley]

15. But ranting is just ranting....

[mmonk]

My message to elected dems

too paralyzed by fear is the quote in my sig line.

[Jujiman]

32. Classic Projection!

If anyone is "just ranting", it's YOU "mr belchy".

:hi:

[Jujiman]

31. childish crap from our progressive purists lately...

Seems like you've got your panties in QUITE a twister!

Speaking of "childish crap"...

:dunce:

[madfloridian]

3. Attacking? I did not attack anyone. I point out excess caution...

when already the conservatives are talking out about it.

Don't start, Benchley.

[MrBenchley]

5. Yeah, surrrrrrrrre......

Feel free to answer the question.

[mdmc]

8. answer to Mr. Benchley

nothing is wrong with what Vislak said - he is doing what he thinks will help him get Dems elected over GOP opponents. If Vislack gets the nomination, he will almost certainly be better than his GOP / neo-con opponent. We should support him if he gets the nomination. He will be the lesser of two evils.

Let Nader run on an anti-wiretapping platform!

[MrBenchley]

10. Vilsack is 100% correct

The case has not been clearly made to the American public and it needs to be.

[mdmc]

19. can you make the argument for us?

I saw a thread here earlier that was a pretty good defense for the Dems.

As someone who is not "sold" that the Dems should oppose wiretapping, could you suggest some talking points that would "get you on the bus"?

Usually, when someone argues the opposite of what they believe, they expose points that were not well known.

Peace,
mdmc

[MrBenchley]

21. To somebody like you, operating in bad faith?

Why should I bother? Now go do your ratfucking somewhere else.

[mdmc]

23. bad faith? I don't understand

PLEASE make a case for opposing wiretapping.

Sure, I think that democRATS like the dlc are ruining the progressive movement within the Dem party, but I still feel that the worse DLC member is better than the best GOP member.

So make a case for wiretapping.

ps- ratfucking...lol!

[MrBenchley]

25. Don't cry to me because your clumsy act got stale....

[mdmc]

26. clumsy act?

Oh well...
peace,
mdmc

[Jujiman]

34. Rude And Abusive!

Funny I did not hear anyone crying except for you, Mr. Belchy!

You SEEM rude and abusive...Is it true? It sure looks that way

but I hate to jump to any conclusions.

:eyes:

[RazzleDazzle]

35. And those are his GOOD points

Boy, I thought I was cranky. This one take the cake.

In fact, just coming onto this thread, it frankly looks like he's being the perfect troll. Could he have been any more successful at distracting and changing the subject?? I think not. And who's served by that kind of behavior? At least when I'm being cranky, it usually doesn't hijack the thread.

[Jujiman]

30. Uncalled For! Ratf@cking? Are You A Freeptard?

Hey...Your whole spiel is uncalled for! It's bordering on offensive.

What crawled up your ASS? Is that a GOOD ENOUGH question for you?

:wtf:

[OzarkDem]

22. No he isn't, he's trying to have it both ways

Current law provides plenty of freedom for the president to conduct wiretapping in the national defense. He can secure permission on short notice or retroactively and in complete confidentiality.

So you answer the question, what's wrong with the current system that justifies Bush violating it?

[Jujiman]

33. Vilsack Is 100% WRONG!

Mr Vilsack COULD HAVE made the CLEAR LEGAL case!

But, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

He has to play into the GOP's talking points.

That is what the DLC is ALL about anyway, so no suprise.

:shrug:

[BlueEyedSon]

4. Where's Pat Buchanan? John Dean?

[madfloridian]

13. John Dean was pretty outspoken on Countdown last week.

He was very critical of the president. This is only a partial list.

[mdmc]

7. I don't want to attack any Dem over wiretapping

they are just trying to get elected over their GOP opponents. They are the lesser of two evils, right?

[madfloridian]

9. Get in line on either side to get madfloridian...left and right.

LOL

You have some convoluted notion that I support the DLC. I don't. You don't seem to know the difference in the DLC and DNC.

I wrote you a reply explaining it in another thread where you were slamming me.

I am pretty much in the middle, my friend.

[mdmc]

17. but the DLC supports our Dems,,, they just want Dems to be elected

I am very much a progressive, far from the middle. But, like you, I have jumped in bed with the Dems, and fully support the Dem party.

The DLC is Nader's reason for running in elections. I think that Nader has the right to run, and that the DLC has the right to water down the Dem party into GOP-lite.

We need to rise above it all.

Peace, madfloridian... I love you!

[jsamuel]

18. we all want Dems to be elected, but the DLC does it the wrong way

See POST 16

[jsamuel]

16. Vilsack is WRONG in how he stated it.

1. To the press, not to the leadership or individual senators. By doing it this way, he fules the fire against Dems being weak in the public eye. Which is what he was trying to stop from happening in the first place.

2. He stated it as "risk political backlash" rather than "Democrats need to make sure they... so that we show how much we care about national security".

[mdmc]

20. excellent points, jsamuel

why do you think he presented it that way?

[jsamuel]

27. Ok, I will list the possibilities, but I am not going to hold back

1. He has bad political judgment (bad politician).
2. He has bad political advisers.
3. He has people working for him that are purposely trying to make Dems look bad.
4. He is purposely trying to make Dems look bad. (sinister, but possible)
- 4a. He wants senate Dems to look bad so that he will be more likely to be the Presidential nom in 2008.
- 4b. He doesn't really want Dems to get re-elected.
- 4c. He disagrees with the idea that it is illegal in the first place.

[mdmc]

28. thanks for the post

:kick:

[jsamuel]

29. no problem :)

posted similar info over here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/7/13346/07203

[MoonRiver]

24. Vilsack better be careful what HE says if he thinks he has a shot

at the nomination. Dems on the ground WILL NOT go along to get along anymore. WE WANT FIGHTERS, NOT ENABLERS.

[RazzleDazzle]

36. I think that's true

I HOPE it's true.

I like that pic of Gore.

[MoonRiver]

37. Thanks! I got it from somebody else on DU. A lot of people

have it on their sig lines I've noticed. :hi: