Here we go!
Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd, who has taken a hard-line in opposing Bush administration proposals to modify a foreign surveillance law, says the president’s willingness to trample Constitutional rights hands terrorists a “victory” beyond what they could achieve through another attack.
“When you give up basic Constitutional rights, you give terrorists a far greater victory in ways,” Dodd said during an online video chat.
I must say, I had intended to write quite a bit on this, but, to what point? It has been said and written again and again and again: foreigners are not US citizens, and the USA is under no Constitutional compulsion to give them our rights. No matter how many times I delve into the seethe farms of the left, I just cannot wrap my mind around these people.
Nor do I want to. It can’t be all about hysterical politics.
PS: keep an eye on the DUmmy thread I found it in. Surely, they will start their insanity shortly.
Every HUMAN in the United States has rights guaranteed by the US Constitution.
What ??? do you think that perhaps we can make slaves out of non US citizens?
What rights do non US citizens not have other than things like not being able to vote ?
It is much more than that. We are at war and spying on the enemy is a crucial part of war fare. The President is the CinC and thus ultimately responsible for the manner in which the war is prosecuted. No commander in chief has ever had to go and ask a judge’s permission to spy on the enemy during war. FDR didn’t ask a judge before spying on the Nazis. Lincoln didn’t ask a judge before spying on the Confederates. This is truly unprecedented. Furthermore, if anyone looks at the expanded powers that other Presidents took during war time, Bush is quite mild. Lincoln suspended habeus corpus. FDR set up a commission to censor media he didn’t like. Wilson set up the creel commission to spy on war opponents. What Bush is doing is really quite mild compared to other war Presidents.
Finally, this nonsense is a piece in an overall puzzle in which the Dems insist on debating on issues on which they are in the minority in terms of the polls. They have struck gold on SCHIP but besides that on issue after issue they insist on debating when the public is not on their side.
From gay rights, warrantless wiretaps, re authorizing the Patriot Act, enhanced interrogations, the Fairness Doctrine, the list is almost endless, and again, besides striking gold with SCHIP, they are constantly on the political loser. Here is how I see it.
http://www.proprietornation.blogspot.com/2007/10/enda-to-move-through-legislature.html
[…] Read the rest of this great post here […]
I can’t tell you how sick and tired I am of this “The Terrorists will get us again if we don’t live in a police state” BS. The war on terrorism is about as effective as the war on drugs. If Bush is serious about going after the terrorists then why did he give them a breeding ground in Iraq? Why hasn’t he caught Bin Laden?
Chris Dodd does not love terrorists. Simply saying that shows that you aren’t serious aobut the issue – you’re just going for the knee-jerk response. Well, here’s one gal that would like to give you the knee jerk you somewhere!
John, cut the hysteria. It is not about slavery, but the Constitution applying to American citizens, and certainly not to foreigners who aren’t even in the USA.
Mike, couldn’t agree more. Great article, BTW.
Sick, again, more liberal hysteria. No American is being asked to give up their rights. As far as Dodd goes, he seems to care more about people who aren’t under the protection of the Constitution then Americans.