Wrong. Not only did Clinton use the same NSA program that Bush did, but he also authorized phyiscal searches (which Bush did not). In addition, does the ECHELON program mean anything to you?
Didn't Nixon get in trouble for something like this too?
On both sides. And suspected incidents doesn't mean a thing.
Election fraud? You mean kinda like "I lost...I demand a recount!"?
No, that's not fraud, it's just being a whiner baby.
Not only wrong, but doesn't have to do with the President. The President publicly condemns torture. The Abu Gharib "torture" was carried out by a few rogue enlistees.
Are you crazy? When will you sheeple realize that everything that goes on in every military detention center administered by the US gets all of its orders directly from the President? And that they never, ever, do anything without his express direction?
Open your eyes already!
If the Ghost of Christmas Past ever decides to visit you, I can almost guarantee it'd choose to look like Karl Marx. Just for you.
Really, that's not such a bad thing. From what I've read about him he was a huge drinker and great at parties.
Valerie Plame wasn't covert by the CIA's definition.
So are you okay with what transpired?
Show me proof that it was Bush personally who "refused to allow inspectors to US POWS". Since when has anyone abided by the Geneva Convention. And if you are referring to GITMO -- just to let you know, the Red Cross is permanently stationed there so there is no getting around 24/7 scrutiny. Sailors often joke that the POWs get better treatment (food, beds, etc) than they do.
Anyway, the Geneva Convention wasn't designed for this particular breed of detainees (as Dave pointed out in one of the other threads - which thread was that again?). Still, we need to come up with a better system, because no matter how nice and fluffy the beds are down at Gitmo, being held there still means being held against one's will and unless we can provide a good, clear reason for doing so we really don't have a right to keep them.
As for conditions - it's a prison. It is not meant to be nice. It is meant to keep detainees in one place. It is meant to keep them alive and healthy.
In relation to contemporaty size of gov't, Jackson was a more powerful executive.
Much. Were you a fan of Jackson by any chance, USMC? I wrote a paper comparing him to Hitler when I was in high school, but now I view him as more of a mixed bag. Still like Jefferson more though - economics aside.
So corporations are EEEEEEEEEEEEVIL. My little red book told me so...
It wasn't unilateral. And Arab countries do it all the time.
Yeah. We had Lichtenstein on our side. So long as Lichtenstein stays in the fight we're okay.
Please. If it weren't for us that attack would never have happened. We had very little real support - Britain and Australia were the only two to stand very firmly behind us and Britain only did so because of Tony Blair.