wrote in message
...
Do you really credit Ford with ending the war? I'm inclined to give Nixon
that one, despite the timing.

I certainly do. Nixon started us towards the door but we were never
going to get out of there until we got out of there.

Well, too far away to argue about now... We don't have Dick Nixon to kick
around any more. lol

I see the same thing in Iraq. All it is going to take is the
insurgents to roll over "our" side in one of those cities and we will
be back in there. Our troops are just waiting for the next battle to
start

Ok. So, what do you propose? Should we allow the Iraqi gov't to stand on its
own two feet or should be help if necessary? Do we really want that place to
descend into chaos?


I have no idea what you're talking about re "our rights." He's opened up
an
investigation (limited right now) into the torture stuff. More is surely
to
come.

Several years ago everyone on the left was howling about the patriot
act. Obama rubber stamped it. Gitmo never affected our rights, only
aliens who never set foot here (the point of Gitmo)

It absolutely has. It's a slippery slope when you start treating the worst
like animals.

I am not sure how much of that is true and how much is hype.

By the gov't's own reporting, we tortured prisoners. Some even died. At
least several were so mentally damaged that they can't stand trial. It's
pretty well documented. Heck, even Darth Vader (aka Dick Cheney) admitted to
knowing about it and agreeing with its use.


If you want a real example of losing your rights, look at the drug
war. That was where the 4th amendment was shredded. It is also when
illegal domestic wiretapping really took off. I don't see Obama
softening that.

I don't know of any examples of illegal wiretapping wrt to the drug war.

There is plenty (I get this from cops). They don't use illegal taps to
get evidence, it would not be allowed in court. They just use it to
"get lucky" on a traffic stop and say it came from an informant.
In most cases it is not really the cop who does the tap. It is a paid
informant. A distinction without a difference in my opinion

This is, of course, hearsay. If it's not used in court, then there's really
no way to show it happens or not. I believe most police to be honest and try
to follow the spirit and letter of the law. They've certainly done right by
me.


However, the Bush administration pushed through the end run around the
FISA
court. Obama hasn't done enough to end that end run.

How do you know that. FISA court proceedings are secret. All you know
is it hasn't been leaked to the press yet.

Some things are, some aren't... for example:

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009...gold_fisa.html

NSA always listens, everything they do is secret and largely
unregulated in any real sense.

Especially relatively recently. Speaking of Nixon, under Bush:

In November 2002, the New York Times reported that the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was developing a tracking system called
"Total Information Awareness" (TIA), which was intended to detect terrorists
through analyzing troves of information. The system, developed under the
direction of John Poindexter, then-director of DARPA's Information Awareness
Office, was envisioned to give law enforcement access to private data
without suspicion of wrongdoing or a warrant.

Remember Poindexter? Read the section on the Iran-Contra affair if you don't
remember:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Poindexter

Probably right, but you really can't blame Obama for this. I'm even
willing
to give Paulson a snap for doing what he and other economists thought was
right. He didn't have any accountability in what he did, and Geitner did
more toward that.

You are right, it is not directly Obama's fault but we always seem to
blame the president for everything that happens on his watch. That is
why I frequently talk about congress and why I read a lot of
Thomas.loc.gov.

--
Nom=de=Plume