The State of The Union

[Lizzard[MPE]]

Your comments please.

I'm writing mine at the moment

[KvHagedorn]

His speaking style has certainly improved.

[Jessterw]

So it's more primate than rock? Ahem.

[Dr Mordrid]

Lessee.....

TIME magazines headline:

In an address designed mostly to soothe, the President aimed to show he's got aggressive plans on energy, health care and, above all, national security.

My take:

Iran: On notice with a not so veiled comment Iranian people that it's the Mullahs we're after, not them. Guess he knows a lot of satellite channels go to Iran. It would be nice if some covert support for pro-democracy forces inside Iran could be implemented, but that would take time and I don't think we have enough before the nukes come online. Time to start digging out those DoD contingency plans I guess.

Energy: Nukes: yes. Biofuel: yes. Alternative fuels: yes. Democratic support: not likely 'cause then they couldn't run on these issues this fall. How typical

Iraq: Stay the course and hunt down the AQ agents there and work towards Iraqis taking the reigns militarily. Even moderate Dems agree here, but not the Libs who live in the Blog-o-Sphere.

Economy: It's big and getting bigger faster than the EU and Japan combined. Unemployment is <5% (less than any major nation), incomes are up, home ownership is up etc. etc. All this dispite war, natural disasters and the "other party" nay-saying at every turn even though their figures don't add up.

Health insurance: Work does need to be done here, but not national health insurance. The UK and Canada have shown that to be a non-option bigtime.

The real problem is all the money going into lawsuits and insurance for same. Most of those suits are criminal in their insanity, but get settled to prevent even bigger losses. That and Medicaid Fraud, which is running about 25% - 30% of expenses in most States.

Get rid of the bloodsucking lawyers, malpractice insurance companies and fraud and national medical expenses go down in rapid order.

Foreign policy: "There is a difference between responsible criticism that aims for success, and defeatism that refuses to acknowledge anything but failure. Hindsight alone is not wisdom. And second-guessing is not a strategy."

IOW he's willing to take advice from Dems and others, but not willing to put up with criticism for politics sake. This was the way things were in the US for decades ("politics stop at the waters edge"), but then the Kennedy wing took over the Dem party and the old policy went out the window.

NSA wiretaps: They're doing it and won't stop doing it, so there!! Every President from Ford to Bush, including Clinton, has used NSA intercepts of communications to and from known agents of hostile powers, but now the Dems think there is political hay to be made of 'em. Fortunately the public is on to the Dems hypocracy and approves Bushes policy by a large majority.

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

Ok I have to take exception to the NSA wiretaps.

Every president has done them... legally. They've gotten the secret court orders, and done it within the bounds of the law.

My problem is Bush's continued belief that he IS the law. The man just doesn't understand that the President... doesn't make laws, doesn't change laws, and doesn't interpret laws.

[cjolley]

You know Doc, I was going to go through that list and describe the problems with them.
But we've been through them so many times before there's just no point.

Even the things I agree with him on , I know he will find a way to f**k up.
It's all just happy talk and BS from a retired land man.

The emperor has no cloths, and just about everybody knows that now.

[Dr Mordrid]

Ok I have to take exception to the NSA wiretaps.

Every president has done them... legally. They've gotten the secret court orders, and done it within the bounds of the law.

My problem is Bush's continued belief that he IS the law. The man just doesn't understand that the President... doesn't make laws, doesn't change laws, and doesn't interpret laws.

Problem doing it using FISA is that it's too slow, even if they were to use the 3 day delay system. How do you file for enough FISA warrants for phone #'s and email addys when they can change 'em every few minutes? That volume alone would clog the FISA system so badly as to make it useless.

BTW: that isn't something out of my hat. It's the scenario put forth by at least 3 former national security advisors from both parties.

Dr. Mordrid

[cjolley]

There is nothing in that that explains why they didn't ask for the law to be changed instead of just flagrantly violating it.
At that time they could have had ANYTHING they asked for.

Dick has a theory of executive power that should scare even you.

[Dr Mordrid]

He doesn't have to "violate FISA" because not a few constitutional law types of all political persuasions think FISA is unconstitutional in that it's a Congressional attempt to limit a Presidents Article II powers. Which came first; the Constitution or FISA? IMO it ain't FISA.

Even if FISA is constitutional in this regard (not likely) there are still problems with applying it to these circumstances.

FISA is one of those laws passed in and for a different era that is now more of a problem than a solution. Not unlike laws setting the penalty for horse theft as death by hanging, FISA is now a hopeless mess and not by a little.

Requiring that targets of a FISA warrant be linked to a foreign government or international terrorist organization may have made sense when FISA was enacted in 1978. Then the typical FISA target was a Soviet spy or a member of one of the hierarchical, military-style terror groups of that time. This isn't the case today and the difference is quite lethal.

Even Sen. Schumer (D-NY), he who is now (hypocritically) screaming at what Bush is doing, has made attempts to change FISA to fix this problem. His last attempt was in a bill co-written with Sen. Kyl (R-AZ) in 2002 (S.2586) as part of the post-911 legislative package.

Unfortunately such bills usually fail in a filibuster because the ACLU's Senatorial minions howl like wolves during a full moon.

So much for "fixing" FISA being a viable solution.

So....what options remain?

I guess either Bush should continue to do his "NSA thing" or we should go back to the pre-911 days when these communications get a pass until it's too late.

At least until the next skyscraper falls into rubble. Pffftttt......

Dr. Mordrid

[cjolley]

You might want to read the Constitution instead of just parroting Rebublican talking points.

Article I. - The Legislative Branch

...
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
...
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations; To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

...

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
...
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.


Article II. - The Executive Branch



Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
...


That's it

[Dr Mordrid]

You just made my point:

COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF THE ARMY AND NAVY OF THE UNITED STATES

Just in case you weren't aware we are now in a time when the War Powers Act as been implemented both against AQ and in Iraq. It continues to be active and will continue to be so until Congress deems otherwise.

As the Commander in Chief Bush has the power to not only conduct the war but, as a natural extension, to also engage in gathering intelligence about our enemies. This power has been used by Presidents going all the way back to the beginning.

Today the kind of intelligence that has to be gathered must be done as he is doing now.

That isn't just my opinion. Numerous former Secretaries of State, Directors of NSA and CIA and Defense Secretaries of both parties say the same thing.

Dr. Mordrid

[cjolley]

You might want to read the Constitution instead of just parroting Rebublican talking points.

Article I. - The Legislative Branch

...
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
..
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
...
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Have you lost your ability to read a simple English sentence?

They haven't got a prayer of getting their ridiculous misreading of the constitution past the Supreme Court.
But of course they will maintain that they don't have to because as CIC Bush doesn't even have to follow the Supreme court's rulings.

Cheney is as nutty as a fruit cake.

[Dr Mordrid]

The legislative branch cannot make laws that take away Constitutionally provided Executive branch powers. That's been tested time and again and Congress loses.

BTW: have you checked the makeup of the USSC lately? It changed yesterday. Besides that in War Powers rulings the USSC has held for the Administrative Branch far more often that not, even without conservative majorites on the court.

This is especially true when there is an active Declaration of War or active War Powers Resolution.

As for the inadequacies of FISA, try reading this;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20060124-104527-1255r.htm

Yet, without monitoring all the inbound and outbound traffic from a known terrorist communication node -- like Abu Musab Zarqawi's cell phone number -- no intelligence can be gained.

FISA must be amended to enable programmatic approvals for automated monitoring programs, since authorization for practical reasons cannot be sought on an individual basis even after the fact. With programmatic approval for the initial automated screening, existing FISA warrant procedures could then be followed for targeted monitoring of identified U.S. persons or sources in appropriate cases where follow-up investigation is needed.

By all means, let us debate who should have the authority to authorize and oversee such intelligence-gathering programs. But amid the partisan bickering, let's not forget that someone must do it -- and that the existing mechanisms are inadequate.

Dr. Mordrid

[cjolley]

The legislative branch cannot make laws that take away Constitutionally provided Executive branch powers. That's been tested time and again and Congress loses.

BTW: have you checked the makeup of the USSC lately?

It changed yesterday

Dr. Mordrid

Alito can read a simple english sentence.

What Bush and Cheney are saying is that they can do ANYTHING while the "War on Terror" is on.

And of course it will last forever in some form or other, people being what they are.
So guess what?
We have a new form of government.
An Elected Monarchy.

[Dr Mordrid]

Not anything. Just monitor the incoming and outgoing calls of AQ operatives overseas. Do you think they have constitutional protections? Pffttt...

Dr. Mordrid