I look forward to reading this – at long last something holding up the Republican side, not a Yoo, Flanigan, Gonzales, Bradbury, Ashcroft etc. piece of nonsense, but a smart guy with principals. Thank you for constantly coming back to the need to do the right thing, the Constitutional thing, the moral thing.

So President Carter fought against the FISA bill to reign in Nixonian Presidential antics?

Maybe you should rephrase it… No ‘dishonest’ President has surrendered power voluntarily.

If America hasn’t had enough of these guys then we’re all stupid.

Is there any true Conservative today who kneels on bended knee to the Communist (in their opinion) Constitution of the U.S.A. which calls for the sovereign to be “the people”? I’d like to be kind to Republicans who appear civil and who don’t harm me, but there are so few. If it takes the extremes of George W. to rile them, then they just aren’t very bright or maybe it’s just that their special interests aren’t getting enough earmarks.

Even during the Clinton administration there were a few and we were not served well by any of them.

Over the last 28 years there have been 5 Republican terms and it’s hard to name more than 2 or 3 things they have done which benefited anyone but themselves. However, the list of their stupid, selfish, destructive, criminal activities is enough to fill volumes.

Even this evening on 60_Minutes they discussed the Credit Default Swaps and placed the blame squarely on Bill Clinton. How dare those bastards. They didn’t even mention Newt Gingrich and the Republican majority Congress for the entire story. They’re not quite Liberal for sure.

We need to lay out who did what and place blame. If Americans never get the story straight, then how can our politics go foward properly?

We need many things, but one is a new Dem 9/11 commission and for Bush & Co to go to jail after he leaves office. If we can’t even do those kinds of things, then how can we say we’re ‘good or smart people’?

True some of the powers will be kept, but a lot of the alleged powers are not actually real, and I simply don’t see a President Obama pushing back against the legal establishment, of which bruce is a proud example, as Bushco has.

Just because Obama may not utilize the powers that Bush employed does not mean the precedent does not stand if legally challenged. Another Republic President (or another Democratic one, for that matter) may decide to use those powers that Bush put into practice, and s/he may get away with it, since there is nothing left to say it’s illegal because no one has objected strenuously enough when it was used previously.