The Legislative Branch has no oversight responsibility over the White House.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Griff

It appears you need a bigger one.

Bigger is not always better.

[Happy Monkey]

OK, so you just don't see a need for the concept of a warrant. I guess that's as far as this conversation can go.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

OK, so you just don't see a need for the concept of a warrant. I guess that's as far as this conversation can go.

He will change his tune when the Executive branch flips back to the Democrats. Then it will be like the old days when all you heard about was the horrors of Ruby Ridge and Waco.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

He will change his tune when the Executive branch flips back to the Democrats. Then it will be like the old days when all you heard about was the horrors of Ruby Ridge and Waco.

I don't see how that fits into a discussion of warrentless searches. I would bet that they had all thier ducks in a row... well at least until that sniper shot and killed the mother holding her baby or the match was lit.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I don't see how that fits into a discussion of warrentless searches. I would bet that they had all thier ducks in a row...

That's because you needed warrants back then. The next Democratic President won't need them. Ruby Ridge and Waco are examples of times that many conservatives think a Democratic executive branch was overstepping its authority. In the future, there won't even be warrants involved.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

In the future, there won't even be warrants involved.

And how in the world do you come to that conclusion? Are you afraid of something?

[elSicomoro]

April's uncle used to work for the NSA in the 80s. Then he flipped out when his wife left him and disappeared. Apparently, the FBI and CIA came here looking for him. Eventually, they found him on the side of a road in Virginia, naked, his car ablaze. He now collects disability and lives in a small apartment near April's mom's house.

[Undertoad]

What an awesome way to collect disability! That's using yer head.

Naked is good, too, that way when they take you, they won't shoot you thinking you're concealing something.

The car fire seems a bit over the top though.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

What an awesome way to collect disability! That's using yer head.

Naked is good, too, that way when they take you, they won't shoot you thinking you're concealing something.

The car fire seems a bit over the top though.

He wanted to kill himself, so he set the car on fire...but he got scared of the flames.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by sycamore

He wanted to kill himself, so he set the car on fire...but he got scared of the flames.

You really took all the fun out of the story with that. Since this is a thread about believing whatever we want, despite contrary evidence, I'm going to continue thinking this was a brilliant disability scam.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Griff

You really took all the fun out of the story with that. Since this is a thread about believing whatever we want, despite contrary evidence, I'm going to continue thinking this was a brilliant disability scam.

Maybe the guy was just an asshole and he wanted to make a fire to keep warm. No harm no foul, well except for being naked.

[Griff]

put on a sweater

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by Griff

You really took all the fun out of the story with that. Since this is a thread about believing whatever we want, despite contrary evidence, I'm going to continue thinking this was a brilliant disability scam.

I was telling April about this thread earlier...she reminded me that before he set the car on fire, he tried to jump off a bridge into a river to kill himself. But he didn't like being in wet clothes and could swim. So he went back to the car and set it on fire.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

The car fire seems a bit over the top though.

You can't collect insurance on a blown motor or trans.

[warch]

Once again, I am not afraid of anything because I know that some really dedicated people are out there doing the good work hunting down the people who want to harm us. I will not support hamstringing their good work.

That's alot of blind trust, I kinda think its a bit naive, too. You said you *did* get out much?
I'm gonna stick with the framers and demand a bit of accountabilty and oversight. I have a sinking feeling that mixed in with the hardworking heroes are a few bad apples. Some have surfaced (see the Abu kids, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, see Brownie, see Libby, Rove, Feith, see Tillman, see Gonzales, Miers, Goodling, Samson), and perhaps even, say, due to a ill-considered political appointment of a unqualified adminstrator by a weak CEO (Bush) who puts political gain before country, cause harm to the safeguarding efforts.

How have I personally been effected? I pay taxes.