So claims 24's Janeane Garofalo. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms45EzMR0f8 Wow. Sometimes it amazes me that, no matter how far our nation has come, idiots like her still come and pull the racism card in an issue that has nothing to do with any sort of racial prejudice. :pinch: But hey, at least it makes for good entertainment. I got a good laugh out of it.

O'Reilly was talking about this the other night. It's outrageous. I never knew that anyone could be as stupid as that. And the guy doesn't even object to her, he's just "Mhmm, mhmm." And MSNBC wonders why they are getting absolutely annhilated in the news show ratings.

Actually, I don't think that wiretapping is a bad thing. It's an excellent source of information. They just need to control themselves and make sure they only do it to ppl under suspicion. Not that we can trust the government to do that.

Yes, and agree completely with that. However, I think warrentless wiretapping should be [i]temporarily[/i] permitted in the case of a terrorist attack on the United States. I mean when it IS happening or just about to happen, like within 24 hours of the attack or something, if the government has strong evidence of an attack and is imminent danger. Then I think it would be necessary. I wouldn't want to be waiting for a judges approval while the White House is blowing up or something. Unconstitutional? Yea, probably. Scratch the probably- DEFINATELY. But sometimes in times like that you may need to bend the rules in extreme cases of emergency. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. Of course afterward, there should be a formal investigation of the governments actions to show that they ONLY did what they are authorized to do, so that it doesn't keep happening. It should only happen in extremely special cases, like in the midst of a terrorist attack.

I suppose I can't argue with that.

that just makes me mad. how does she not realise that she's actually the one being racist? to her, his colour is more significant than his political standing. Someone can be wrong whether they're black or white. That's equality. not racism. Also I'd like to point out that the democrats are, historically, the racist party.

Coming in, late, I know, but wow... my goodness. This thing is SO far out there in left field, it's not just Garofalo that loses credibility over it, but MSNBC for not screening her better as to what she wanted to talk about. It's the sort of sensationalistic story I would expect to see from.. The Enquirer, Access Hollywood, or the Rush Limbaugh show, not at all what I would expect to hear while turning on a respected news source owned by a major broadcast network. I can't believe I have to spell this out for anybody, but here's how *I* know it's all BS. As many of you know, I'm a pretty die-hard libertarian. Have been for years. Sometime around 1995, I bought a couple of books from Loompanics Publishing's Claire Wolfe entitled "101 things to do until the revolution" and "Don't shoot the bastards (yet): 101 more things to do until the revolution. IN these books (or one of them, I can't remember which) was mention of sending in tea bags with your tax return. She didn't speak of it as if it were her idea, but like this was already an organized thing. She had comments from IRS officials about how annoying it was to get all these teabags they had to dispose of. *I* didn't see what difference it would make, but I know people that could've been among the first to file electronically, and didn't just because a jpg of a teabag, in with your electronic return is not at all the same, and they didn't want to give up the practice. This was before Obama OR Bush. Although, who knows, Garofalo might still claim the same thing, since 90s liberals loved to call Clinton the first black president, as if THAT wasn't insulting to the entire black race. He cheats on his wife, and lies about it, so he must be black? Anyway.... You know, ignorance is not something I'm gonna be mad at anyone over. The problem is when a person, like Ganeane Garofalo, is ignorant, and yet somehow thinks they're an expert, and want to go on TV to spread their ignorance. Why is Obama spending money like a drunken sailor on shore leave any different than Bush doing the same? Out of sight, out of mind. Bush ran on deficit spending, it's true. But in the short term, he gave us stimulus checks. I know even once the war began, my (taxable) income was taxed somewhere around 11-12%. THIS year, it's about 17%. That's $1000 or so out of my pocket. In the LONG run, yes, it's slightly better to raise taxes than to sell our kids into bondage. But people forget about those debts that their kids and THEIR kids will have to worry about. When it's them having to pay it, it's more real somehow. And it makes them mad, as it makes ME mad. For me, I don't much care. Regardless of how Obama spends money, or doesn't, any children born in America are born into a $30-40,000 debt that they didn't agree to take on. I kinda can't see me wanting to do that to my kids. To me, anything short of a balanced budget is a failure, and so Obama is failing, just like Bush failed.

I fully agree with daisukeghost. It IS Ganeane Garofalo that's looking at it in racial terms. Just because people protest a President (and a Congress, BTW) doesn't mean they're protesting his skin color. I think mainstream America understood the historical implications of having our first African American President, and have now moved on to seeing whether or not the history books will have anything greater to remember him for. But there ARE people in this country that will ALWAYS see race, everywhere they look, and any conflicts will be racial conflicts to them. I almost think you would have to have some small level of paranoid delusions to really believe the junk Ms Garofalo was saying. What it really reminds me of is when the feds seized a Baptist church here in Indianapolis. The order came down from a federal judge, but city, county, and state law enforcement refused to enforce the order, and drag a praying congregation out of their church. A man named Frank Anderson, then with the US Marshals agreed to do what no one else dared. He then took credit for a "peaceful" resolution to the conflict... as if it wasn't the church themselves, being so vigilant making sure no radical violent types or weapons were allowed in their building, but rather it was the benevolent US Marshals, for so mercifully deciding NOT to shoot a bunch of unarmed people. He took credit for it, and then he successfully ran as our Sheriff. I hate that man. Anytime I saw his campaign signs in a yard, I took them. Once I was looking at scores and scores of these things stacked up, I decided I'd make some stencils, and make my own signs. I just painted over one side, and on the other "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal." Of course, nobody wanted to see MY signs at the polling places. But I was prepared for that. I had backups for when they disappeared, I mapped out where they were being removed the quickest, and I spent time there, to make sure I gave some resistance. I was even fully prepared when a cop showed up, put me in cuffs, and tried to threaten me with this, that, and the other. What actually took me by surprise was a democratic pollster at one of the places that kept insisting that anyone that hated Frank Anderson must just hate black people. No matter how I tried to explain it, he kept flipping back to race. I don't really think he was really that dense. I think he was used to being able to throw out the "race card' and white people falling all over themeselves, to cross their position, and avoid even the ACCUSATION of being racist. I ain't the one. I know what I believe, and my problem wasn't with Marion County having our first black Sheriff, but Marion County having a Sheriff that SO obviously did not serve the will of the people of Marion County, but rather, the will of the federal government.