Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?Now here is the headline from the uber wingnut site Ace of Spades HQ: More Rasmussen: 64% Say Warrantless Eavesdropping OK
Yes..64%
No...23%
OK, where in the question does it say "Warrantless"? Hell I would have answered yes to that question. We have a similar story from Blogs For Bush.
Unfortunately I think that a majority would approve of warrentless wire taps in spite of the fact that they run roughshod over everything that this country is supposed to stand for.
That brings us to Iraq. I think Iraq will bring the Bush and the administration down. Not because they lied about the reason we invaded. I think a majority would approve of the invasion to insure a fuel source for their automobiles and that may be what Cheney and company were counting on. No, it will bring them down because they couldn't pull it off, because they fucked it up so bad. I said three or four years ago that it would be their incompetence that eventually brought down the Bush/Cheney administration and I think we see that being played out in Iraq today. See these two recent posts, Iraqi Security Forces...preparing for civil war and The losers in Iraq for some details.
Update
John Aravosis makes some sense out of the Rasmussen poll numbers:
Even I would probably approve of the NSA listening in on phone calls between suspected terrorists and "people living in the US" - notice the survey question didn't even say "Americans," it said "people living in the US," a description that would get EVEN MORE support for spying (i.e., people are more apt to approve NSA spying on foreigners in the US rather than US citizens in the US).So in fact this is nothing for the wingnuts to be crowing about, in fact it's really bad news for the Bushites.
That number should have been in the 90 percentile and up, Americans who support the NSA eavesdropping on conversations with suspected terrorists. Yet it was only in the low 60s. Something's up.
Again, that number should have been in the 90s. The fact that only 6 out of 10 Americans are willing to agree to such a broad question, to me, says that Bush is not on solid ground on this issue at all.I think John is right, these are low numbers when you consider the question. I still wonder how much of it boils down to the fact that an increasing majority don't trust Bush to do anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Be Nice