Tasini Supports Feingold Censure Move

Today all MSM are abuzz with Senator Feingold demanding President Bush be censured for NSA anti-terror surveillance, even though it is legitimate and to date no harm as imagined by some can be demonstrated.

Well, whether in re Tom DeLay being charged by a Democrat prosecutor for an alleged act which by absence of vital statute could not be a crime when and if done, or calling mere suborned management of a port title ownership able to confound the Coast Guard, or failing to articulate why Congress knew about the NSA program for years but none of nine Democrat Presidential candidates used that data until now, or failing to explain why they don't, say, do anything ever in their own regards re natural disaster preparedness or set up roadblocks where ports meet their jurisdiction to inspect if the President allegedly can't be trusted, ad infinitum, anti-administration parties are famous for not letting truth or impossibility be bars to their never-ending complaints.

Curiously, Democrats from coast to coast, alleging worry over warrantless surveillance, have evolved great ability to surveil everyone in their jurisdictions, and without any analogs to the judicial review provided by USA PATRIOT. In Benton County, Oregon and elsewhere now in that State, cameras are installed to monitor closely all movement through the area; the Chicago Sun-Times about a month ago had a headline story about Mayor Daley spending $85K apiece for new police cars that not only enhance public video surveillance generally, they have a device which scans all vehicles such units pass and can process up to 3,600 license plates each per hour for ownership data. And so it goes, ranking Democrats in such jurisdictions as yet facing no electoral opposition, and all without any nature of judicial review of program applications; again, none of this stuff appears used by Democrats to replace or enhance port security…at least that affirms there is no manifest reason(s) to doubt efficacy of the Coast Guard or USDHS.

But since most "red" States elect GOP Congress members from areas not having such Democrat unquestionable surveillance programs, in lieu of explaining how neither competing from our own resources nor accepting foreign investments ever again together with no property rights will raise wages and create jobs, some Democrats would like to tell "red" area voters that Democrats are saving us from a man whose only occupation is world plunder backed by hardcopy printouts of everything you do and without recourse of habeas corpus or judicial review…which is why foreigners want to hurt us. Ah, that Democrat doctrine of contradictory proof not being a bar to persecution. Oh, and as well they want to protect "red" State voters from ideological rubber stamps and locksteppers.

Curiously, most of such Democrats either aren't running for re-election or don't face any opposition even for their own party's nomination, let alone opposite party or independent candidates. I guess non-reviewable constant surveillance of their own venues and readiness to hound alternate political views is well-accepted by their voters, assuring them easy additional terms.

But since there is no evidence of USA PATRIOT Section 223 bona fide harm, nor of this inane complaint of "Presidential file building on everyone's lives", nor that the NSA does more with mass emails/calls than pass/fail check for known foreign terror coda, and since surveillance is authorized by the same USA PATRIOT Democrats voted for, or by signal intel unitary power, or both, there appears no reasonable basis for censuring President Bush any more than there would be re any successor President of any party if acting equally.

I continue to support the White House use of NSA surveillance as a basis for FISA and any related warrants.