1 Rusty by the Right's standard at that time FDR was Stalin. So what does any of that prove ? Washington was a slave owner blah blah blah. Holding historical figures to present day standards seems to me to be creating easy targets. How about a post instead on something a bit more current, say the disaray in the C.I.A. ? I seem to recall reading about that in the MSM last week.

2 Libs have different standards for Democrats. Kind of like Jimmy Carter appointing a Navy admiral to head the CIA (Stansfield Turner), but throw a hissy fit when Bush appoints an Army guy for exactly the same post. That's why it's best just to ignore them, or just laugh at them.

3 Does that mean we should start calling him Chimpy McPolio? Seriously Rusty, if we're going to mirror the intellectual reactions of the left, then we should simply rain down hate, err, I mean 'tolerance' on people who disagree with us.

4 Any one else hear that giant sucking sound??? WTF is that. Oh just John Ryan again. Never mind.

5 Interesting piece in the Spectator. One key difference that is controlling from then and now is this: Congress has spoken on national security wiretapping, in the FISA case. When Jackson wrote his memos for FDR, there was NO congressional statute addressing this point. As articulated by no lesser light than Jackson in the steel seizure case, when the president acts with statutory authority granted by Congress, it is constitutional unless the constitution directly forbids it. When the Congress hasn't spoken to a matter, it is a gray area, tasking judges with divining where the power rightfully resides. But when the president, given a statutory path to achieve a given end, ignores or thwarts Congress' will, it can ONLY be upheld if the Constitution grants that power to the president strictly. This is tantamount to strict scrutiny, and thus, FDR's actions would have been in zone 2, and Bush's post FISA acts in zone 3. That's a huge difference, in legal terms.

6 Jd, noted and already over-ruled a while ago. Bush's actions fall under the president's wartime powers, and we've seen legal judgments to that effect. Besides which, this is only an issue if you have a deep inner need for that. Or are you going to start complaining when they search your luggage at the airport when you leave or enter the country?

7 Is this argument an example of the tu quoque fallacy? Agree or disagree, showing your reasons.

8 FYI Carlos, Stansfield Turner had retired before he was DCI. The last active duty military officer in the poisition was Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter (1947-50). So, the "Carter did it" example of a double standard doesn't apply. Thanks for playing!

9 daphne, Stansfield Turner was head of the Navy War College, a MILITARY institution-- and therefore hardly "retired"-- when Carter called him up to the CIA. Thanks for playing.

10 I don't know what was "overruled". Jackson's steel seizure division of presidential powers? FISA? As you know, there is no explicit grant of wartime emergency powers in the Constitution, which distinguishes it from most constitutions. There are statutory examples of powers that grow in war, and Congress and the courts have treated the president deferentially. But Bobby Inman got it right yesterday, yet another intel/law expert who says the president broke the law when he ignored FISA. There is another side to the debate, but it is hardly as simplistic as the Spectator makes it out to be.

11 Carlos sweetie, Stansfield Turner - Naval War College 1972-74 Stansfield Turner - DCI 1977-81 Thanks for playing!

12 Dems had to find something to criticize. But Hayden being a general in the Army is a non-issue. He's the highest ranking military intelligence officer in the country and therefore eminently qualified (unlike Stansfield Turner was).

13 dcb, then why the pre-push no by Republicans to the Hayden nomination? Big Bill is asking the same question now on the teevee. And now Stansfield Turner wasn't qualified, aty. I think James Webb would like to weigh in on that. Let's see. I'll ask him, as opposed to taking the word of "dcb" on a blog. Thanks for playing

14 daphne, don't take my word for it. "Although Turner had had little previous experience in intelligence, he viewed it simply as a problem of assessing data, or, as he described it to his son, nothing more than "bean' counting. He quickly found, however, that the CIA was a far more complex and elusive entity than he had expected." http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/archived/whokilled.htm

15 DCB--was Daphne right about Turner and the war college? You have a funny way of admitting that someone correctly identified a mistake in your post.

16 It should be noted, Hayden is Air Force, not Army. /quibble