Cameron: "Democrats complaining about the NSA programs" without knowing all the details "is precisely why Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security"
Fox News correspondent Carl Cameron suggested that "the idea that so many Democrats are complaining about the NSA programs without really knowing what they are is precisely why so many Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security."
On the May 11 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, chief White House correspondent Carl Cameron suggested that "the idea that so many Democrats are complaining about the NSA [National Security Agency] programs without really knowing what they are is precisely why so many Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security."
Concern about both the recently disclosed NSA program that collects phone call records of millions of Americans, and the previously disclosed warrantless domestic surveillance program, has been bipartisan, as Media Matters for America has documented. On the May 11 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, former House Speaker and Fox News political contributor Newt Gingrich (R-GA) said of the newly disclosed program: "I'm not going to defend the indefensible. The Bush administration has an obligation to level with the American people. ... But I don't think the way they've handled this can be defended by reasonable people. It is sloppy. It is contradictory, and frankly for normal Americans, it makes no sense to listen to these three totally different explanations."
In fact, even Cameron's own report indicated that House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) said Air Force Gen. Michael V. Hayden, who was head of the NSA from 1999 until 2005, "will have a lot more explaining to do" about the two NSA domestic monitoring programs before being confirmed as the new director of the CIA.
From the May 11 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
CAMERON: Democrats pointedly suggested that Hayden's confirmation could be held up until questions about NSA's program are more fully answered.
SEN. CHARLES E. SCHUMER (D-NY) [video clip]: He was head of NSA. And if the administration is just going to stonewall, as they have done in the past to not give us answers, we have no choice but to ask General Hayden to answer those questions before going forward with a confirmation.
CAMERON: Even the Republican majority leader of the House, John Boehner, indicated that Hayden's confirmation may have been complicated.
BOEHNER [video clip]: I think he will have a lot more explaining to do.
CAMERON: Senate Intelligence Committee Democrat Diane Feinstein of California agreed. She has spoken favorably about Hayden's nomination and the various NSA programs as one lawmaker who has been briefed. But Democrats want more lawmakers in the loop. And she suggested that keeping others in the dark could set back Hayden's confirmation.
FEINSTEIN [video clip]: I think this is also going to present a growing impediment to the confirmation of General Hayden, and I think that's very regretted.
CAMERON: The White House says the reason more lawmakers are not briefed is to prevent leaks and keep the NSA programs working to protect the country. And the idea that so many Democrats are complaining about the NSA programs without really knowing what they are is precisely why so many Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security. Brit?
From the May 11 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
ALAN COLMES (co-host): Then he [President Bush] said, when it came out a little while ago that there was some wiretapping, he said it only applies to international communications. And now we're finding something else. So it just seems we're not getting a consistent story here, are we?
GINGRICH: No. You're not.
COLMES: Why not?
GINGRICH: Look, I'm not -- Alan, I'm not going to defend the indefensible. The Bush administration has an obligation to level with the American people.
And I'm prepared to defend a very aggressive antiterrorist campaign, and I'm prepared to defend the idea that the government ought to know who's making the calls, as long as that information is only used against terrorists, and as long as the Congress knows that it's under way. But I don't think the way they've handled this can be defended by reasonable people. It is sloppy. It is contradictory, and frankly for normal Americans, it makes no sense to listen to these three totally different explanations.
COLMES: Let me also show you --
GINGRICH: I hate to disappoint you, Alan.
COLMES: Well, I appreciate your candid response. And I'd like to show you what [Attorney General] Alberto Gonzales said during his confirmation hearings on this very same issue.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Then see if they still complain.
BushCo's secrecy and arrogance is as bad as the NSA's invasion of privacy, IMO. It directly attacks the heart of the Constitution, rather than chipping away at the Bill of Rights.
"the idea that so many Democrats are complaining about the NSA programs without really knowing what they are is precisely why so many Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security."
No lie in there. Nobody really knows what's going on with these NSA programs yet everyone on BOTH sides feels compelled to talk about them. The difference is the Republicans, with a few exceptions, blindly back Bush's ILLEGAL wiretapping and data collection routines while the Democrats want more info. They are curious as to the inner workings of law breaking. Republicans? So what, it's for our own good is the subliminal BS filtering through. You know what's for our own good: rule of law, the Bill of Rights and other quaint principles promulgated by those "dead old white guys" (thanks, Mr. Heston!).
MMFA Republicans: please save the Clinton “Echelon” and “warrantless search” canards. Both claims have been long since debunked, sent to the old canards home. They are tired. Let them rest.
to report the details. You ( cameron ) are not doing your job.
it's not that democrats actually are complaining about the NSA program or that republicans aren't complaining. It's the idea that democrats complain. conversely, it's the idea that conservatives are complaining about democrats' inquiries into domestic spying that is precisely why so many democrats say republicans aren't serious about civil liberties.
NEWT GINGRICH is blasting them...and as for Fox 'noise' -trying to FIND OUT THE FACTS about wire tapping and phone records = NOT SERIOUS about national SECURITY?!?! Uuumm...Cameron- you are a tool...
Hannity repeatedly responded to Gingrich's remarks with a seperate issue within the topic. He couldn't get off the idea that Gingrich wasn't backing the administration on this issue, which he was not asserting at all. Gingrich was asking for the administration to be upfront and honest about the situation. Not hand out three totally different explanations to the public and hope that it would fade away. Hannity just couldn't believe that Newt wouldn't drop everything and "go along" with the administrations decision of handling this situation. SUCK IT UP HANNITY! Even your "die hards" are questioning the actions of the administration!
Gingrich on MTP Sunday? He has already changed his opinions on NSA wiretaps. Karl must have had a sit down with him.
Does anyone know the details of the NSA spying? Why wouldn't we question or "complain" about a program that could possibly endanger our rights to privacy as citizens. Isn't that what we as citizens are responsible for, looking out for our own self interests? Maybe if we knew more details about what is going on, there could be conversation concerning the program, and not complaining. Maybe if they actually did their job the right way, the legal way there wouldn't be any reason to "complain."
Hmmm...so the reason why more lawmakers are not briefed is to "prevent leaks and keep the NSA programs working to protect the country. "
So how are the Democrats supposed to inform themselves on the program if Dubya and his minions won't talk about it?
Just more crap on a stick from the northern branch of the White House press office.
we have a reporter who is certainly not embarrassed by inserting his own opinions (or those of FOX) into reporting news.
And as for "the idea that so many Democrats are complaining about the NSA programs without really knowing what they are is precisely why so many Republicans say Democrats just aren't serious about security." I am still glad, as I pointed out before, that FOX journalists and opinion makers seem to have more knowledge of the program that our representatives or we as a people. Of course, I will skip the argument that his statement is just weak and lousy to begin with.
The Bush administration and the Republican power Congress are doing something that is very obvious: Disrespecting their opposition. We have never given one side of our two party system an advantage and trust they will not use that advantage to better there political position. So why does one side have the ability to listen in on what plans one side might be making? I wonder does a political opponent have something to hide? How will the Republicans and right wing media "spin" the reality that we may have been cheated out of the 2004 Presidential election, and if things don't change, we will be cheated out of the 2006 and 2008 elections. These are important questions and they mean a lot to our system of Government, and I am not sure we are not outraged enough. At every level, in every medium and in very clear terms, we must bring this issue to the American voters and Congressional representatives. We stand to lose more than elections if we don't frame this one sided power play..
Joseph
but so far the Democrats havent shown themselves knowledgable enough on this issue to comment upon it.
This is a liberal law signed by a democrat... Whining and crying on;y because its Dub-ya..