I just cracked the DU lack of analysis code

[cui bono]

38. Okay, I know I said I wasn't going to respond, but that is all complete bullshit and you know it.

I don't know what logic means in your book, but it's not accurate if you think I'm not logical. I laid out the evidence to my claim, using a lot of info from the link you provided, and then you retorted with "the relevant part of the link". So you want to pull out only one statement that you think supports your claim and discard all the rest that proves mine.

Secondly, you are now falsely stating that I claimed "Obama is worse than Bush" without qualifying it to the one policy I was discussing. Way to misrepresent the whole situation, you're good at that, I know.

Now you are attempting to slander me by claiming I'm habitual at whatever it is you are claiming. Prove it. Prove it in a truly logical manner, not whatever you think logical means.

You are the one who defended BushCo's illegal warrantless wiretaps. In response to Spector saying that Bush just ignored the 1978 law anyway

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the most prominent Republican opponent of the compromise bill, issued a statement today calling that exclusivity provision "meaningless because that specific provision is now in 1978 act." Specter said Bush just ignored existing law in starting the warrantless surveillance program.

you said:

I would also beg to differ with Sen. Specter's interpretation, because essentially Bush was arguing that the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force against Al-Qae'ida and its terrorist allies was also Congressional permission to use any means to track them down - even if they were American citizens. And if this interpretation were correct (it was never tested in court), the 1978 law would be superseded by the later law. By passing a law in 2008, Congress was making clear that the wartime authorities granted in the 2001 AUMF did not extend to warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens. Even if you had reason to suspect that a citizen was a member of Al-Qae'ida, you still had to get a judge's permission to intercept their communications.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4673518

You can catapult your propaganda all you want in however many threads you want, doesn't make it true.

And if you're not upset, why are you so obsessed with me and that exchange?