Skip to comments.
Ann Coulter on Fox News tonight
Posted on 09/14/2003 8:03:02 PM PDT by MegaSilver
I just caught the last part of her appearance; a transcript would be appreciated. :)
Anyway, I was surprised that she took the stance she did on the Patriot Act. Perhaps it is effective in fighting the war on terrorism. On the other hand, it gives the government incredible power. And if and when Hillary Rodham Clinton takes the White House in 2008, I don't want to see her wielding that kind of power. I believe that the result would be far worse than her simply abusing it; I believe we might see the collapse of the United States as we know it.
Thoughts?
TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; foxnews; patriotact
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
To: MegaSilver
Yes, if Hillary Clinton takes the White House in 2008, this will be the end of the United States as we know it (or as anyone knows it, for that matter.) And the Patriot Act won't make any difference in that equation at all.
2
posted on
09/14/2003 8:05:58 PM PDT
by
spodefly
(This is my tagline. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
To: MegaSilver
Unlike most people, Coulter knows what is in the Patriot Act, and doesn't just react to the propaganda spread against it.
3
posted on
09/14/2003 8:06:24 PM PDT
by
William McKinley
(http://williammckinley.blogspot.com)
To: MegaSilver
4
posted on
09/14/2003 8:07:58 PM PDT
by
RaceBannon
(It is perfectly fine to kill people when you are defending yourself)
To: MegaSilver
"And if and when Hillary Rodham Clinton takes the White House in 2008"THAT my friend, will never happen
5
posted on
09/14/2003 8:09:37 PM PDT
by
Lloyd227
To: MegaSilver
I would like to know SPECIFICALLY what the govt. can do now that it couldn't do two years ago that has your boxers in a bunch?
I'm supposed to be concerned that the Feds can learn what books I've been reading at the library?
I'm supposed to worry that the govt. has increased powers to go after NON-citizens?
Again, what SPECIFICALLY?
The biggest exposure in the law may be in the definition of the word "terrorist," which could be turned onto the pro-life movement or fundamentalist Christians by a Hillary Administration. But the Patriot Act as I understand it doesn't change what can be done to citizens, so we're no worse off than we were 3 years ago, when the Administration was clearly targeting Christians and conservatives with IRS harassment and DOJ investigations.
To: MegaSilver
Good point.
7
posted on
09/14/2003 8:12:02 PM PDT
by
risk
To: RaceBannon
thank God for someone who knows the rules.
8
posted on
09/14/2003 8:13:52 PM PDT
by
glock rocks
(shoot fast. shoot straight. shoot safe. practice. carry. molon labe.)
Comment #9 Removed by Moderator
To: kingsugar
Having fun? We've got your number.
To: kingsugar
Such wit! Such style! Such grace! Oh BRAVO...BRAVO...you must keep them in stitches wherever you hang around...
11
posted on
09/14/2003 8:23:36 PM PDT
by
Pharmboy
(Dems lie 'cause they have to...)
To: glock rocks
right on Glock...I was thinking the same thing when I clicked on this thread...
12
posted on
09/14/2003 8:24:09 PM PDT
by
Keith
To: RaceBannon
That woman needs her doc to write her a prescription for one of these, twice daily, until the sharp edges disappear:
13
posted on
09/14/2003 8:24:25 PM PDT
by
Hank Rearden
(Dick Gephardt. Before he dicks you.)
To: William McKinley
Unlike most people, Coulter knows what is in the Patriot Act, and doesn't just react to the propaganda spread against it.I know what's in it. And a lot of it scares me. In the right hands, it's creepy. In the wrong hands, it is ITSELF terrorizing.
14
posted on
09/14/2003 8:29:29 PM PDT
by
MegaSilver
(Let the Patriot Act expire!)
To: Blue Jays
Hit the ol' handy "abuse button" on KingSugar. In my years on FR, that is the first time I've ever used it.
15
posted on
09/14/2003 8:32:19 PM PDT
by
Blue Jays
(Rock Hard, Ride Free)
To: Hank Rearden
I really think she and Arnuhld's wife are both anorexic in the medical sense. It makes me uncomfortable to look at either of them. Sort of "Memento Mori" plaques.
To: MegaSilver
Americans have always surrendered rights in times of great danger. They quickly take them back when the danger is over.
Abraham Lincoln even suspended the right of Habeas Corpus during the civil war. That meant the government could have any person arrested for any reason sufficient to the government. Once a person was taken into custody, the Government did not even have to admit it had done so. The Federal Government could make any citizen disappear and not tell anyone it had done so.
Like many people, you think the nations freedoms were maximized at the founding and have gradually ben limited in scope ever since. Nothing could be further from the truth. The breadth and scope of individual liberty has been a function of the dangers we face as a nation.
There were lots of limitations in world war II. You had to have government permission to buy gasoline or even butter. Travel of all kinds was limited, and people even suspected of being supporters of the Germans or Japanese can and were put in concentration camps for the duration of the war. All war reporters were drafted into the military under martial law during WWII. Any reporter who failed to get all stories approved by the military before pubishing, could be shot by a firing squad. How is that for your freedom of the press.
There is no danger to freedom as long as we can elect anyone we choose. You should try reading a history book or two to learn how this nation really works.
Here is a truism that even a libertarian with only a partially drug fried brain should be able to comprehend. In all nations the army and the police are made up of ordinary citizens. When ever the police refuse to arrest the people the government says arrest, and when ever the privates refuse to shoot the people the leaders say to shoot, the government falls.
Many thought the Soviet Union could not collapse. But when its citizens wanted a new form of government they destroyed the Soviet Union.
People like you have a huge inferiority complex. To you people like Bill and Hillary seem to have the power to rule you and all around you. You are the gutless fearful majority and can easily be controlled and ruled. But there are always a few with the guts to take a dictatorial government down.
As long as you believe yourself to be helpless and inferior... you will live in abject terror of those you think would subjugate you.
17
posted on
09/14/2003 8:33:36 PM PDT
by
Common Tator
(I support Billybob. www.ArmorforCongress.com)
To: MegaSilver
Get away from Ann, you! She's mine! :)
Does anyone know of a link to a decent examination of the Patriot Act? I've read so much ABOUT it, but very little that breaks it down so a non-lawyer like me can have a clear look at what's in it.
Any assistance would be appreciated. It sounds like something that I wouldn't like, but so far I have found little to actually complain about.
To: MegaSilver
I don't want to see her wielding that kind of power...If the Hildebeast becomes POTUS, she doesn't need the Patriot Act: just look at Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elian, etc., plus what the EPA police, ATF, etc. do on a daily basis already.
IMHO, it will be the end of the republic if that woman is ever elected.
To: Common Tator
Bravo!! Excellent.
20
posted on
09/14/2003 8:37:33 PM PDT
by
11B3
(Two choices: Republican or Communist. You know it's true.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson