But some people just aren't happy unless they're finding some lame-ass word or phrase or idea or another to apply to themselves personally so they can take offense.
Being a Victim-American is too big of a fad these days!!
Thank you. Reference your site, this article, and the definition of "patriot" we clearly differ on the meaning and the words of patriots. I am still waiting for the original poster to define what should be done in lieu of the Patriot Act. It is easy to say something is bad and potentially threatening but it isn't necessarily helpful. The heavy lifting is in designing a plan that is effective but without threat. Let's here what he would do differently?
I don't blame Mr. Armitage for being cynical about the implementation of the "Patriot" Act. This idea was lying around for MONTHS (like from January!), with those supporting it just waiting for something like 9/11 to happen so that those who are looking to increase the power (and let's be frank, the possible ABUSE) of Federal Government could play upon the fears of someone exactly in your situation to cram it through without comment from the public, without hindrance from the President...and hell, without even READING it themselves.
I would like to understand clearly what you are saying. Is your contention that concurrent with the swearing in ceremony the Bush Adminstration someone drafted these exact line items currently known as the Patriot Act? Please share with us who drafted it and where you got your data. Please cite it here, I would be interested in reviewing it.
And considering the Feds admitted they knew the 9/11 attack was being planned for quite some time, it's rather tough for me and others NOT to be cynical about This Magic Solution suddenly popping up as The Answer To All Our Problems. "We're from the government and we're here to help you", as the old joke goes.
The logical continuation and connectivity from the paragraph above is with this legislation already drafted, the Feds intentionally allowed the attack to happen so that they could enact the Patriot Act. Is that what you are saying? The other way this can be read is that the Patriot Act is part of a planned strategy to usurp our rights, waiting in the wings for an opportune time to roll it out. Maybe that's what you are saying. A clarification would be appreciated.
I'm POSITIVE if President Clinton signed something like this under such circumstances, the red warning lights would have been flashing like Rudolf's nose on Christmas Eve 'round these parts.
We will have to disagree. I am equally positive that the public support would have been the same. I can not speak for the radical fringe who would have "flashed like Rodolf's nose" in that case anymore than I can for there counterparts who are doing the same thing now. I am sure there are those who would have objected.
As to the current conflict (or war, whatever you want to call it)...I say find the bastards who did this and who assisted them, put them down, and then bring our troops home. No "nation-building" aftermath, if you please.
We agree on this. Though it is in our interest to help them get started, to assure Afghanistan doesn't become Club Med for the terrorists again. After that we need to be gone.
I think we've discovered over the past few years that too many of these people we've assisted in the past usually wind up NOT appreciating it.
And we've got more important things to do at home than set up future, dangerous foreign ingrates into positions of power.
I agree partially with the first part. But that's the stating the obvious, you can get that from TV. The less obvious part, because you have to be there to see it, is many people do appreciate and benefit from our assistance. It may not be evident on the national level, yet, but as individuals many lives are better for the US's efforts. Over time the investments we make in educating citizens of foreign nations will payoff.
I will await your clarification then reply accordingly.