Actually, anyone who makes the statement ...
"Privacy is a hallmark of our constitutional system ... "
... has every right to be called a moron and ignored.
I choose to do both.
Posted on 12/16/2005 10:58:09 AM PST by new yorker 77
--------------------------------------------------------
Larry Craig – Idaho
Phone: (202) 224-2752
Email: http://craig.senate.gov/email/
Website: http://craig.senate.gov/
--------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Hagel – Nebraska
Phone: (202) 224-4224
Email: http://hagel.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home
Website: http://hagel.senate.gov/
--------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Murkowski – Alaska
Phone: (202) 224-6665
Email: http://murkowski.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Website: http://murkowski.senate.gov
--------------------------------------------------------
John Sununu – New Hampshire
Phone: (202) 224-2841
Email: http://www.sununu.senate.gov/webform.html
Website: http://sununu.senate.gov/
--------------------------------------------------------
Frist also voted against it in order to keep the option open to hold another future cloture vote.
I still have one on my car, and my house, and the hat I'm wearing right now. I also think these senators did the right thing.
Keeping in mind the fact that the Clinton Administration repeatedly got a pas when using the IRS to audit and harras it's enemies, is it so hard to imagine them doing the same thing with provisions like:
Section 215: Authorizes federal officials to obtain "tangible items" like business records, including those from libraries and bookstores, for foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations.
These people did the right thing. Supporting the totalitarianism of the Patriot Act is shameful. I am glad that they stood up to the rest of the "republicans" and told them where to stick it.
You got that right. When a person thinks such laws are good simply because their party supports them they should consider the reality THEIR PARTY will not hold power forever. They should also consider such laws open the doors wide open for many unethical power hungry elected who would have no finer pleasure than to use these laws to further enslave us to the federal government.
There was sufficient laws and powers on the books before the PA was originally passed. At best all it did was promote a false sense of security and make politicians feel like they were doing something. At worse it is a liberty robbing act only making life harder on those who live within civilized law. We didn't need it to start with and we don't need the Patriot Act now.
With the stroke of a pen, FDR put hundreds of thousands of Americans in internment camps and AMERICANS said nothing. Whether it was warranted or not is not the question, rather the fact that it was done should have been a lesson for Americans.
It wasn't warranted. I shudder every time I read some FReeper defending the rounding up of American citizens based on their ethnicity. It's a Dem evil, and we should hold them accountable for it. We certainly shouldn't be defending it.
With this fraudulent misnamed "Patriot" Act American people are signing on before the fact and that is very dangerous.
The word "Patriot" is not being used for no reason at all.
On the contrary - it's being used for a very specific reason. They're shrewd. They know that by giving the bill the right name, its opponents can be accused of being "against America." Marketing at its finest.
Today's vote was on the conference version. The Senate passed its version in July, and the objections today relate to "compromises" made in conference.
The word Patriot was used as you say, to SELL the Act and now anyone that disagrees with it will be automatically "unPATRIOTIC".
Some of these people need to review what HONEST Abe Lincoln did to American citizens, without an act of any kind.
I suggest having the feds PATRROL OUR BORDERS, & round up & kick out illegal immigrants...all of them!
The STATES can enforce theor own versions of the patriot act as the people w/in their jurisdiction so desire...& those that they believe support terrorism, or helped in ANY mmanner whatsoever, should be handed over to the frds & prosecuted for treason.
So am I. Actually considering their stance, I may well send them handwritten thank you notes as well
"Roe v Wade" also has nothing to do with the Patriot Act either, so your point is useless. Which criminal investigation and intelligence means that were legal before the Patriot Act do you claim were "unconstitutional", and why?
Terrorist acts are acts that come under the framework of "invasion and insurrection", which Congress is required by the Constitution to provide for the necessary laws that enable the nation to provide counter measures for. Simply because terrorists do not wear uniforms, do not represent another soverign power, and hide among the civilian population does not change the external originationg threat to which the Congress and the Executive are required to defend the people against. The fact that they hide here, domestically, among our own citizens does not change the type of threat they represent and therefore the nature of the counter measures needed to identify, track and counter them. You have no privacy or rights if you are dead. Your security is always the first and primary responsibility of any government. You can give up your security to some mental confort about your "rights", but the rest of us will deal with the real world of real threats.
I'll be sure to call and thank them.
"I thank'em. The so-called "Patriot Act" is an incredibly dangerous piece of work, and NO PART of it should EVER be made permanent US law. ALL PARTS should ONLY be renewable on a time-limited basis, preferably by a requirement for a two-thirds majority."
Why? What, specifically is that you are so opposed to and how does that opposition compare to what was legal before the Patriot Act.
How do you plan on (1)identifying, (2)tracking, (3)investigating terrorism in the abscence of some of the provisions of the Patriot Act?, provisions without which we would not have succeeded in some terrorism investigations in the past four years; we would be as blind as we were on 9/11.
Where do you live? Maybe we can be sure that Al Queda knows how well proctected you think you will be without some of the Patriot Act provisions.
Actually, anyone who makes the statement ...
"Privacy is a hallmark of our constitutional system ... "
... has every right to be called a moron and ignored.
I choose to do both.
Why is it an excellent point?
What is it that you object to? and why? Please be specific and base your answer on the text of the law and not suppositions or what the pundits say.
"Congressmen should be required to read the crap they're voting on,"
Its clear to me that you have not read the laws you are referring to, nor what the law was before the Patriot Act was passed.
The Patriot Act is far less of "new" things than things extended to cover terrorism, as opposed to organized crime, and things to cover changes in technology.
Why do Patriot Act opponents always speak in platitudes instead of knowledge-based specifics?
It ain't over yet, my FRiend....the Patriot Act worshippers are gonna come back again & again & again until they get their way....it may be given a different name, & it may eventually pass under a Dim-ocrat President rather than a Repug, but still, the fight for an all-powerful & a more centralized government will continue.
I used Roe v. Wade as an example of a "prior approved method"that you said was ok or proper for government to use, not 'cuz I thought it had anything to do w/ the Patriot Act.
DUHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001
Could it be anymore Orwellian?
"Section 215: Authorizes federal officials to obtain "tangible items" like business records, including those from libraries and bookstores, for foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations."
It was previously legal to obtain those records in organized crime investigations, with a court approved warrant, and the Patriot Act extended those investigatory means to terrorism investigations with a FISA court approved warrant. In other words, before the Patriot Act it was easier to investigate the mafia than it was Al Qeuda. The same type of thing is true with many of the Patriot Act provisions.
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.