PATRIOT II Legislation Leaked 851
Buck Mulligan writes "The Center for Public Integrity reports that it has obtained a copy of PATRIOT II -- a huge law enforcement power grab that is intended to build on the USA PATRIOT Act. It's called the 'Domestic Security Enhancement Act.' CPI says it would increase domestic intelligence gathering and surveillance while reducing judicial review and public access to information. For more on the first PATRIOT Act, see the EPIC page."
Patriot? (Score:5, Insightful)
-Thomas Paine
So, what's life like in Canada? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's kind of sad that the government actually needs more power than what's provided by the first Patriot Act. It's also ironic that it was called the Patriot Act, because it doesn't make me feel very patriotic...
Vote Next Year Everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
most people dont want privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately the majority of people dont want privacy except _maybe_ in the bedroom.
hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently terrorists have tragically gone free due to the inability of investigators to pull up their credit records.
I also like the bit about how the use of encryption in the commission of a crime would be a felony. Recursion anyone? Sounds like a blank check search warrant on anyone using PGP to me.
Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
In fact, most of the 'western' countries followed suit like lemmings walking off of a cliff... and the opposition in Canada thought we weren't doing enough! I'm convinced that if Stephen Harper was in power, we'd pretty much be Americans.
But don't thank your lucky stars that just because our government is inept that it isn't going towards 1984... get out there, create/join a new party (eg CAPP, Patriot, etc) and VOTE these bastards out.
Too bad I never visited the States (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's too bad that I never had the occasion to visit the States before because it's got a lot of great places to see but with the way things have been going politically I wouldn't feel secure.
Let's hope that they can come back from these dark times like they did from MacCarthism.
Oh yay... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, If we could only get the British gov to stop proposing similar dumb laws (ie. EUCD) that make the EU look more like the USA.
If this one goes through, I've got yet another reason to avoid going to the USA and working/living there.
Conspiracy theory... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm very glad this has come out at a time when our heads are mostly screwed on straight so we can shoot it down in the light of day.
no difference (Score:3, Insightful)
In some ways, a return to the norm (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember what Sen. Feingold said about a *return* to an era of invasion of privacy and harrassment.
In 20's and 30's america labor leaders and other troublemakers could expect to be spied on, harrassed, framed for this and that (John Steinbeck never went to a hotel alone for fear of
being framed for rape).
In the post-war era it wasn't so bad, but even then there was McCarthyism and spying was done on suspected communists that'd raise quite a few eyebrows now. It's really only since the civil rights era that Americans have come to expect the very high level of privacy and fairness that our generation has enjoyed.
Rather than sinking into a new and unexpected bad patch, it's more that along good patch may be ending.
Wow. (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't stand the way the USG is handling this. If Americans would stand up for their rights instead of being in a stupor over "terrorism", we could get our hard-earned rights back. One of my Canadian friends from online has called me an honorary Canadian and is offering me safe haven should the USG ever come after me lol.
Enough rambling... go talk to friends and more, print out pamphlets, write your Congresscritters, do something constructive towards repealing and destroying these evil policies.
What Thomas Jefferson said (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course this was a popular quotation for Timothy McVeigh. The second part of the quote: "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Makes one think.
So is this the real thing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Keep in mind that the alleged document is draft legislation. It may be that everyone has put what they want in it, and it will be tempered down before it is handed to Congress.
It also might be yet another proposal where a group proposes something insane in order to gain more minor consessions. If so, hopefully Congress will recognize when someone keeps crying "wolf" that the wolf may not be there.
But what if the "wolf" does come along and someone says "if we had X, we could have caught them before this disaster." What should Congress do then?
***Your IP Address has been logged for reading this comment. Thank you for your cooperation.***
Write Your Elected Officials (Score:1, Insightful)
This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:4, Insightful)
Funny that we would fight communism for 50 years only to see the eastern block fall and America gleefully embrace the oppressive Big Brother powers of a secret government.
At this point I have to wonder if some of the more ultra right-wingers like Ashcroft are arranging global annihilation so they can see their biblical end game fantasies come true.
Well, at least it's out in the open now.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now at least the govt is being OPEN about its facist tendencies.. which makes it easier to resist, if anyone is left who has the heart. Ben Franklin said it best, I think... something to the effect of "Anyone who would trade freedom for security deserves neither."... And history will show, gets neither as well.
Oh, how Babylon the mighty has fallen.
Re:I can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Democrats and Republicans are very a like in many ways, but the ways that they differ are prohaps the most important. Mostly it is on matters of human freedoms, like this the Act that this story pertains to.
It IS important to vote.
Too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)
In the future, things will get worse becuase we allowed future abuses. This government was set up to prevent it, and now in the name of security, we are giving up the important checks and balances. These last 20 years have done more damage to these than at any other time in history (the WW2 damage was temporary, these are permanant). BTW, folks, clinton has been part of these stripping of rights as well.
Its a shame that.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Thomas Paine (1737 - 1809)
You know of whom I speak.
Re:Vote Next Year Everyone (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just what... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, you can do whatever you want now that you did pre-patriot. But once you start allowing your government to errode your freedoms, you are going to run into problems. What if Partiot Act V includes restrictions on computers that are on non trusted platforms. Suddenly you become a 'terrorist' if you dont want to play nice with Microsofts latest behemoth of an operating system. But because you didnt stand up for your rights and your freedoms back when they werent taking away anything that affected you directly, there is no one left to stand up and say 'Wait, this is wrong'
There is a famous saying that goes:
'In Germany, they first came for the communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics. I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak up.'
I am not trying to compare the USA to Nazi Germany, in spite of the current administrations seeming desire to take away some of the fundamental rights that are entrenched in your legal system. I am just saying that if one keeps their head in the sand, you'll never see the lion sneaking up to bite your backside.
Re:In some ways, a return to the norm (Score:5, Insightful)
Benjamin Franklin (Score:2, Insightful)
- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.
Re:Conspiracy theory... (Score:5, Insightful)
A big part of getting what you want is knowing when to ask. Another big part is being prepared. These people aren't stupid. That's what makes them dangerous.
Re:Hail Bush! (Score:1, Insightful)
But what is the USA going to do about him ?
i can tell you to save you even thinking
absolutely nothing
heil himler
My God. (Score:2, Insightful)
BE AFRAID. BE VERY, VERY AFRAID.
I'm far from being considered a "political" guy, but this absolutely scares the shit out of me. DNA database??? Prohibition of Disclosure of Terrorism Investigation Detainee Information??? Sounds to me like a blank check for the gov't to do whatever the fuck they please. I'm trying not to be paranoid, but the people spearheading this seem to represent everything our forefathers stood against.
Let's pray that this thing never gets passed.
Constitutionality restricting judicial oversight? (Score:4, Insightful)
I also don't understand why... well, I do, but for rhetorical purposes let's say I don't... the need for security necessitates less oversight by the court system. Once you've got the guy in custody, what's he going to do to the country while rotting away in jail waiting for judicial review? Is Congress seriously concerned that the judge is going to just let a criminal go? They're not in that business, assuming the government has enough evidence to back up their case. Oh, hey, think maybe the government wants the right to make wild accusations?
Sometimes, for laws like this, I wish you could bring a case before the Supreme Court for judicial review without an actual complainent. I understand the reasoning for not allowing this and generally agree with it, but in cases like this it's sad you have to wait for someone to be screwed over, and willing to spend years of their life fighting back, before the law might be overturned.
why do you think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do you think Bush is poking his fingers into the eyes of the Arab world? Why do you think we keep getting upgraded to "orange alerts"?
Creating fear and starting wars gives politicians power.
what's in a name? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who would dare oppose something called the Patriot Act? That's great fodder for political campaigns ("John Congressman says he loves America, but he voted to raise taxes and even supported terrorists by voted against the Patriot Act").
A vote against the "Patriot Act" is a vote for Osama!
Re:no difference (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it is the majority of the American people that want "Big, caretaker government". For some reason the majority of the general American populace seems to feel that the government should and worst yet, could provide the omnipotent and benevolent protection of a diety.
This is why acts such as the Patriot Act are so easily and quickly passed by such a majority. The government obviously, cannot really provide such a level of protection but, they are still all too happy to accept the power supposedly necessary to provide it. The fact that the majority of the people actually believe that any government could provide such a level of protection speaks volumes about the intelligence of the man on the street.
Re:This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't understand how anyone could support this. (Score:5, Insightful)
People need to wake up and understand that there are ALWAYS people who want to disenfranchise the rest of us. The wolf is ALWAYS at the door. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
There are three things that people can do.
1) Vote
2) Join the ACLU
3) Joine the NRA
The reason for the first is obvious. The reasons for the second and third are that the ACLU is a strong champion of individual rights, even if they are part of the loony left. The NRA is of course a strong champion of individual rights as well, even if they are part of the loony right. I'm a member of both and give generously to them.
Laws like this can only come to pass when our representatives in congress are not representing us. The only way that situation can arise is if the voters in general have not been holding them accountable. Any legislator who would put forward legislation intended to deny us our rights is a traitor because they have broken their vow to defend and protect the constitution. Should we re-elect such a person? I'd rather elect a pig straight from someone's barn to office than see someone like that remain in power. The american political landscape is dominated by party politics and this is a big part of the problem. People will vote for someone because of their party, or will vote for a party because that is what they've always done, or because they've been suckered by the propaganda that both major parties just love to spew out. It is sad to see so many people led around by the nose and irritating to have to hear them regurgitate the propaganda that they've swallowed down with relish. Look past the propaganda and bullshit. Be willing to vote for a different party. Become informed about issues that matter and the party's agenda on these issues. If people would do this then a lot of this kind of bullshit would cease to exist.
Lee
America is the new Nazi Germany!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The USA is passing laws for unlimited gov't control and secrect agencies. People disappear for no good reason or explaination and get deported (least they aren't gassing them on the way out, they wait till they get them to their home country and then just bomb the shit of it.. All's fair in love and war.) And all this time anyone who doesn't think this is a good idea is called unpatriotic and an america hater. I do beleive this all happened before, started with a guy named Hitler.
You know, say what you want about Clinton, but in the 8 years he was in office, there wasn't one major war.. Vote in two Bush's and you get a war for oil everytime.. oh but wait I guess the second Bush wasn't really voted in
Re:Just what... (Score:2, Insightful)
Hash: SHA1
Because I am paranoid.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0
iQA/AwUBPkVNY1or0GSY5Ro/EQL3gQCgvjlcARWqEjOJkz2
dnQfZn8CVrvcIClgKrVNX/Vo
=0uHK
Let me take a moment and ask (Score:3, Insightful)
I would love to know what members of Congress wrote what part of the bill. Of course, the guy who admitted sticking a 'Can't sue this drug company for causing birth defects' in the completely UNrelated, mis-named Patriot Act has got off scott-free - no media attetion, no questions about conflict of interest.
Where are the angry voters? I read (online, ironically) that it is thought that people like the ones who post to the YRO stories spend all of their outrage posting to discussion boards and clicking polls.
I am guilty of that as anyone else, "Ahh. George Bush IS coke snorting dumbass who has more command of swallowing pretzels than the english language."
I feel better, and job well done. Well I'm preaching to the choir. We need reforms in the US and quick - sadly, it seems the most outspoken Geeks are the most insular ones and don't vote, organize, or spread the word.
We need someone charismatic who can get the message across to regular Joe.
I'd do it, but I'm watching last night's Farscape on my Linux PVR while posting to the Our Government Sucks, But I'm Comfortable With Complaining About It, So Back To Buffy And Let Someone Else Handle It board. /Irony
Re:Just what... (Score:5, Insightful)
Take, for example, the new federal law that all foreign nationals from certian countries be required to register with the government: several [alternet.org] news [thislife.org] artivles [boston.com] about how this process has revealed that many people have been detained. Not a problem... except they're being detained without the right to a lawyer; habeus corpus has been suspended for them (they do not know what evidence and what crimes they are being charged with -- something out of Kafka's "The Trial", I believe); and currently reporters can't find out who's being held, why they're being held, or even how many are being held.
This extension of the PATRIOT Act makes these things legal. Which means they could charge you, and not only could we not know why, or if, you are on trial -- you wouldn't even be able to get a lawyer.
Next, let me admit, you're right, I haven't had any civil liberties restricted directly that I know of. Let me stress that last point: you talk of wiretapping. I wouldn't know if someone was tapping my lines, because with the PATRIOT Act, if I was labeled a terrorist, it wouldn't be private or public knowledge; it would be completely unknown, as the request would go to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Again, I reference this Real Audio file from This American Life, it gives the details. This court meets in secret; it's documents are not published and not for review. So not only would you not know if you were being wiretapped; no one would.
Finally, if I had been hauled off to jail out of the blue, I probably wouldn't have access to a computer to check on Slashdot, and be able to read and/or post to your question; jails of this sort tend not to let people have access to computers.
I'm not worried that they're coming for me today; I'm worried that if, in the future, I expouse beliefs that are opposed to what the government believes, I will become labeled a "terrorist", and will have my rights unilaterally suspended. What happens to my neighbor this week can happen to me next week -- so I want what's fair for *everyone*.
Re:This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:2, Insightful)
(Sadly, I must post anonymously.)
I have been thinking the same thing for years. Look at the war in Iraq. It's so illogical and the Bush administration knows it's going to unleash mayhem. Right-wingers eagerly encourage and incite the kind of global instability. I've seen these people so obsessed with armagedon that's it's truly frightening to realize these religious dolts are running the gov't and have access to nuclear weapons.
I agree with you 100% and have been warning people for years. These people are religious fanatics. They believe absolutely in everything written in the Bible... and if they have the power to make it happen, they're going to.
Encryption section of the act (Score:5, Insightful)
In recent years, terrorists and other criminals have begun to use encryption technology to conceal their communications when planning and conducting criminal activity. Title 18 of the United States Code currently contains no provision on the use of encrypted communications to plan or facilitate crimes. This proposal would amend federal law to provide that any person who, during the commission of or the attempt to commit a federal felony, knowingly and willfully uses encryption technology to conceal any incriminating communication or information relating to that felony, be imprisoned for an additional period of not fewer than 5 years. These additional penalties are warranted to deter the use of encryption technology to conceal criminal activity. In addition, it does not address the issue of whether software companies and internet service providers should give law enforcement access to "keys" for the purposes of decoding intercepted communications.
"Attempt" to download a copyrighted work from Kazaa and email someone about it using PGP = 5+ years in federal prison.
Ironic that it is section "404".
Re:Vote Next Year Everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So is this the real thing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Then hopefully someone in Congress will be smart enough and have the guts to say bullshit. Not a single thing can stop a person who is dead set (literally) to destroy something. If you pass laws requiring everyone to be strip searched upon leaving their house, and to wander around nude outdoors, someone will swallow C4 and a detonator.
Which of these rules will stop the terrorists? Stripping everyone of their citizenship on suspicion? Giving FBI agents the right to spy on my personal email, without telling me, until the guy gets fed up with his low pay and decides to use a loveletter to my girlfriend to try and blackmail me? Or shall the CIA monitor everything my company does, so that they can get their stock orders in early when we get a 50 million order from overseas?
I don't have any problems with PATRIOT II (Score:5, Insightful)
The only problem, of course, is who defines "terrorism"?
Think about that for a while.
How many people had to die... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Too bad I never visited the States (Score:3, Insightful)
I did. I am scared of the nut cases who wrote this stuff.
Re:I can only hope (Score:2, Insightful)
this week's sign of the apocalypse (Score:4, Insightful)
what a sad world we live in, when someone like me, someone who is generally anti-political, someone who despises the self-serving two choice system we have today, can say right now that he'll vote for whoever the crappy Democrat candidate will be in the next election. George Bush is that repugnant.
The fools who voted for Dubya can consider themselves responsible for this steady erosion of our rights, and the steady consolidation of power by Big Brother. But hey, at least the economy is humming right along! Oh, wait.....
Re:no difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Not really. Sure, Bush blabs on and on about tax cuts, but then jacks up government spending. Here's a big clue - your taxes are, in the long run what govenment spends. Nothing more, nothing less. It can't be anything else. Tax cuts don't do anything to reduce what you are are going to have to pay if there is no control on government spending, for the simple fact that the effect of deficits is a hidden tax that takes effect on the value of the dollar.
The only REAL way to control taxes is to control spending. That is something that Clinton did far better than Bush ever dreamed of.
Re:Patriot? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:most people dont want privacy (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
I serve as the Senior Senator from California, representing 35 million people. That is a formidable task. People have weighed in by the tens of thousands. If I were just to cast a representative vote based on those who have voiced their opinions with my office - and with no other factors - I would have to vote against this resolution.
And yet she didn't. This is not surprising to me anymore. The government has become stacked with people who have become completely removed from the people they supposedly represent. They don't seem to see much of any reason to listen to the masses, to listen to the people who voted for them in the first place.
Unfortunately, when you look at the political landscape post-9/11, the stakes have gotten that much higher in the decisions these people make, in wilful ignorance of popular opinion. They seem much less interested in what their constituents think than in what their buddies in Washington will think of their dissent. Couple this lapdog behavior with an Administration that has shown nothing short of contempt for the will of anyone that doesn't agree with them, and you have the continuing murder of the Constitution that we see today.
Personally, I've gotten to the point where I don't believe that representative government works in the current climate anymore, because no constituency is accurately being represented. Where does that leave us? I don't know for certain, but all roads look pretty dark from here on out.
Re:This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:5, Insightful)
Section 501, "Expatriation of Terrorists": This provision, the drafters say, would establish that an American citizen could be expatriated "if, with the intent to relinquish his nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United Stated has designated as a 'terrorist organization'." But whereas a citizen formerly had to state his intent to relinquish his citizenship, the new law affirms that his intent can be "inferred from conduct." Thus, engaging in the lawful activities of a group designated as a "terrorist organization" by the Attorney General could be presumptive grounds for expatriation.
In related news (Score:5, Insightful)
We the Government...
Re:hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, I don't mean to defend the proposed changes, but this sort of thing is common. Certainly, here in the UK, I'm allowed to carry tools (hammer, crowbar, etc) with me - no police officer is going to stop me for it. However, if I use those tools to steal a car, or break into a building, I'll also be charged with going equipped to do so.
Same thing here, I imagine - use PGP, fine. Use PGP whilst commiting a crime, get done for the crime and for using PGP whilst commiting it.
Yes, I agree that it makes people who use PGP look suspicious even when doing no wrong - but I can't imagine that the courts would put up with too many search warrants being issued for searches based solely or mainly on use of encryprion that failed to turn up any evidence of wrong doing. Being able to apply for a search warrant and actually being awarded one are two different things.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Relevant Quote (Score:5, Insightful)
It's remarkable how John Ashcroft is the karmic successor to Joseph McCarthy; we're in a modern-day Red Scare, but with a very sympathetic administration and a apathetic public. The potential for (further) permanent damage to Americans' civil liberties is very real and very frightening.
Am I exaggerating? Well, can you tell them apart [morons.org]?
FWIW, link to ACLU coverage [aclu.org] and a Google News search [google.com].
Minority Report...? (Score:5, Insightful)
Its coming. When Federal Agents come knocking on your door because an electronic filter decides that your purchase of certain books, your web browsing propensities, and some people you met in passing at the coffee shop (caught on video) - adds up to something dangerous (to the state), and the agents don't need a search warrant to invade your privacy and tear apart your home in search of something that isn't there.
The NSA was profiling peace activists and human rights activists during the 60s and 70s - intercepting and analyzing their communications during the 1960s. During that time this was abused, and it was stopped for a reason. Now we are starting to do this again - civil rights will suffer. Witch hunts the likes of the communist scare of the 50s will happen in secret as people mysteriously disappear without habeus corpus rights. The government has been removing large amounts of information that was public knowledge a year ago. What else are they doing under the ospices of secret executive orders? Why do we have to give up our rights to protect this country? If something smells bad, it generally means it is bad; this smells bad.
We will probably wake up as a people when things get too unbearable. Hopefully it won't be too late (I have faith in the sense of democratic principles and right and reasonable government by the majority of people when push comes to shove). Just hope you are not one of the Minorities...
Re:I don't have any problems with PATRIOT II (Score:3, Insightful)
One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
Fear the New American Government (Score:5, Insightful)
- Thomas Paine
How can anybody support this (Score:4, Insightful)
People need to wake up and understand that there are ALWAYS people who want to disenfranchise the rest of us. The wolf is ALWAYS at the door. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
There are three things that people can do.
1) Vote
2) Join the ACLU
3) Joine the NRA
The reason for the first is obvious. The reasons for the second and third are that the ACLU is a strong champion of individual rights, even if they are part of the loony left. The NRA is of course a strong champion of individual rights as well, even if they are part of the loony right. I'm a member of both and give generously to them.
Laws like this can only come to pass when our representatives in congress are not representing us. The only way that situation can arise is if the voters in general have not been holding them accountable. Any legislator who would put forward legislation intended to deny us our rights is a traitor because they have broken their vow to defend and protect the constitution. Should we re-elect such a person? I'd rather elect a pig straight from someone's barn to office than see someone like that remain in power. The american political landscape is dominated by party politics and this is a big part of the problem. People will vote for someone because of their party, or will vote for a party because that is what they've always done, or because they've been suckered by the propaganda that both major parties just love to spew out. It is sad to see so many people led around by the nose and irritating to have to hear them regurgitate the propaganda that they've swallowed down with relish. Look past the propaganda and bullshit. Be willing to vote for a different party. Become informed about issues that matter and the party's agenda on these issues. If people would do this then a lot of this kind of bullshit would cease to exist.
Re:most people dont want privacy (Score:2, Insightful)
I lead a fairly ordinary life and I don't do anything particularly 'colorful' or unusual, but I still want privacy because, frankly, the level of control and oversight they're seeking falls into the realm of 'none of your fucking business.'
I'm not hiding anything, I just find it disturbing that they want to routinely monitor me as if I was the leader of a terrorist organization. One concern of mine is that if they ever managed to put up the surveillance measures that they wanted, they could then start wheedling away at the legal system and begin outlawing some mundane activities, then find a reason to arrest or detain me.
I don't want to have to live in a country where I have to be afraid of what I do or say for fear that I might piss off the wrong person and disappear.
I do realize that that's pretty bleak and paranoiac, but when I read newspaper articles about hundreds of innocent people ("terrorists") being jailed for months without any charges, I start getting nervous. Also read an article somewhere or another about some guy making a wisecrack about a 'burning bush' and then being jailed for three years. That's not a country I want to live in.
Sad. (Score:4, Insightful)
Can you say Yes Master like a good totalitarian state citizen?
Re:How can anybody support this (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not terribly familiar with the NRA, so I'll pass on that.
But the ACLU, definately. I finally got off my ass and did it. I just became a `card carrying member of the ACLU.' (I wonder if I'll be sent a real card :)
You can join too [virtualsprockets.com]. You don't have to give them a lot of money -- just having them list you as a member increases their bargaining power.Re:this week's sign of the apocalypse (Score:3, Insightful)
20 People get mad at democrats so they vote republican.
30 People get mad at third parties because they didn't win, and therefore the republicans and democrats they're mad at win.
40 People get mad because they are voting for people they're mad at, rather than people they'd be happy with.
50 People get mad because the system doesn't provide them with any good choices and the winner-takes-all-system bites.
60 People get mad at politics in general, say "screw it" and go on with their ever-worsening daily lives.
70 People get mad about abortion or taxes or racial issues or the personality of the people in office, or are just having a bad day.
80 People get mad enough that the politicians notice them and promise to solve their problems.
90 Politicians pander to people's special interests and hand out chocolates and puppies.
100 People like politicians again.
110 People get mad eventually because the politicians utterly fail to do anything constructive.
120 GOTO 10
130 People get mad enough that the system sees great, sweeping political reform for the benefit of all.
Yeah, but.... (Score:1, Insightful)
BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON!!!!!!
Seriously, this is a prime example of what Bush, and especially the MEDIA are doing. Has Bush taken responsibility for ANYTHING? It's been two years and they are still shrieking BILL CLINTON at the top of their lungs anytime something goes wrong. The damned media is STILL obsessing about Bill's wang while Rome burns.
Re:The war in Iraq is most logical (Score:3, Insightful)
> to "secure" the oil derricks this time. And once
> he gets his hands on them, the Jews will have them
> forever.
This is not a racial or religious issue. It is a national and class issue.
The idea that Jews are all bad is nonsense. It is just the Israeli government (like Bush, Blair, Hussein, Bin Laden, the Palestinian suicide bombers and others who use violence inappropriately) who are at fault.
Re:This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I can only hope (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How can anybody support this (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I can only hope (Score:0, Insightful)
This is plain silly. Everything I've read about Bush and Ashcroft indicates they really are trying to fight terrorism. It should be clear that patriot I and now II are responses to restrictions on domestic intelligence-gathering that really did go too far.
I've seen the highlight article, now slashdotted, but haven't seen the original text. Before you go out and move to North Korea, read the dam' thing and write your congress-lifeform.
There are certainly sections of the law I'd strike.
201, 202
301-306
312
405
501
The moral of the story: the administration is not being evil for the sake of being evil. They're trying to fight terrorist infiltrations. They're going a bit too far
As an excercise
Re:no difference (Score:1, Insightful)
Somebody doesn't know what inflation is...
*When asked why we should go to war with Iraq, he answers "why not?" He also doesn't want to get drafted, but is more than willing to let others die fighting a war if Bush says so. I can't tell if this guy is truely a narrow-minded, pigheaded moron, or just likes pissing off people. Either way, he's wasting oxygen.
Re:Premature Jocularity (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that our government would even consider such laws is monumentally scary. Why do Republicans believe that govenment oversight is such a bad thing? Did you notice that the only requirement was a group being designated a terrorist organization by the Attoreny General You can't be serious! One man could simply wipe out a group of people's citizenship - where are the checks and balances?
What kills me is how they sell this stuff. "Oh - so you think someone raisin gmoney for Al Queda shouldn't have their citizenship stripped?", etc, etc, etc. No - they shouldn't - try them, imprison them, but you can't honestly think stripping someones citizenship so easily is a good thing.
It is amazing how a group that believes Muslims shoudl rule the world knocked down the WTC and thus allowed Republicans to lay the ground work to rule the US for geenrations with tatics the communists would have used. How ironic and sad that my country is being taken over by conservative and religious zealots and nobody seems to care because it might, just might, allow them to prevent a terrorist attack (yeah right)
Bush's New Math! (Score:4, Insightful)
2003 = 1984
"In order to save our freedom we had to destroy it"
Re:no difference (Score:1, Insightful)
You've pointed out two situations where US involvement was hardly in our direct interest. In one, the President made no bones about this, and his decision was basically sound. Even if it hadn't worked, it wouldn't have destabilized all of Europe and risked thousands of US deaths.
In the other, the President tries to invent some hokey explanation for why a much more dangerous war is in the US interest. And we all know it's nonsense, but we don't seem to care.
Declaration of Independence VS Constitution (Score:2, Insightful)
"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance."
"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power."
"For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury"
It's all there in the D.O.I ladies and gents, which I consider to be a more important peice of America than the constitution. Maybe we should just change the date on it and send it right to Washington.
Re:How can anybody support this (Score:3, Insightful)
My point is that I feel the ACLU is too left-wing and takes cases based on political positioning rather than whether or not any rights are actually being trampled.
2. if you aren't willing to defend the civil liberties of those who you disagree with (or disagree with you) then you're probably not committed to the concept in the first place.
Forgive me for thinking the ACLU's efforts could be better spent on more important matters than chasing after Christmas references or protecting the pro-molestation literature of NAMBLA. There are limits to everything.
3. state sponsorship of christmas is an explicit support for one religion by the u.s. government. "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and so on. if you are an american citizen you should read jefferson's treatise on this issue (the letter to the danbury baptists [loc.gov]) to get the full grok on the seperation of church and state.
I'm fully aware of the issue. When the ACLU goes after elementary schools legally threatening them if they don't chance their little calendars to mention "Winter Break" instead of "Christmas Break," I wonder what the ACLU's priorities really are. Not only is it ridiculous to start with, but everybody knows the break is for Christmas anyway. Whose rights were being stomped because they got school days off for Christmas break? Surely there are much more important issues the ACLU needs to be spending its money and effort on than something so silly that children don't even regard it as a problem--only their uptight ACLU parents do. I dislike the overdone victimization mindset organizations like the ACLU endorse. Just my opinion.
Bitching is Good but aim it (Score:2, Insightful)
People are staying home.
Police are wearing military style uniforms (and acting like the military).
The National Guard is being deployed on a regular basis.
The public is mostly pacified with mindless teebee news and news shows.
And now the US Constitution is being used as toliet paper by the Congress.
Today Iran compared the USA to the old USSR.
I for one do not take this sitting down and hollar loudly; First to the local news opinion section. Then if bad enough I just write to the editors and let them have an ear full. Then I write Congress but a letter in the local media has much more effect than a letter to the person you didn't vote for last election.
Do something, anything would be good.
Re:I can only hope (Score:2, Insightful)
What's this? Why, look, it's a soapbox!
What exactly were you expecting? She is a United States Senator. This means she can do whatever she damn well pleases for six years. Anything. Until those six years are up, she can only really be held accountable by (get this) other senators. Heck, 9 times out of 10 she can't even be arrested!
But what about the end of those six years? Most of us can't even remember what happened in the past five minutes, let alone six years. And we're the ones that actually try to pay attention to this stuff, unlike the disturbing 40% of US voters that vote along strict major party (ie. Dem/Rep) lines.
"The government has become stacked with people who have become completely removed from the people they supposedly represent."
You assume they're supposed to.
Take a look at campaign finance reform (we don't trust them to write their own paychecks, but this is OK?). They limit how much the average person can donate to candidates directly. But, conveniently enough, the limits on donations to (and from) either of the two major parties or to a special-interest lobbyist are quite a bit higher. And these groups, in turn, spend (some of) the money on behalf of these candidates.
They don't represent you. They represent their party and their pet PACs. The fact that they essentially require you to go through these groups to reach them should demonstrate that. Heck, your vote is just a vote, but paying for a mud-slinging TV spot can be worth thousands (votes and dollars).
Alright, so I'm a political crackpot that believes in eliminating campaign donation limits and the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment. But still...
A few facts learned last night watching Moyers (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft were going to lob this firecracker in a few weeks, as the attack against the Iraqis goes into full swing. Get it? Standard Operating Procedure. Get the thing into law when no one is looking -- and Bush gets to decide when the distraction occurs.
3. Spread the word. Yell it from the highest chatrooms. Only publicity can kill this thing.
Re:no difference (Score:2, Insightful)
I watch these crazy religious nuts on the tv, out of morbid curiosity and they frighten me more than the islamists, truth be told. This is the reason I'd vote for a philandering lying stupid democrat over any republican that ran for office. I don't necessarily know who 'controls' the democrat, but I know who the republican pays homage to.
All Downhill (Score:3, Insightful)
2. A new government is started. At that point things are as good as they're gonna get in that country (freedom wise).
3. From that point on, the government gets more and more corrupt until
4.Go to 1.
Re:This is not your brain on drugs. This is real. (Score:3, Insightful)
Congress has an unfortunate history of passing bad legislation during times of National Crisis. Japanese internment, Gulf of Tonkin, etc...
Remember, this bill was passed just over a month after 9/11. This country was collectively in a deep state of shock. As time passes, more citizens are waking up to what has been done in the name of National Security. Much of what the President and Congress has done, in my opinion, is little more than window dressing. Given time, public sentiment will turn against these intrustions.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin