Yolo congressmen split on continue Pa...

Yolo congressmen split on continue Patriot Act which was rejected by House

There are 5 comments on the Daily Democrat story from Feb 9, 2011, titled Yolo congressmen split on continue Patriot Act which was rejected by House. In it, Daily Democrat reports that:

The House late Tuesday failed to extend the life of three surveillance tools that are key to the nation's post-Sept. 11 anti-terror law, a slipup for the new Republican leadership that miscalculated the level of opposition.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily Democrat.

ugh

Alta, CA

#1 Feb 9, 2011
naturally Herger would be against freedom...
bluffian

Schuylkill Haven, PA

#2 Feb 9, 2011
Which is as simplistic as saying, "Thompson would be against security."
bluffian

Schuylkill Haven, PA

#3 Feb 9, 2011
The merits of the specific provisions, of course are arguable. As for the first, since it specifies "court-approved" wire-taps, that's not too different from other court-sanctioned surveillance. The "library records provision" is maybe a bit more bothersome to me, but the logic behind it is clear. And as for the "lone-wolf" piece, many would say that while the government has a duty to respect and protect the privacy of citizens, non-citizens are a different matter (not to say that they have no rights, but they don't have all the rights of citizens).

There are certainly arguments to be made against all of the above, but to throw out such an "ad hominem" statement says more about the speaker than the target. But, if you would like to follow that line of thought, be honest about where it goes: the majority of congressmen and the majority of voters must be "against freedom." Is that really what you're proposing?
yup

Alta, CA

#4 Feb 9, 2011
Republicans are against freedom. It's simple. They promote corporate rule, restrict women from getting reproductive help, and promote the wealthy over everyone else.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#5 Feb 9, 2011
yup wrote:
Republicans are against freedom. It's simple. They promote corporate rule, restrict women from getting reproductive help, and promote the wealthy over everyone else.
We can not be truly free without security and without the benefit of corporations you would whine like a child for the things you would no longer have. Being against killing baby humans, most often for the convenience of the mother is not restricting reproductive help. Being wealthy is not a crime comrad, even if your friend Karl Marx would like it to be so.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Patriot Act Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Cheney touts economy, Patriot Act during Missou... (Jan '06) Dec '17 teat 7
News Ron Paul: The only Patriot Act reform is total ... (May '15) Jun '17 Ron Paul Liberty 11
News Qatar, in regional crisis, hires former US atto... (Jun '17) Jun '17 Retribution 4
News This is why the first 100 days is a 'ridiculous... (Apr '17) Apr '17 Trump your President 52
News Christie Says He's Ready to Move Past Bridge Sc... (May '15) Mar '17 Fire 4
News House passes NSA reform bill (May '15) Mar '17 Dead Mothers Club 12
News Business Owners Who Employ Illegal Aliens Shoul... (Mar '17) Mar '17 13th Amendment 20
More from around the web