Go back
The Patriot Act Revisited

The Patriot Act Revisited

Debates

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

I supported it at first because it seemed like a good idea. I have since had the opportunity to read it (as best a non legally trained mind can do) and see the results of it. I am now opposed to it.

Because it has not helped in apprehending a single terrorist to date. It has been used three times by various federal agencies. Twice by the EPA and once by Commerce.

These three usages have resulted in a man in wisconsin (?) being held and guilty of moving dirt on his own property from one location to another. And in a family business being confiscated by the EPA because they dared hire a lawyer. And to put a charity out of business because they had donated a thousand dollars to Bush without filing the proper papers.

Wow! Impressive. I'm so proud of my government. Gag...

I thought it was relatively harmless because the automatic triggers to recind the law were to go off Jan 1 this year. Guess what? They just passed a revision of the law that removes the automatic expiration. Got to love it.

So SVW was wrong for the ten millionth time. Bbarr was right. Again.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by StarValleyWy
I supported it at first because it seemed like a good idea. I have since had the opportunity to read it (as best a non legally trained mind can do) and see the results of it. I am now opposed to it.

Because it has not helped in apprehending a single terrorist to date. It has been used three times by various federal agencies. Twice by the EPA and once ...[text shortened]... ration. Got to love it.

So SVW was wrong for the ten millionth time. Bbarr was right. Again.
80% of the time that law enforment officials have used the provisions of the USA Patriot Act it has been used in non-terror related crimes. It is a load of crap. The Patriot Act has done more to deteriate your rights than any law ever passed in US history.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by CliffLandin
80% of the time that law enforment officials have used the provisions of the USA Patriot Act it has been used in non-terror related crimes. It is a load of crap. The Patriot Act has done more to deteriate your rights than any law ever passed in US history.
You are right. And I have no real excuse. I was aware of the hard struggle to recind the 1790's "Sedition Act".

Oh well. At least it gives us a good issue to whack our party with in two years. We'll see. Believe it or not, conservatives love it when there is something to work toward. The elimination of the PA will now become a cause. We "reacted" instead of "acted".

Just like the damned dumb stupid "Homeland Security" act just passed.

Question: What do you do when you have a problem with too much mindless bureaucracy preventing your intelligence services from working? Answer: Well, obviously you double the size and scope of the number of Chimps by doubling the size of the brueaucracy.

Nuff' to make a sad farmer want to go plow a field.

Vote Up
Vote Down

So. How come I am the only one on RHP to ever apologize and repent? My point of view? You all to mighty and proud? Or just too damned smart to ever make an error?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by StarValleyWy
So. How come I am the only one on RHP to ever apologize and repent? My point of view? You all to mighty and proud? Or just too damned smart to ever make an error?
Two reasons:

1) You frequently present views which are untennable and
when called on it, you just back down. In this sense people
view you as a troublemaker.

2) The fact that you present untennable views and
frequently back down from them leads people to believe
that you aren't passionate about them. In this sense
people don't take you seriously.

I find that about one in ten of your posts are actually
thought provoking, personally. The rest are just spam.

But that one in ten is usually a doosie, a really good
thought.

You know what they say about chimps and typewriters...

😉

Nemesio

Vote Up
Vote Down

so. Just a thought.

If we make enough mistakes... can we have a mulligan? If so... who grants it? Our playmates? If so?

Who qualifies? Must it be serious? Please, god, no. Let it be in humorous discordance of love. Like many know that anymore.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by nemesio
Two reasons:

1) You frequently present views which are untennable and
when called on it, you just back down. In this sense people
view you as a troublemaker.

2) The fact that you present untennable views and
frequently back down ...[text shortened]... now what they say about chimps and typewriters...

😉

Nemesio
Trouble maker is good. Is there a bad point to me then?

If people are incapable, should I back up? Apologize for their inability?

Ok.

Untennable implies absolute truth. I have NEVER seen that at RHP.

All my positions are "tennable".

Or at least I sopport them. Do you? Support all your positions?