posted on December 16, 2005 10:04:02 AM new
Woo Hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!! Doing the happy dance!!!
WASHINGTON - The Senate on Friday rejected attempts to reauthorize several provisions of the USA Patriot Act as infringing too much on Americans' privacy and liberty, dealing a huge defeat to the Bush administration and Republican leaders.
In a crucial vote early Friday, the bill's Senate supporters were not able to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a threatened filibuster by Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and their allies. The final vote was 52-47.
President Bush, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Republicans congressional leaders had lobbied fiercely to make most of the expiring Patriot Act provisions permanent, and add new safeguards and expiration dates to the two most controversial parts: roving wiretaps and secret warrants for books, records and other items from businesses, hospitals and organizations such as libraries.
Feingold, Craig and other critics said that wasn't enough, and have called for the law to be extended in its present form so they can continue to try and add more civil liberties safeguards. But Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker
Dennis Hastert have said they won't accept a short-term extension of the law.
If a compromise is not reached, the 16 Patriot Act provisions expire on Dec. 31.
Frist changed his vote at the last moment after seeing the critics would win. He decided to vote with the prevailing side so he could call for a new vote at any time. He immediately objected to an offer of a short term extension from Democrats, saying the House won't approve it and the president won't sign it.
"We have more to fear from terrorism than we do from this Patriot Act," Frist warned.
If the Patriot Act provisions expire, Republicans say they will place the blame on Democrats in next year's midterm elections. "In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without these vital tools for a single moment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "The time for Democrats to stop standing in the way has come."
But the Patriot Act's critics got a boost from a New York Times report saying Bush authorized the National Security Agency to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people inside the United States. Previously, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders for such investigations.
"I don't want to hear again from the attorney general or anyone on this floor that this government has shown it can be trusted to use the power we give it with restraint and care," said Feingold, the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act in 2001.
"It is time to have some checks and balances in this country," shouted Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. "We are more American for doing that."
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
posted on December 16, 2005 10:16:34 AM new
WooHoo - for our enemies and those who wish to be invisible while working to destroy our Nation.
Yep...figures a liberal/socialist would feel that way.
He immediately objected to an offer of a short term extension from Democrats, saying the House won't approve it and the president won't sign it.
And the House already approved the bill this week.
"We have more to fear from terrorism than we do from this Patriot Act," Frist warned.
If the Patriot Act provisions expire, Republicans say they will place the blame on Democrats in next year's midterm elections. "In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without these vital tools for a single moment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "The time for Democrats to stop standing in the way has come."
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on December 16, 2005 10:38:37 AM new
So I guess those republicans that voted against it are are just socialists in sheeps clothing?
It's no big deal Linda - all they are asking for is a little oversight. Is there some reason that you don't believe there should be any oversight or justification for delving into the personal lives and civil rights of American citizens that have been accused of no crime?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on December 16, 2005 10:41:34 AM new
Good, too restrictive.
Sort of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Should of accepted a short term extension. Definitely should not be permanent in its present form.
Ron
"Better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not."
posted on December 16, 2005 12:16:49 PM new
More than the library issue, the hospital issue bothered me the most. How many people would neglect to seek medical care if they had to fear their hospital or medical records could be seized without even a court order? What of doctor/patient privilege? Then there's the matter of HIPPAA regulations, which were enacted by Congress is 1996. Those provisions also address the security and privacy of health data. I also e-mail friends who live overseas. I shouldn't have to worry that my e-mail is being intercepted and read.
Cheryl
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
posted on December 16, 2005 12:30:01 PM new
Human Rights and Civil Liberties are comforting myths, but the truth is that there has never been a time in the history of this nation that your personal rights exceeded the governments willingness to delve into your personal matters if National Security was believed to be at risk.
And it has nothing to do with partisan politics.
DEM- Harry Truman was the president that gave power to the NSA and took us into the Korean war to keep communism at bay.
"the National Security Agency was originated in response to a memorandum sent by President Harry Truman on October 24, 1952 to Secretary of State Dean Acheson and Defense Secretary Robert Lovatt. This memo placed the NSA under the authority of the Secretary of Defense, and charged it with monitoring and decoding any signal transmission relevant to the security of the United States. In layman's terms, the NSA eavesdropped on the world through all kinds of sources, overtly and covertly."
posted on December 16, 2005 01:45:48 PM new
And there has been no doccumented instance where the Partiot Act has abused or violated Americans civil rights. Unlike heir klinton's abuse of the IRS and Department of Justice in the Henry Cisneros scandal.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on December 16, 2005 03:22:08 PM new
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in order for the above to have ocurred, there must've been a few Republicans who voted for it too...
Republican Liberal/Socialists? Or independent Republicans who've decided not to tow the line anymore on a sinking ship? Good for them, and thanks to them.
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
posted on December 16, 2005 03:39:58 PM new
The Republicans voted against it to make it expire so they could then blame the Democrats for the next "terrorist" attack .
posted on December 17, 2005 07:54:15 AM newfenix - chery was the liberal/socialists I was referring to.
Fenix don't you know by now that a Republican can do no wrong even when they vote against Bush and his agenda. Who says there can not be an activist Republican
Cheryl, I am glad to see some Republicans are not buying into the Bush led agenda anymore. They are starting to wake up and see what is in the best interests of this country and protecting the civil rights that were granted in the constitution.
By inacting laws that go against what this country was founded upon, the Republicans are letting the terrorists win.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on December 17, 2005 08:31:06 AM new
Excellent post/point, Lt.Ray. Always good to inform them of things they aren't aware of....always.
-----------------------
::By inacting laws that go against what this country was founded upon, ::
This country wasn't founded on NOT being able to weed out those who wished to destroy us. Nor were any laws/articles in our Constitution made so that we couldn't update whatever needed to be in order to do just that. The President was even given 'special powers' to do so....just like he has done and the recent news is whining about. Using those 'special powers' to protect our Nation.
----------
Yes, but they can (and should according to some) inact laws for other things this country "wasnt founded on" with no problem.
Once again...the truth is spoken. It only matters if these issues are the changes they want to see made....protecting our country is isn't one of them to some.
posted on December 17, 2005 08:42:53 AM new
4th amendment to OUR constitution:
"""The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."""
THIS HAS BEEN VIOLATED ....a direct attack on OUR democracy by the bush administration.
It's the truth, you can't get around it, it happened.
posted on December 17, 2005 08:47:46 AM new
unreasonable......this searches have NOT been 'unreasonable'. They've been to protect the people of this country.
posted on December 17, 2005 08:56:24 AM new
Linda in your obsession with me and my posts let's just say that "this searches "
ARE, in some cases, MOST unreasonable.
People were investigated because they participated in peaceful anti-war demonstrations. Since when does disagreeing with your government constitute a threat.....only to a fascist sheep like you.
This administration broke the law again with it's usual disdain for ethics, laws ,and rights of individuals.
Linda, you better not argue or I'll think you're obssessed with me
posted on December 17, 2005 09:02:02 AM newwere investigated becasue they participated in peaceful anti-war demonstrations.
Sure were, and should have been. The organizers of those anti-war protesters are communists and marxist supporters. VERY anti-American groups. Been documented over and over for years and years. I'm glad my government keeps them under survelliance....as they do under dem administrations too.
Since when does disagreeing with your government constitute a threat.....only to a fascist sheep like you.
No problem with disagreeing with....problem comes in when they're working towards our downfall/destruction....and they only way we're going to know that is to do just what others countries to do....monitor them.
This administration broke the law again with it's usual disdain for ethics, laws ,and rights of individuals.
Once again....nothing but unproved accusations/allegiations from you. And who really believes anything you say? Few, I'd bet.
posted on December 17, 2005 09:10:25 AM new
Oh linda, you are soooo obssessed with me!!!
So, like a communist, you believe no one should be allowed to disagree with their government....verry interesting.
""The organizers of those anti-war protesters are communists and marxist supporters. VERY anti-American groups.""
Where do you PROVE these are communists...you can't...and even if they were YOU advocate communist doctrine all the time!
You believe dissent is anti-American.....intelligent people KNOW that dissent is a right and a responsibility in a democracy.
"" ""This administration broke the law again with it's usual disdain for ethics, laws ,and rights of individuals.""
Once again....nothing but unproved accusations/allegiations from you. And who really believes anything you say? Few, I'd bet. """"
Once again, if you expand your news import beyond Ann Coulter and Fauxnews, you'd hear how the law WAS broken and innocent people targeted but you would rather remain in ignorance.
posted on December 17, 2005 10:07:11 AM new
HeeHee!
""WashingtoneBayer
posted on December 17, 2005 09:32:03 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again....nothing but unproved accusations/allegiations from you.
How about following your own adice. You are twice as worse as Linda has ever been.
You and peepa. """
Your first sentence, ron, is from linda
But maybe linda should follow her own "adice".
And: as for being "twice as worse" as linda has ever been.....prove it
posted on December 17, 2005 11:09:47 AM new
Is the roll of the Bush machine ever slowed by laws?
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
....excerpt
Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.
Setting aside all the particulars noted below about the NSA wiretapping story, the most dangerous aspect of this case is the legal theory on which the president was reportedly acting.
According to the original Times article and subsequent reports, the president's authority to override statute law comes from the 2001 congressional resolution authorizing the force to destroy al Qaida.
By that reasoning the president must also be empowered to override the new law banning the use of torture, thus making the McCain Amendment truly a meaningless piece of paper.
posted on December 17, 2005 12:46:27 PM new
I don't have to prove anything to you. At least I am not a liar like you and peepa and place rumours, allegations and unproven statements as facts.
It is people like you who give liberals a bad name.
It is people like you that make people want the Patriot act, it is people like you who do nothing to better the country but are the first to #*!@. What have done for charity this Christmas season? Same as you did for Katrina-nothing.
Ron
"Better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not."
[ edited by WashingtoneBayer on Dec 17, 2005 12:48 PM ]
posted on December 17, 2005 12:55:28 PM new
HaHahaha!
""I don't have to prove anything to you. At least I am not a liar like you and peepa and place rumours, allegations and unproven statements as facts.
It is people like you who give liberals a bad name.
It is people like you that make people want the Patriot act, it is people like you who do nothing to better the country but are the first to #*!@. What have done for charity this Christmas season? Same as you did for Katrina-nothing.""
OH BOY! From the patriot Act to ronnie spying on my charitable giving !
Your first sentence ronnie about rumors, allegations, and unproven statements......isn't that what you just posted about me ?
In your fury you couldn't find anything to attack so you chose my charitable contributions or lack thereof ????
ROFLMAO! WHERE did THAT come from ??
OK, Smarty, PROVE YOUR ALLEGATIONS ABOUT MY CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS AND YOU CAN PROVE YOU'RE RIGHT
posted on December 17, 2005 12:56:31 PM newBy inacting laws that go against what this country was founded upon,
How about the right to due process. That is granted in the Constitution. But I guess Americans should be held in process for over two years without being tried for a crime. That is ok with you.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
