House Renews Patriot Act

Here's the painful truth... The Patriot Act was, and is, a vital and necessary component in fighting radical Islamic terrorism. It doesn't, and never has, infringed on the tangible freedoms of Americans to any real degree. Not one single example has ever been given, of a real case where the government has violated the Constitutional rights of any American citizen through use of the Patriot Act. It has been crucial in uncovering terrorist networks operating in the United States and abroad, and has resulted in the capture, arrest, and killing of numerous terrorists, as well as breaking up several terrorist attacks in the planning phase. The benefits to our public safety, far exceed any residual implications of infringement of our Constitutional rights. Thankfully, most in Congress realize this, and certainly the President realizes this, which is why it hasn't been revoked, much to the chagrin of liberal pinheads who were moaning and writhing over Bush's 'trampling' of the Constitution.
 
Dixie said:
The Federal Government reserves the right to declare Martial Law and mandate that you remain in your home... doesn't that "infringe on your rights" as well?
Click to expand...

yes, which is why i'l ignore any martial law order and kill any government thug that attempts to enforce it upon me
 
SmarterThanYou said:
yes, which is why i'l ignore any martial law order and kill any government thug that attempts to enforce it upon me
Click to expand...

Well, that has nothing to do with the discussion of what IS and ISN'T the law, and what DOES and DOESN'T infringe on your Constitutional rights as defined by the SCOTUS. The point is, there are a whole lot of things that you could interpret as "infringement on my rights" ...I think income tax infringes on my rights! I think me having to pay for someone's welfare or health care infringes on my rights! I think the Census infringes on my rights! Eminent Domain! Selective Service! Traffic Signals! Crosswalks! School Zones! A case could be made for pretty much anything the Government does, being an infringement of rights of the individual, it all depends on perspective.
 
Dixie said:
Well, that has nothing to do with the discussion of what IS and ISN'T the law, and what DOES and DOESN'T infringe on your Constitutional rights as defined by the SCOTUS. The point is, there are a whole lot of things that you could interpret as "infringement on my rights" ...I think income tax infringes on my rights! I think me having to pay for someone's welfare or health care infringes on my rights! I think the Census infringes on my rights! Eminent Domain! Selective Service! Traffic Signals! Crosswalks! School Zones! A case could be made for pretty much anything the Government does, being an infringement of rights of the individual, it all depends on perspective.
Click to expand...

and I would agree with you about 98%, other than the census is specifically spelled out in the constitution and so is income tax via the 16th amendment.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
and I would agree with you about 98%, other than the census is specifically spelled out in the constitution and so is income tax via the 16th amendment.
Click to expand...

Well all of it, including the Patriot Act is "spelled out" in the Constitution! That's the point! Depending on your interpretation of what the Constitution says, an argument can be made for anything that is presently the law. The Government is mandated by the Constitution to provide for the "general welfare" of the public. Their #1 responsibility under the Constitution is to protect our rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. It's not a matter of what you or I interpret as our "right" or infringement of a "right!" The Constitution (and law) doesn't say, you have the right to determine what is your right and whether government can infringe on it!
 
Dixie said:
Well all of it, including the Patriot Act is "spelled out" in the Constitution! That's the point! Depending on your interpretation of what the Constitution says, an argument can be made for anything that is presently the law. The Government is mandated by the Constitution to provide for the "general welfare" of the public. Their #1 responsibility under the Constitution is to protect our rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. It's not a matter of what you or I interpret as our "right" or infringement of a "right!" The Constitution (and law) doesn't say, you have the right to determine what is your right and whether government can infringe on it!
Click to expand...

actually it does, with the phrase 'we the people'. WE determine the meaning of the constitution.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol...no way....you're too fucking dumb to take seriously......
Click to expand...

Do you realize how dumb you look when you do this, bunky? You claim that I'm not worth taking seriously, yet YOU take time and effort to read (albeit partially) what I write and then you respond to it. So either you're full of it or you have an emotional bent that requires some professional therapy to cure.

Now, that being said, are you okay with the Bill of Rights/Constitution bending Patriot Act powers in the hand of what the neocon driven GOP punditry decribes as Obama's socialist agenda?
 
Southern Man said:
Bush Patriot Act = bad; Obama Patriot Act = good. :palm:
Click to expand...

Now, that being said, are you okay with the Bill of Rights/Constitution bending Patriot Act powers in the hand of what the neocon driven GOP punditry decribes as Obama's socialist agenda? Because as I and Christie pointed out to your cohorts, we aren't.
 
Dixie said:
No, it says you have the right to "petition for a redress" of your grievances, it doesn't say you can arbitrarily decide what "rights" you are entitled to based on your own interpretations.
Click to expand...

your totalitarianism is showing.

1) who wrote the constitution
2) who ratified the constitution
3) who does the constitution provide protection to?
4) who does the constitution restrict?
 
Dixie said:
Here's the painful truth... The Patriot Act was, and is, a vital and necessary component in fighting radical Islamic terrorism. It doesn't, and never has, infringed on the tangible freedoms of Americans to any real degree. Not one single example has ever been given, of a real case where the government has violated the Constitutional rights of any American citizen through use of the Patriot Act. It has been crucial in uncovering terrorist networks operating in the United States and abroad, and has resulted in the capture, arrest, and killing of numerous terrorists, as well as breaking up several terrorist attacks in the planning phase. The benefits to our public safety, far exceed any residual implications of infringement of our Constitutional rights. Thankfully, most in Congress realize this, and certainly the President realizes this, which is why it hasn't been revoked, much to the chagrin of liberal pinheads who were moaning and writhing over Bush's 'trampling' of the Constitution.
Click to expand...


Here's the reality......the USA survived 40 years of a Cold War with an enemy that we fought proxy wars with across the globe WITHOUT circumnavigating the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. Not only that, but we TRIUMPHED! And the old Soviets had FAR MORE deadly resources and infiltration abilities than a all the members of Al Qaeda and their friends combined.

And maybe you were out of the country when you had all the noise about the FISA ACT being violated or about countless American's phone/computer information being turned over to security agencies without probable cause, or what happened to Brandon Mayfield.

The majority of the Congress that signed the damned thing in a blind panic PUBLICALLY ADMITTED THAT THEY DIDN'T FULLY READ IT!

To this date the GAO has consistent reviews that much of the necessary security measures that should have taken place were not and have not been done to our infrastructure since 2001.

What the "patriot act" claims to do, Slick Willy accomplished with a weekly meeting of all security and intelligence agencies.....despite the screw-ups of the extraordinary renditions that he helped initiate (i.e., Khaled El-Masri).

Bottom line: a bloated bureacracy that essentially is redundant and unnecessary.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
your totalitarianism is showing.

1) who wrote the constitution
2) who ratified the constitution
3) who does the constitution provide protection to?
4) who does the constitution restrict?
Click to expand...

*sigh*

1) The Founding Fathers.
2) The States
3) The People
4) The Government

No one has argued ANY of that!

What in the fuck do I have to do to get you people to stop formulating arguments on my behalf and arguing against things I haven't ever argued? It's ridiculous! Every day, almost every left-wing poster, is doing this on a routine basis, and it's getting really old! Stick to what the fuck I said, and stop pretending that I've said shit I would never say! Did you fuckwits get together in your little social group and decide that no matter what Dixie says, make his argument into something crazy and off the wall, so we can all jump in and "prove Dixie WRONG" on something? I don't get it? That's about the only explanation I can come up with for this delusional silliness!
 
Taichiliberal said:
Here's the reality......the USA survived 40 years of a Cold War with an enemy that we fought proxy wars with across the globe WITHOUT circumnavigating the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. Not only that, but we TRIUMPHED! And the old Soviets had FAR MORE deadly resources and infiltration abilities than a all the members of Al Qaeda and their friends combined.

And maybe you were out of the country when you had all the noise about the FISA ACT being violated or about countless American's phone/computer information being turned over to security agencies without probable cause, or what happened to Brandon Mayfield.

The majority of the Congress that signed the damned thing in a blind panic PUBLICALLY ADMITTED THAT THEY DIDN'T FULLY READ IT!

To this date the GAO has consistent reviews that much of the necessary security measures that should have taken place were not and have not been done to our infrastructure since 2001.

What the "patriot act" claims to do, Slick Willy accomplished with a weekly meeting of all security and intelligence agencies.....despite the screw-ups of the extraordinary renditions that he helped initiate (i.e., Khaled El-Masri).

Bottom line: a bloated bureacracy that essentially is redundant and unnecessary.
Click to expand...

YOUR FUCKING LIBERAL PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS JUST RENEWED IT!

...Or maybe you were "out of the country" when THAT happened?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top