home

Democrats Fail to Insist on Additional Patriot Act Improvement

by TChris

Russ Feingold and two other senators had the courage to stand up for your right to privacy. It's pathetic that other senators didn't join them.

The Senate brushed aside an attempt to block renewal of the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act today, voting 96 to 3 against changes urged by Senator Russell D. Feingold, the act's most persistent critic. Mr. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said he wants to make the Senate debate several more days on the bill, and under the Senate's rules he can do so. But today's vote signaled that, once Mr. Feingold has exhausted his moves, the act will indeed be renewed by the Senate before its scheduled expiration on March 10.

Feingold is a national treasure. A heartfelt thanks to Senators Feingold, Byrd, and Jeffords for putting up resistance to the administration's unquenchable thirst for unreviewable discretion to pry into our personal information and private communications.

< George and Dick: The Hunting Stories | Sen. Roberts Wants to Protect President, Not the Rest of Us >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Democrats Fail to Insist on Additional Patriot (none / 0) (#1)
    by Lora on Thu Feb 16, 2006 at 04:34:44 PM EST
    I'm reminded of Barbara Boxer's sole challenge of the Ohio electoral votes. Now, how can we make these gestures be something more than just symbolic?

    You mean Russ "No free speech for you" Feingold? The man who, along with McCain, Shays, and Meehan, needs a remedial reading course so he can comprehend the first amendment? Feingold is not deserving of anyone's respect.

    This probably belongs on another thread (one relating to NSA's illegal wiretapping)-- but does there seem to be any connection between the recent lack of interest in the probe into NSA's conduct (and Bush's constitutional powers) and the latest investigation into Senator Arlen Specter (who heads the Senate Intelligence Oversight Committee)? Smells like Rove's handiwork to me.

    Re: Democrats Fail to Insist on Additional Patriot (none / 0) (#4)
    by Sailor on Thu Feb 16, 2006 at 07:14:04 PM EST
    Uhh, you mean Russ Feingold who doesn't think money equals free speech?
    Feingold is not deserving of anyone's respect.
    I can certainly understand that someone with your POV doesn't have any respect for US Senator Feingold, but it is rather presumptuous of you to tell the rest of us how we should think.

    "Uhh, you mean Russ Feingold who doesn't think money equals free speech?" You might ponder how he and his ilk want to regulate internet speech - where making political endorsements/attacks would be viewed as "in kind" contributions. Yeah, that'll help political discourse tons.

    Is the Democratic party obsolete? Are Democrats an anachronism? Is it time to close up shop and join the Whigs and Know-Nothings? Maybe, maybe. I no longer identify myself as a Democrat, I have stopped attending the meetings, I register as an independent. I would be too embarrassed to tell anyone that I am a Democrat. The Dems have become a doormat to the right wing. You whine, whimper, and cower at the feet of a stern and hateful master. There are few voices in the blue seats (Feingold and maybe Edwards--Biden is too intellectual for the average eighth-grade education). Kiss the mid-terms good bye, and learn to be satisfied with little other than being the loyal opposition for the forseeable future. It may be time for the venerable party of FDR and JFK to go the way of the Edsel. What a shame that the gelatinous backbones of the Democrats can only stand by and wring their hands as the Reichstag burns and the cattle cars are made ready. As the saying goes, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way. If you can't do better, then at least do no harm.

    Re: Democrats Fail to Insist on Additional Patriot (none / 0) (#7)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Feb 16, 2006 at 09:13:14 PM EST
    JR, Links please. I'm interested. I'm going to check his site.

    Re: Democrats Fail to Insist on Additional Patriot (none / 0) (#8)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 12:24:09 AM EST
    JR,
    You might ponder how he and his ilk want to regulate internet speech - where making political endorsements/attacks would be viewed as "in kind" contributions.
    Well! Clearly, that means we should all support every provision of the Patriot Act. ...wait, no it doesn't. Nice non sequitur, though.

    Re: Democrats Fail to Insist on Additional Patriot (none / 0) (#9)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 12:34:37 AM EST
    Come to think of it, does JR really want to go down this road? Does he want to have to explain why he trusts the party of "beatings to the point of organ failure" to be within a mile of national healthcare?

    Unlike the partisans here, I'm able to disagree with things regardless of the party involved. For information on where campaign finance "reform" could go, have a look here. There are plenty of links following from there. Feingold - and McCain, and Shays, and Meehan - are all disgraceful excuses for senators, and they all want to remove my - and your - ability to speak freely about politics. The bad acts at Abu Ghraib actually have a context, for those paying attention: 1) The military was investigating before the media broke the story 2) The military prosecuted those responsible. If you're one of the but jobs who thinks Cheney or Rumsfeld ordered that stuff, well, I suspect that you also look under your bed for monsters each night. What's truly fascinating is what the left is willing to pay attention to. Bad acts by the military that get prosectuted? Sure. Even if it might damage the war effort? You bet. Beheadings of innocents by the islamic radicals? Nope. The insane rantings of the cartoon protesters? Nope. As a side note, I'll posit a reason why TL (and, to be fair, many others) won't publish the cartoons, but will publish Abu Ghraib photos: They know full well that there will be no action against them by the US government for the photos. They also know that publishing the cartoons could set off a nearby radical, who might actually kill them. I grow very, very tired of all the "the US is creating terrorists - they wouldn't bother us if we left Iraq" nonsense. Care to explain the ongoing killings and religious cleansing in southern Thailand based on that theory? What the heck did the Thais do - other than not convert - to deserve what they are getting?

    James Robertson, responses to: The military prosecuted those responsible. If you're one of the but jobs who thinks Cheney or Rumsfeld ordered that stuff, well, I suspect that you also look under your bed for monsters each night. Yes, I think they "ordered that stuff. The entire administration essentially did. They did it for the same reason that the Nazis killed Jews. To intimidate their own "constituents." You are free to suspect whatever you want. And Abu Ghraib was also used by Saddam for exactly the same reason. On the other hand, if you're one of the nut jobs who thinks Saddam Hussein ordered that stuff, well, I suspect that you also look under your bed for monsters each night. You might ask why Bush didn't have had it torn down, or emptied and preserved as a historical landmark. And I can understand why you do not publish pictures of Jesus pulling Arabs on leashes, but are willing to show pictures of big buildings collapsing. So what is your point?