That Franklin quote is the most over and misused by liberals trying to make conservatives out to be hypocrites. It is most aptly used when attacking most liberal agendas.

The only people being harmed by the Patriot Act are criminals. You liberals (if the shoe fits...) have no grounds to talk about unconstitutionality unless you are going to admit that gun control is unconstitutional, campaign finance reform is unconstitutional, and separation of church and state, freedom of choice, and freedom of privacy are all not in the constitution.

The other thing that is so hillarious is all this Bush criticism. Often we hear N. Korea has WMDs, why didn't we go there? You mean you would support going to war with N. Korea? Doubtful. You complain that Bush didn't do enough to stop 9/11 yet would you have condoned pre-emptive strikes in Afghanistan? Racially profiling arabs in flight school or airport security? You people don't even support these things in the post-9/11 world.

So why don't some of you for once answer this question: Besides pander to the UN, which idly stands by ethnic genocide in Africa, what would you do to make our country and the world more secure?

------------------
Have you forgotten ...

Kak in 04!!!
------------------
"If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?"

[This message has been edited by MaxisReed (edited July 15, 2004).]

Kieran: Constitutionality isn't something you get to decide on a case to case basis. Either the FBI can spy on American citizens without probable cause or they can't. There are no special circumstances that make normally illegal and unethical actions legit.

You forgot scenario 3, where the FBI wiretaps someone and searches his apartment because they think he's a terrorist but end up being completely wrong. Or 4, where an agent uses the surveillence information to fulfill a personal vendetta.

I have to get to work.

I believe on NUMEROUS occasions that I have demonstrated VERY STRONG conservative principles. To be blunt honest, conservatives who do support the Patriot Act are hypocrites. This Act goes against EVERYTHING conservative. We're trying to reduce the size of the national government not increase it. To expound on Tracer's words. You know when the Patriot Act is a really bad idea is when I'm agreeing with Ictus that this is bad.

Do you want to be watched by the FBI constantly? Do you want your calls monitored day in and day out. Your street corners and even your home watched by the National Governement? After all you have nothing to fear and nothing to worry about because you haven't committed a crime. These cameras and surveillance devices are there for your protection against terrorists.

The Patriot Act is a political tool and nothing else. It's got a nice good title and it's sold to calm the fears of the American public. It is a total reactionary bill.

------------------
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat.

.....power it had before due to other laws. The Patriot Act is just a different means to the same ends.

Well, outside of the Patriot Act there are. They are called exceptions to warrants. One is called Stop and Frisk. Basically it means a cop can stop you on a street and frisk you for a weapon on the ground of reasonable suspicion. Maybe you should go after the Supreme Court about those instances where a warrant isn't required because those are used a lot more than the Patriot Act. Yet, shockingly, you don't hear about too many abuses. That's because cops know they are always walking on thin ice and have no desire to rock the boat. There are exceptions to everything in this world. And if something comes under hot debate, the federal courts (and more important the Supreme Court) will decide what is necessary and what isn't.

In scenario 3 the person can sue the FBI (yes, they can do that) if they find out. If they don't find out all information they received is scrapped and the FBI move on. Better safe than sorry. In scenario 4, more than one person is needed to perform these operations and their superiors find out about what the agents are doing. After finding out about the misuse of federal funds and power, the agent is fired to prevent a heat storm of criticism from the media.

What makes you think they are going to pay attention to you? There are almost 300 million people in this country. They aren't going to waste their time listening to some guy talk to his wife about work unless they have reason to believe he is up to something. They don't do this stuff for ****s and giggles.

------------------
Kieran: The reason I put a link to it is because she is in underwear and I know the admins are touchy on that.
Yecti: Jaiph will touch himself for hours if he so much as smells a woman's underwear

I do agree that the Patriot Act is a political tool(used both for and against Bush). It was used to ease the fears of people after 9/11. Congress holds up a piece of paper and says "Looky, we're doing something about it! No need to fear!" when in reality all they did was restate the same things over again. It would have been far more useful if they started cracking down on the CIA and putting them under more pressure by means of threatening to cut funding and watching them more closely.

The Patriot Act was the alternative to saying we had a weakness in our intelligence.

------------------
Kieran: The reason I put a link to it is because she is in underwear and I know the admins are touchy on that.
Yecti: Jaiph will touch himself for hours if he so much as smells a woman's underwear

Gandalf, don't talk my comment personal. While I don't really spend enough time here anymore to know everyone's beliefs, I have noticed that statement and other conservative ones used to impune conservatives.

The fact is that some tools must be available to law enforcement to combat terrorism. Sure, you want your "diary" protected but do you want the diary of a terrorist protected? Say an illegal wire tap exposed 9/11 before it happened. Should nothing be done because the information was illegally obtained?

This is a legitimately debatable issue and I'm for the protection of individual rights, however we need to recognize that our enemies are hiding behind these rights and have to come to some sort of reasonable solution.

The words of our constitution are so often distorted. Our constitution expressly forbids the infringement of the right to bare arms yet that right is constantly attacked. Then some perverts seem to rationalize murdering the unborn by quoting something that has never been in the constitution.

I'm actually quite happy to debate the issue with conservatives like you but liberals haven't earned the right to debate it based on constitutionallity because they already disregard and despise the constitution to such a high degree.

------------------
Have you forgotten ...

It really goes against Republican principles, not conservative principles. The Republican party is generally seen as more conservative, and the Democrats as more liberal, but that isn't always the case. Saying you are conservative or liberal about everything, IMO is just ignorant (deciding an issue before you even hear it).

I'm not a big fan of much of the Patriot Act (or what parts I'm privy too), and the name implying those opposed are "unpatriotic" or at worst traitorous, but some people are blowing it a little out of proportion. I think it should be revised a little, it doesn't need to be a tome, just expand a few law-enforcement powers, while making sure there are still checks against it. I really don't like that library book oversight thing I've read about (ala Seven).

------------------
Steal my dreams and sell them back to me.....

[This message has been edited by Bounty Hunter 4 hire (edited July 15, 2004).]

No you have it backwards. Conservatism is the ideology. Republican is just the party made up of conservative-minded (of varying degree) people. My math professor said to us that he's been an independent all his voting life but he leans towards the conservative ideals. Same is true for Democrat. They make up liberal-minded (of varying degree) people. That said, supporting something that increases the government goes against core conservative principles. An idea (bigger governement) goes against an ideology (conservatism).


------------------
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat.

...yeah, that's great. If I was American, I'd be insulted. If anything, people who identify themselves as liberal or conservative care for the constitution a great deal - enough to get upset about things. It's the interpretation that differs.

------------------
"Look at me! I'm Tracer! BLAHBLAHBLAH!"

-MBeggar

Concerning the Patriot Act: those of you claiming that “if you do nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear” need to consider the possibility of the government someday becoming hostile. I’m certainly not claiming that Bush is sinister or anything, but somewhere down the line the government could become aggressive. Legislation like this simply paves the way for future abuses.

What happens if (years from now) your ideology is considered a “terrorist threat” and the Patriot Act is wrongly used to persecute you? It is not likely, but it is possible. These are not just the terrorists’ rights that we are talking about—they are everyone’s rights.


------------------
"I am downright amazed at what I can destroy with just a hammer."
-Atom and His Package

Kieran: Terry stops a. are constitutional b. are hardly on the same level as secret searches and wiretaps and c. require greater justification. You know why cops walk lightly? Because their every action is scrutinized. What do you think happens when you remove every shred of accountibility? Oh, and the presence of superiors certainly didn't prevent Hoover's abuses.

I'm sorry, but if you can honestly justify the unjustified surveillence of an American citizen with 'they could sue, except a. they would never know and b. it's legal anyway', I don't see this conversation going anywhere.

But the liberal interpretation is generally crap. For example, guns are specifically addressed in the Second Ammendment but liberals blatantly want to disregard that right but then they claim that a woman's right to have an abortion, things that are in no way addressed, is constitutionally protected. It's some odd, selective interpretation that they use.

------------------
Have you forgotten ...