Senate Passes Patriot Act Renewal

IAmTheDave writes "The Senate has passed a renewal of the Patriot act, 89-10, after two extensions caused by months of negotiations. The only thing standing in the way of a full renewal is a House vote, expected to pass next week. The renewal comes with some privacy protections attached, however, some worry they are only cosmetic. Some lawmakers who voted for the package acknowledged deep reservations about the power it would grant to any president. "Our support for the Patriot Act does not mean a blank check for the president," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who voted to pass the bill package. Certain lawmakers supported passing the bill even though they were still wary about it - Arlen Specter urged his colleagues to pass it even as he promised to introduce a new measure and hold hearings on how to fix it. Terrorism aside, the bill also includes new legislation that has almost nothing to do with terrorism, like one measure, which would make it harder for illicit labs to obtain ingredients for methamphetamine by requiring pharmacies to sell nonprescription cold medicines only from behind the counter. I know that people like Arlen Specter promise further hearings - but why pass what you know is flawed?"

Comments

Re:Vote Out Incumbents

[tsotha]

I don't understand what the big deal is. She wrote a letter urging "forcefull" removal of the governemnt. That's textbook sedition. It's against the law. You see, there are a couple exceptions to you right to speak freely, and that's one of them.

Note too she hasn't actually been charged with anything or even, to her knowledge, investigated by the FBI. Some schmoe HR director is just covering his ass in case she goes postal.

Now, if writing a stupid sentence in a rant letter is all she did and she gets a criminal charge and she gets convicted, then I'll be worried. Until the, no.

By the way, if she composed that letter from work she really should be fired, just like anybody would be at my work for playing politics on company time and on company equipment.

Re:BECAUSE IT WORKS

[jgardn]

Re "What if the other guy gets the White House? What then? How would YOU feel when they come for YOU!?!"

You know what? I'm not scared one whit. As long as a potential President H. Clinton follows the law and doesn't go beyond the powers granted by the constitution and congress, I'll be perfectly safe.

They CAN'T torture me, I'm a citizen of the U.S. and I haven't taken up arms against my country. If I did, I would make sure that I wore the uniform of the country I am fighting for and make sure the country was a signatory of the Geneva Convention. That way, the Geneva Convention would protect me.

They can't wiretap ME, but they can wiretap the enemy. If I receive a call from the enemy, guess what, I would HOPE a President H. Clinton was listening to the conversation! If I was stupid enough to place a call to the enemy, I would hope she would be listening to that as well. Of course, I don't want her to hear my private calls between me and people who haven't taken it upon themselves to kill as many Americans as possible, and there is nothing in the PATRIOT act that permits her to do so.

As for the conservative reaction to President Bush's behavior, you'll have to read very closely to what they say. They are upset with his ARROGANCE, not his behavior. They are upset that President Bush doesn't stoop down to the level of his moonbat attackers and address their issues. They want President Bush to come out and say, "I didn't cause Hurricane Katrina, nobody can cause a hurricane, and I didn't single out New Orleans because they were black. In fact I did everything in my power to try and help the people in New Orleans." Instead, like a king, President Bush is silent and expects people to follow his lead politcally without question.

No one is suggesting that the president is exceeding his constitutional limits. In fact, people are wondering why he isn't exercising his wartime powers and imprisoning those people in this country actively collaborating with our declared enemies, and shutting down the newspapers and TV shows that are demoralizing the troops and inspiring the enemy. We have historical precedence for President Bush doing far more than he is doing now, and frankly, I would like the president, of any party or gender, to act like a president during wartime. The faster this war gets over, the faster we can get back to normal life. But to pretend that we are at peace when we are at war is a formula for disaster.

Re:Funny

[kbielefe]

First of all, it isn't sensational enough to make the mainstream media. Remember that the filibuster last year received approximately the same level of coverage as Cheney's hunting accident. If you want thorough, accurate, and impartial news about the United States Congress, do what I do and get it from http://thomas.loc.gov.

Second, while the original patriot act did create several civil liberties concerns, the main focus of this bill was to solve a vast majority of those problems. That was done to the satisfaction of all but 10 senators, including several who are not up for re-election this year, and also including some of the most liberal, Bush-hating senators from liberal, Bush-hating states like Kennedy, Kerry, Schumer, and Clinton.

Lastly, the mainstream media has a liberal bias in general. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that bad news about a republican beats a republican congressional victory. Ironically, if the democrats hadn't been so openly obstructionist, they might have been able to spin this as a democratic victory due to the many civil liberty concerns that were addressed. Now, it is much easier for the republicans to spin it that they were able to renew the crucial patriot act and address several important civil liberty concerns in the process (republicans like liberty too, believe it or not), in spite of democrats' attempt to block the legislation.