Slashdot Mirror
Patriot Act Up For Renewal, Nobody Notices
Ponca City, We Love You writes "When the Patriot Act was first signed in 2001, it was billed as a temporary measure required because of the extreme circumstances created by the terrorist threat. The fear from its opponents was that executive power, once given, is seldom relinquished. Now the Examiner reports that on January 5th, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) introduced a bill to add yet another year to the soon-to-be-expiring Patriot Act, extending it until February, 2012, with passage likely to happen after little debate or contention. If passed, this would be the second time the Obama administration has punted on campaign promises to roll back excessive surveillance measures allowed under the act. Last year's extension passed under the heading of the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act. 'Given the very limited number of days Congress has in session before the current deadline, and the fact that the bill's Republican sponsor is only seeking another year, I think it's safe to read this as signaling an agreement across the aisle to put the issue off yet again,' writes Julian Sanchez."
Veto it.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Wont.
Why is anyone surprised that Patriot act has bipartisan support? At the time it was passed all Democrat senators voted for it except for one (Feingold) and he is not in senate anymore. Democrats always supported the act, just like the Republicans did. Obama has renewed it regularly since so its a safe bet that he would have voted for it had he been in senate at the time.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Let's not forget his promise to shut down Guantanamo and to end the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy.
When Obama and the Democrats didn't repeal it when they had all the power, and now, when they seemingly won't object to its renewal, does that mean they are hypocrites? Does it also mean that they actually tacitly approve of it?
For all the noise and whining that's been made about it by their constituents , the Dems sure have been quiet about it.
When the people you hate (republicans) and the people you love (Democrats) seem to be of like mind on something like this, is it time to consider that you are on the fringes and just a bit nuts?
we talk about how unworkable, public-enemy the system in america has become. and say that wikileaks exposes stuff like these, and it is necessary. whoops -> mod down to oblivion. uncomfortable truth better not heard.
and when we call on americans, some of you come up saying that not all americans are the same, some of you actually see what's going on, and aware of how things really are. ok. well. nice.
however, you have to do that, BEFORE being called out. if, you dont speak, and instead let the most loud voice that speaks be of irrationality and make-believe, it means that you are basically leaving the arena to such minded people.
when the wise dont speak, fools have the day.
Read radical news here
How long until they set it up so it's "extended for another year" renewal bill becomes automatically passed if it isn't voted down?
They've done it on other things. It's a scam where they can refuse to vote, it automatically passes, and they can claim they didn't vote for it.
It's going to take a lot of people to metaphorically kick them in the balls repeatedly until they get the idea that maybe that nazi act needs to be retired before they'll do it.
I love the way US laws are given these cheesy, sometimes forced, acronyms.
I think you guys are doing yourself a disservice as they seem to dumb down the often complex debates and arguments covered by these acts, and force folk into simplistic positions based on the naming of the acts. It must be hard to argue against a PATRIOT act: most people don't want to appear 'unpatriotic'.
I am guessing there are civil servants paid to make up some of these acronyms, some of them must have taken some thinking! ("Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" - impressive!).
is a mandatory sunset date on every bill that they sign into law. A year wouldn't be bad. A year would give legal scholars and the public (and maybe even congress itself ,... nah wait for it...... hahahahaha) a chance to review it to see if it actually works.
True story, bro. President Obama will not veto the Patriot Act. One thing both parties agree on, the Patriot act is a great tool for maintaining the status quo of the current power elites.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
The PATRIOT Act is here to stay. There is NO WAY the Federal Government is going to willingly give up all the powers it granted them.
Of all the stupid things that happened during the Bush years, that is by far the most damaging. And it's going to take a Congress and a President with a hell of a lot more spine to repeal it. I don't see that happening anytime soon.
"What no one seemed to notice... was the ever widening gap... between the government and the people. The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway... and kept us so busy with continuous changes and 'crises' and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the 'national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, 'regretted,' that... one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. But the one great shocking occasion... never comes. That's the difficulty." - Milton Mayer (1908-1986) journalist and educator, writing about the Nazi takeover of Germany from the point of view of the average citizen, They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1938-45
Americans seem to fall into these categories:
The rich - they don't care about justice or injustice, just money
The poor - they may care but they have no power
The oblivious - they're busy watching American Idol and eating pizza
The middle class - they're just trying to maintain or looking for work
"What keeps most Americans from being shocked by the shredding of the Bill of Rights is that they have yet to feel the consequences, either personally or through someone close to them. It would appear, however, that they only have to wait." - William Blum
No, we decided that if we were going to be oppressed, we could at least bask in the small luxury of complete sentences.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
There has not been much serious abuse of the law since it was created. While the potential for that abuse is still there I have not seen convincing evidence that the innocent have been terribly harassed because of this act. The war is still on. Numerous attacks have been foiled in the last several years primarily due to good intelligence. I hope someday that we will again live in a world where these laws are not needed, but I don't think that day has come.
Obama is worse than Bush: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush
I think moreso than anything else, the Patriot Act can be held up as a shining example of both parties caring about nothing more than maintaining power. The Patriot Act goes against almost everything the Democratic party supposedly stands for; quietly continuing its usage and doing nothing to try to kill it should be proof to all but the most hardcore lefties that their beloved politicos are no better than the right-wingers they despise.
"I'll show you politics in America. Here it is, right here: I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs. I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking. Wait a minute, there's one guy holding out both puppets!" -Bill Hicks
Living With a Nerd
While I agree that Obama has left much to be desired, comparing a common speech problem with a bumbling idiot is flamebait at best and ignorant at worst.
I mean, come on...seriously? Making fun of a guy who pseudo-stutters? What is this, fucking kindergarten?
Living With a Nerd
That would be the legal way to do it. Frankly I'm surprised they haven't done it yet.
The day Congress decides to pass an Amendment is the day they collectively realize they're bound by what the Constitution says. So, yeah, it won't ever happen.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
I didn't say Obama, I said the Democratic party. You do realize Obama isn't the only person with a (D) after their name, right?
Living With a Nerd
Well excuse me then. I actually still like a few democrats. They are not all right of center sellouts like Obama. I was objecting to your characterization of "the most hardcore lefties" being the holdouts supporting this travesty. The most hardcore lefties were the first ones who realized it was happening. We aren't like the republicans, we do not circle our wagons, coordinate our talking points, and defend "our team" to the death.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
In case you haven't ever noticed, there is no left wing in the US. There are two rights.
Mastering the English language is fucking easy: all you have to do is to put an f* word in every fucking sentence.
The guy holding the puppets is special interests. Get money out of American politics and the puppet loses his strings.
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/01/11/lind_five_worldviews
The Democrats and the Republicans, when they govern, all generally govern as neoliberal globalists. Some Democrats campaign as social democratic liberals; somewhat more Republicans, lately, campaign as nationalist populists. Nonetheless, the consensus of power itself is pretty stable, and has been since the mid-90s.
Neoliberal globalism is essentially "center-right" ideology. It's very close to core neoconservatism, with the difference being that neo-conservatives give a bit more authority to the idea of the nation-state in carrying out its policing function.
We all kinda hoped he would do something about the, you know, TORTURE. But not only did he not go after the torturers in the previous regime, HE KEPT ON DOING IT. It was at that point that all the hardcore lefties went, "Oh. Whoopsie
Obama was very clear during his campaign that he would step up the war in Afghanistan. Why is anyone surprised?
Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
If W was really an idiot, would it be his fault? Guess what: he's Ivy-league educated, and not an idiot.
"I'm going to put people in my place, so when the history of this administration is written at least there's an authoritarian voice saying exactly what happened." --George W. Bush
"One of the very difficult parts of the decision I made on the financial crisis was to use hardworking people's money to help prevent there to be a crisis." --George W. Bush
"I'm telling you there's an enemy that would like to attack America, Americans, again. There just is. That's the reality of the world. And I wish him all the very best." --George W. Bush
"In terms of the economy, look, I inherited a recession, I am ending on a recession." --George W. Bush
"First of all, I don't see America having problems." --George W. Bush
"I want to tell you how proud I am to be the President of a nation that -- in which there's a lot of Philippine-Americans. They love America and they love their heritage. And I reminded the President that I am reminded of the great talent of the -- of our Philippine-Americans when I eat dinner at the White House." --George W. Bush
The man is a fucking idiot.
Living With a Nerd
1) He's off by a factor of 50, which while not great, is still orders of magnitude better than the 1:1 odds of being spied upon that he quotes. Even if both stats are off by a factor of 50, the point still stands; or
2) He's engaging in the ancient and time-honored art of hyperbole, in which case his point STILL stands.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
McCain's undoing was the Palin crap and not running as he did before. Had he ran as McCain in 2000 he could have been elected, instead he did as his party told him and lost for it.
Damn straight he is. The center in this country wants a public health care option, an end to the Bush tax cuts, the Patriot Act repealed, Gitmo closed, and their kids home from getting shot at in the desert. That's the center. The Obama administration is firmly to the right of it. It's not hard to understand.
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
problem with "democracy" is that it really just ends up meaning the ones with the most money, win. All you have to do is convince more gullible sheep than the other person running, and bam - there you are. Sure, sure, it's really just how we've implemented democracy, not democracy itself that is a problem...except, I disagree. There is no way to have the common man make wise, intelligent decisions that are good for themselves. They want instant gratification. The common man has as much business deciding on budgets, long term goals, etc as a 5yo child does in a household - let the parents/adults make those decisions, kktnx.
What economy has been growing at an astronomical speed? The one that is able to make quick and intelligent decisions (China) without worrying about the people it harms. There's a happy medium between the two things...and that happy medium was what we originally had; a system where only the educated could vote. Was it perfect? Hell know, but at least it wasn't farking stupid like the crap we have now. I've never understood why people so readily accept the brainwashing that democracy is the only right way...think about how horrible medical science would be if we let the "common man" make decisions about how to do treatments, what procedures would be most respected, etc. Think about how successful medicine would be if any actor, random dude on the street, or whatnot could suddenly declare themselves a surgeon.
There is a certain skillset and personality to being a real, honest politician. One that has little to do with reading polls daily. We'll never get that back here - ever. C'est la vie, I guess.
The Greens? The Tea party?
Yes, some green tea would be lovely. No sugar please.
Reply to That ||
The system will not allow somebody get elected who is threatens to disrupt those in power today. The best you can do is end up in a few party primaries like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich and quickly be marginalized by the party elite, the press, the tv media, and even big donors. You think its bad for 3rd parties? Well, the people within the parties get calmly screwed and setup in more covert ways-- With Nader, all you get is some transparency because they have no incentive to be as nice.... That is, if you pay attention to the 3rd party at all because the press sure does not tell you about the dirty tricks.
Obama could be great; however, it does not matter about him personally or what he tries to accomplish - he is a pragmatist and totally willing to compromise over ideals, ethics, etc. THAT is why he was allowed to proceed despite being an untested outsider -- Hillary would have won if Obama couldn't be managed. (The party elite were largely in her camp at the beginning- but they are just 1 of the weaker factions.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
let me help you with this:
http://politicalcompass.org/
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I'll tell you why I think libertarians are divorced from reality. Because they believe in simplistic solutions to complex problems. Because they do not think through the implications of their policies. Because they refuse to look at the lessons of history. Because they are funded by ultra-wealthy elites like the Koch brothers. Because they live in an echo chamber of their own devising. Is that enough, or would you like some more?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Mr President When you swore to close Guantanamo, I wept. The pure vindication of my life long love for America seemed finally vindicated. You swore a return to sanity, to justice and peace. You swore an oath to your countrymen with such passion that they entrusted upon you the highest office. Your treachery is boundless.
Haven't you been listening to the source of all "truth", Fox News? Obama is so far left that's he's completely off the map, looney Communist nutjob?
I thought he was a fundamentalist Kenyan Muslim who wants to institute Sharia law in the United States. It's so hard to keep up with the sheer, unadulterated evil that is Obama.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
No. It doesn't. The fair tax taxes consumption above the poverty level; the poor aren't taxed at all.
I'm going to lay some numbers down to show you how it works. I'm picking them because they're easy to follow, not because they're specific suggestions. What the actual numbers should be would vary, but if you actually understand the following, your concerns about the poor will be resolved. There are only two numbers: cost of living, and the fair tax percentage.
Lets say that the cost of living for an average person is determined to be $1000 per month. Let us also say that the fairtax, which is a tax only levied on purchase of new materials, is 35%. Those are the numbers. Here's how it goes:
Every person gets a check at the beginning of the month from the government. That check, in the case of 35% fairtax and $1000 cost of living, is exactly $350. So what happens is, as you buy your cost-of-living necessities, and you are charged 35% tax on them, you are paying it out of this $350 check. You have exactly enough to pay the taxes on $1000 worth of purchases: 35% of $1000 is $350. Three important consequences arise:
First, you're paying no taxes on your $1000 of spending -- because that $350 came from outside your income. It's extra. So this means, no question about it, that up to cost of living, your purchases are tax free.
Secondly, because you got the $350 at the beginning of the month, and you have given it back to the government it by the end, then next month, when you get your next $350 check, it's the same money as last month so there is no ongoing expense to maintain this. Just a one-time outlay of $350 per person that gets recycled.
Third, administration costs are almost zero. Everyone gets a check. There are no exceptions, there are no variations. So there are no conditions, no verifications, no nothing. Everyone gets a check, period. This means the government saves huge amounts of money. The IRS can be disbanded; businesses no longer have to collect taxes from employees; accountants, lawyers and other parasites will have to look elsewhere for their hosts. The economic gains are huge.
The poor person who is actually living at the cost of living line is now living tax free, period. The middle class person can also benefit from this, because they don't pay taxes until they start spending on options, upgrades, excesses. The high income person doesn't really give a damn, because that $350 is meaningless in terms of their income.
The fairtax is extremely fair. Proportionally speaking, it benefits the poor much more than the middle class, and the middle class more than the rich. Which is just what you want it to do. And anyone with any extra money at all, not to mention people who work the used market, can save money, tax-free, under the fairtax.
The idea that the fairtax is "unfair to the poor" or "regressive" is propaganda or misunderstanding. No more, no less. Modern income tax implementation is highly regressive, however, and does huge harm to the poor by hiding taxes in the prices of goods and services.
These cartoons may help you understand these concepts:
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
When Obama was elected, he had a website, basically "hey citizens, tell us what you want!" The most popular thing on that site, bar none, by huge margins, was the legalization of marijuana. You know what Obama did? He laughed it off. He mentioned it, but specifically said the only reason he was mentioning it was because he wanted us to know it wasn't going to happen.
That's what happens when the public makes its will clearly known.
This is not a democracy. This is a corporatist republic. Once you fully understand that, you'll stop wasting your time writing letters.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Oh, no. They read it, all right. They scanned every word to see if there was a political contribution in there, or a way to eke one out of you. You know, money. Once they were done with that, then they threw it away. I assure you, they read every letter carefully.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Libertarians want FREEDOM. They want the Constitution. They want sound money. They want friendly relations and trade with other countries without wars and without being the military dictatorship of the world.
They want the right to speak and the right to be left alone.
They want the government to be scared of the people and not the people to be scared of the government.
Liberty.
The truly wealthy, already control the government and the money supply. Why do they need his changes? Why do they want a reduction in government when they already own it and use it as their power tool?
Why do they want a reduction in military spending and the exit from the wars; when they ARE the military industrial complex?
Why would they want a return to sound money when they are in control of the printing of fiat money? Why would they want de-centralizing of power when they control the centralized powers and continually push for more globalization and centralization of power - into their hands?
Why would they want to give individuals the right to be left alone and the right to free speech when they want more control over individuals and more control over the centralized mass media?
Give it a chance. Listen to him and listen to Judge Napolitano. Listen to his good friend kucinich.
Liberty.