What is Digg?165 Comments
- nightscrawler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Damn, bad news. I was looking forward to the day I was legally hauled in and detained INDEFINITELY without access to a lawyer after my f*ing neighbor phones in an anonymous tip, saying I was acting "suspiciously like a terrorist." Smacks of the Salem witch hunts.
- KyleGoetz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Impeachment doesn't necessarily mean "removal from office" -- it is merely a formal accusation of no-goodness. For example, Clinton was impeached, but not removed from office.
So no one wants Bush impeached, they want him removed from office. Difference exists... - FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Let's remember our history. The original PATRIOT act was so long and detailed, it had to have been at least partially completed before 9/11 even happened. 9/11 happened, this thing shows up in Congress almost immediately, and the vote takes place BEFORE ANYONE HAS A CHANCE TO READ THE ENTIRE THING. So much for saying, Hey everyone voted for it, so what's wrong with it? Congress bowed to the Bush administration, gave it what they wanted, then read the thing later and began to regret it.
- scorpioX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7"you know guys (everyone who opposed this act)- it originally passed with ONE NO VOTE."
That is called a knee-jerk reaction, and our government is very good at that sort of thing no matter which party is in power. 4 years later, and some have started to question the detrimental effect of the act on Americans.
"People who tie this with the Bush Presidency are WRONG."
No, the Bush Whitehouse proposed it 4 years ago, and today is pushing as hard as possible to make it permanent. Luckily, cooler heads prevailed. The fight's not over though.
"Stop blaming Bush- it was YOUR FAULT!"
Some of us don't vote Republican or Democrat -- there are more than 2 parties. - realfinkployd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well lets see, the patriot act makes it illegal to report on government requests for information doesn't it? Perhaps you do not see more public abuses of the patriot act because it is illegal to report on its use? If I were as librarian and was forced to turn over all of my book records without a warrant I couldn't tell you that. If I was a doctor and was ordered to turn over medical records I couldn't report on that either.
Frankly, with executive orders, the government does not NEED a patriot act. As we have just seen, Bush can sign a paper that allows the NSA to spy on Americans without a court order (warrant), so why even bother with a congressional law?
And for all the pro patriot act conservatives out there (during the 90s I considered myself a hard core conservative, but you all did a major 180 and left me to become cheerleaders for ultimate, unchecked government power), I have a question: What happens when Republicans lose control of Congress, a Democrat is elected president and someone like Janet Reno gets control of the justice dept again? What do you think they will do with this all of this newfound power for secret courts, evidence, and searches? Can you people not think more than one year into the future? - mstar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Its not completely over yet but its a good step. I think an appropiate quote is "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
- realfinkployd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"We haven't been attacked in the last 4 years and its mostly contributed to some of these articles in the patriot act."
Can you prove that? Can you even link Patriot Act uses with halting terrorism? How about this one, what did the patriot act do to make it possible to stop the few terrorist attacks we know were being planned that couldn't have been done without it?
"And there have been no abused cases stemming from the governments grown power."
You inability to google aside, since the everything is kept classified and secret, how would we know? I know, I know, the government told us there were not.
"I'm all about smaller government, but who cares if they can see my medical history...i'm not a suspect."
If you were alive and in power during the 1700's we would never have broken away from England. We would have been begging them to quarter troops in our homes, tax us through the roof and oppress us all they wanted, as long as the promise to protect us from indian raids. I it amazing how far this country has come once believing in the basic concepts of liberty, justice, fairness, and freedom.
I guess the rallying call today is "Please tread on me, just make sure I don't ever get hurt"
sickening - Vektuz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Patriot act is bad, basically because it allows treating of american citizens as if they have none of the rights of fair trials and due process that the constitution is supposed to provide them, if they are thought of as terrorist.
Thats not so bad, except that the government also decides who to label 'terrorist' and it can arbitrarily label citizens as such, and strip them of their rights under this act.
If seperate, unbiased authority was the one deciding when someone could be classified as terrorist, the Patriot Act might work - but since the same people are deciding that as the people doing the violation, this is a case of an act allowing the government to become the judge, jury ,and executioner all in one, and it is thus a terrible violation of your rights. - realfinkployd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"The whitehouse has no power unless granted by congress...That seems to be my understanding, am i wrong ?"
Yes, the president can sign an executive order effectively making anything he wants a law, circumventing the constitution. Conservatives like me used to hate this with a passion when Clinton was doing it left and right, but now all of them (except me I guess) cheer Bush along every step of the way when he does it.
Of course, it just came out that Bush signed a "secret order" allowing the NSA to spy on american's without a warrant. Why even bother with all these laws and regulations? Why not just say "the government can do anything to anyone it likes with no oversight as long as it uses the word terrorism in the justification"?
"No one has ever brought up which exact "rights" the Act is infringing upon"
They have, but they have been nit picked away. I consider the government bypassing up to 200 years of established legal precedent requiring warrants, evidence disclosure, and charges filed before holding someone to be pretty damn "unreasonable" search and seizure.
And of course, there is the secrecy aspect of the application of the laws themselves. The DOJ has steadfastly refused to inform the voters (us) of how it has been using the law that it passed on our behalf. That alone is cause enough to despise it. This is not Soviet Russia, there should not be "secret laws". If we do not have any right to privacy, why do our elected officials? - thotpoizn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Thank God!!! Best news I've read all week. Too bad my @$%^# representatives both went the wrong way on this... *sigh!* Well, Inhoffe, Coburn - I'm afraid it's a thumbs down for you next time at bat, as a matter of principle.
- ccheath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3http://digg.com/search?search=patriot&submit=Submit
first story today was submitted before vote was in...
this story was first submitted after the vote... afaik - robelanator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Realfinkployd, the difference is that not even the Founding Fathers believed that privacy was a right."
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... - robelanator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"No one has ever brought up which exact "rights" the Act is infringing upon..."
The right to be secure in my persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Why is this important? Look at what happened during the 50's and 60's with COINTELPRO:
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIb.htm - truspark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Can someone explain to me why does this act need to be permanent? Is it really such a chore for the Congress to vote on its continuing relevance every 5 years? It's things like this that make Liberals feel that Republicans have some sort of master plan for a corporate takeover of the US.
- FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3grizwald, what's the matter, forgot how to use Google? Just search for "Patriot Act abuses" and stand back.
- aburd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The Patriot Act makes it illegal to discuss the searches and invasions, it is difficult to know if and when it has caused any harm.
- orabox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@tubejay
"I'm so sick of hearing fifteen stories a day about the Patriot Act"
Dude, your a hypocrite, most of your digs are on politics and the Patriot act. If you don’t want to see this; go away and look at something else. - twollamalove, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
This is a timeless quote from Benjamin Franklin. I feel it really sums up why people are against the patriot act. - realfinkployd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"How are we safer without it ... ?"
I didn't know safety was the guiding principal of our country.
Weird because it only appears once in Article I section 9.
If we are going to place safety as our top priority why not just declare martial law now and let the military run the show?
Or can we admit that some balance between liberty and safety is necessary if we want to keep calling ourselves "free", and trying to find this balance is being acted out now in government. - robelanator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Another dumbass who cannot read... :-/"
Heh. Defensive much?
Because a right is not absolute doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Freedom of speech isn't absolute either.
The PATRIOT Act removes any real judicial review from searches and seizes. FISA warrants are rubber stamps, and National Security Letters require absolutely no independent review whatsover. That's pretty "unreasonable" in my book. - robelanator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The one Senator who voted against the PATRIOT Act originally was Russ Feingold (D, WI). He also played a big role in assembling this bipartisan group to block cloture today. Remember his name come 2007/2008. He'll be running for president and will need all the support he can get to beat Hillary.
If you're unfamiliar with Feingold, The New Republic ran a long peice on him a few issues back. TNR's site is for members only, but this entry at DKos quotes it at length:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/24/21499/442 - FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2TubaTech, I assume you are slamming Clinton for not acting after terrorist attacks, but in fact he did. As a matter of fact, they caught the guys behind the first WTC attack and wonder of wonders prosecuted them in court! Say, where is bin Laden nowadays? Never mind. Then the Oklahoma City terrorism happened, and that person was caught and put to death. bin Laden dead yet? Nope? Oh well.
- test5477, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I hope this whole thing goes away.
Freedom is our right, not a priveldge given by the government. - cybortrip, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2HOLY CRAP i never thought this would get rejected. there may be hope for us after all...
- MikeHinds, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2TITLE: "Senate Blocks Extension of Patriot Act"
No, it didn't. The 53 / 47 majority was short of the 60 votes required to invoke cloture and halt further debate, allowing it to come to a real vote. The real vote did not take place and debate is continuing. The title is incorrect and misleading (but in fairness to the Digger, was probably copied verbatim from the AP source in the mainstream media). - locojones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The White House Press Secretary was quoted on CNN as saying:
"In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without these vital tools for a single moment. The time for Democrats to stop standing in the way has come."
Wow, since when is defending the civil rights of Americans "standing in the way?" - FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Expect another terrorist attack if the Patriot Act is not renewed..."
Are you suggesting the Bush administration will orchestrate an attack to make the point about how much they needed the Patriot Act? - dark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm glad I wrote to my senators. I hope you all did too.
- FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"what would u impeach him on?"
Why was Clinton impeached? For lying. Do the math. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1/Tissue ^^
Do you really feel that way? That were all brainwashed!! OOOOOOOO!!!!! No its okay, its not your fault the democrats control no part of the government cause theyre party is falling apart with a leader like howard dean. No worries. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ROFL George Bush is a dictator ROFL ROFL ROFL. Go watch more michael moore. Hes obviously your source of info. Wow lets see, give up a few freedoms, or be killed in a bombing. And dont say it wont happen because 9/11 did happen and so did the london bombings. As far as Iraq, did I say it was because of 9/11? Heres why were in Iraq. Why let a country who has nuclear intentions even get the get chance? Whether or not they had WMDs doesnt matter, they were trying to get them and they had weapons rich uranium and none of you can refute that. God forbid we give women the right to vote or allow girls to goto school or people to voice their opinions. Ive been to iraq, you have no idea what your talking about. Go and there and then maybe someone will take your BS seriously.
- ccheath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://tinyurl.com/bhl4o
senate.gov vote record - grizwald, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"For all you who think the origional patriot act, was allowed by the senate .
YOUR THE BIGGEST FRIGGEN NOOB.
OH AND REPUBLICAN
The patriot act 1 was passed, during the antrax attacks on the senate, when only 3 senators were in the building.
THX, for listening to another piece of america history."
oh really .. then how did this vote record get created ??? Was it a 'BUSH' conspiracy ..??? retard
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313 - starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1lets hope rationality is finally taking hold. for a while i thought we were becoming the soviet union. lets hope. and lets go ahead and impeach bush just to discourage the next despot.
- Digital.Totem, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I believe in God, because of small miracles. I think he hates me, because of all the other *****.
- oldcyborg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I am against the patriot act. It WAS a knee jerk reaction, and I don't anyone knew what all was in it, yet they want to expand IT!!!!I think that is a bad idea, and hope the vote failure sticks.
I am a republican, but I am against any constraints on abortion, and I think the government ought to pay for, means tested, of course. The republicans keep getting further away from me, or visa versa... Unfortunately, I can't subscribe to the Democrats giving away the farm, either... You cannot take care of everyone. Somebody has to work and pay taxes. People have shown that they WILL sit home and do nothing, if they can get by with it.
No to the Patriot act. We need new rules, but we can't give up any more freedoms, or we aren't gonna have any left..
Cyborg
YES - monfoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1When the next 9/11 happens I don't want to hear you bitching about it. I guarantee it will happen again and this is why. maybe some of the act was over board but instead of just trashing it they should have worked on it and cleaned it up.
If you think it's just the Republicans selling off America then your in for a rude awakening the Democrats are even worse as they are selling you to the Socialist Communist establishment even faster. - scolainsola, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"It goes against the Constitution in many places, and it was sneakily brought into Congress without them knowing the full extent of it."
Thats funny, didn't the supreme court uphold it?? - ccheath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://tinyurl.com/c33fc
LINK TO LIVE BLOGGING OF THE SENATE COVERAGE ON C-SPAN
APPOLOGIES FOR THE STUCK CAPS KEY - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You know this is the reason I like this site.
So many intelligent people all coming together and talking about stuff that matters, it's a beautiful thing. - pfunked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Expect another terrorist attack if the Patriot Act is not renewed..."
Why are you terrified? The White House wants you as frightened as Al Qaeda does. Don't be a sucker. - FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1tubejay, do your own research and learn, instead of asking others to do it for you. If you research on your own, you won't be taken in by pat political slogans used by both sides.
- FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Multifaceted, terrorist attacks on Americans happen a lot more often nowadays, not just every four years. They happen around the world to other nations as well. In fact, terrorism has been with humanity for thousands of years.
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. That was the law he broke. The rest of what he is accused of doing pales into insignificance when you see the laws Bush and crew have been and continue to break. - twollamalove, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hey, as it turns out, the terrorists have not necessarily won. Man, for a while there I thought they had (after all, we've been in a state of constant "terror" since 9/11). This is definitely one step in the right direction.
[I realize this is probably best categorized as a flame. I don't mean it to be, it's just my opinion.] - JaggedEdge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Also.... think about how our lifes were before this act was passed.... Nothing for OUR good has changed, your only giving them more power over yourself. You can argue safety for hours on end... I would much rather live in the world a few years back when it was "Less safe". This act going away means we've all become more free from the grasp of a bunch of politicians, allowed to live just a bit free-er. Arguing that you like the patriot act is like stabbing yourself in the back...its nonsensical.
So step one's complete.... now for step two, make it till Bush is out of office...and elect someone who isnt a ***** puppet. My belief are more liberal but anyone who can run this country and let us americans still have our rights is good enough for me. Good luck to us. - SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1its all in the name. if they had called it the "no more rights for american citizens act" nobody would have voted for it, but everybody wants to be a patriot, right? its good news that they blocked it though. ha i just looked at the voting record. the guy i voted for didnt even vote on this issue. glad our opinions are being represented... fortunately they succeeded without him.
- Clp727, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have always voted for the Republican party. But I hate what they are doing to by basic rights. I am glad that someone posted a link to the voting record. My state Senators just lost a few election votes for voting yes to extend the Patriot act.
- Codes02, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yesssssssssss!
- aburd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Why was Clinton impeached? For lying. Do the math."
How about rushing into a war before the inspections were finished? And we can add: not passing along any of the caveats on any of the intel they leaked and presented in the build up to the Iraq war. - Fieri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1*is a Republican against the Patriot Act*
Libertarian, actually. -
Show 51 - 100 of 153 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is