I Got 99 Problems And George Bush Is One

Okay.

Go ILZ. I'll be reading along with interest and handing you bottled water if you tire.

Soz
I will provide the ice.

BBB

Gee, I wish all our lawmakers, policymakers and all those advisors were even half as smart as ILZ. I get so tired of being and seeing so many retarded people running things.

(please note I am being sarcastic and do not mean this. The fact that ILZ comes here, insults everyone and then you guys raise him up over your heads like some sort of golden calf makes me want to retch.)

<waving towel to cool fevered brow>

<holding the bucket for McG; thinking this vomiting spell may last for a little over two months>

Gotta question for ya, ILZ. How many lawsuits have been filed against The Government as a result of government actions undertaken puruant to authority granted by The Patriot Act? I'll give you a hint; the total so far is precisely none, despite all the energy and fury directed against it. To make a case, first you've gotta have a case to press. There is no case to be made against The Patriot Act, as evidenced by the fact no case has been pressed.

Essentially, all The Act does is streamline communication and exchange among pertinent agencies and grant the government authority to employ against terrorists the same tools and procedures already employed against organized crime.

well Timber, if that's all the Patroit act does can you possibly give me an instance or so of cases where the Act was needed over what laws were already in place? YOu know, so people like me would realize that the Patroit act was useful and needed rather than just a "feel-good cause we made some mores laws and now we all feel "safer?"

The 9/11 Commission determined the Patriot Act was a good thing, just needed a little tweaking here and there.

Said to be careful not to surpress info gathering aspect of it too much.

Golden calf?

I have always thought of him more as an ebony puppy.....

Re: I Got 99 Problems And George Bush Is One


Isn't this preaching to the choir? The only reason I ask that is I just saw another thread, a poll actually, and the Kerry supporters here seem to blow the Bush supporters out of the water as far as numbers go. I realize that with over 20,000 members only a small portion may visit the Politics forum and many may never read anything posted here.

Still, I think we're outnumbered, and to be honest, who here thinks that this forum is in any way representative of "America"? The truth is the "America" that will vote for George Bush (and I'm assuming it's those you are wanting to educate) aren't anywhere near this forum and could care less about reading the political opinions of people like us...people with names like PDiddie, Squinney, BrandX, etc. (not that those aren't great names.)

Of course those who have already replied in this thread are interested in what you have to say. They are firmly backing Kerry or are so against Bush that whatever you come up with will boost their already firmly planted stance of who will best lead. I'm also interested because I like to know what the other side is saying, thinking, feeling, and like most here I think the outcome of this election may well have a profound affect on my life (at least for the next four to eight years.)

I know I didn't state all this as eloquently as some here could, but lately I've had this feeling that the left doesn't really know "America." as much as they'd like to think they do. You know that they seem to care more about reality TV and aren't really tuned into State of the Union addresses, but do you really think that they'll understand what you mean when you say "Enumerated in retard-friendly pointers"? My personal feeling is that phrases such as "Democracy only works when the voters have functioning nervous systems" and explaining the Patriot Act as you see it will be lost on them.

The millions of regular, church-going Americans across the Midwest are already suspicious of those wanting to take prayer out of their schools, and sanction gay marriage. It's not their way and they don't understand it. They understand George Bush. He's plainspoken and humble and they understand him. The liberals just don't get this. JMHO

Oh, I think you were eloquent enough there, JustWonders. And your perception that "The Left" outnumbers "The Right" here is documented fact. A large number of folks on these boards are a bit dismayed at having to tolerate difference of opinion.

The r4ecommendations of 9/11 Commission re The Patriot Act:
Timber and Brand X, the 9/11 Commission didn't find The Patriot Act quite so benign as you described it. ---BBB

9/11 Commission Report Takes on Patriot Act, Government Secrecy; ACLU Outlines Civil Liberties Problems With Cabinet-Level Spymaster
July 22, 2004
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: [email protected]

WASHINGTON - The official 9/11 Commission report, released today, takes aim at the USA Patriot Act and the excessive amount of official secrecy in the Bush administration.

"Regarding civil liberties, the 9/11 Commission report essentially says that the Justice Department and White House have not made a compelling case for either the administration's obsession with secrecy or its Patriot Act," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "This bipartisan report should serve as a wake-up call for Congress that it must maintain the sunsets in the Patriot Act."

As the report states on page 394, "The burden of proof for retaining a particular governmental power should be on the executive, to explain (a) that the power actually materially enhances security and (b) that there is adequate supervision of the executive's use of the powers to ensure protection of civil liberties. If the power is granted, there must be adequate guidelines and oversight to properly confine its use."

The long-awaited report, which contains the official findings of the independent commission investigating the 9/11 terrorism attacks, contains significant recommendations germane to the debate over civil liberties that has raged for more than two-and-a-half years now.

The report echoes criticisms by the ACLU and others that the Justice Department has so far failed to demonstrate why the expanded surveillance and investigative powers in the Patriot Act are needed to fight terrorism. The commission's findings, the ACLU said, strongly confirm the need to maintain the Patriot Act sunsets.

The sunset provisions - which apply to some of the Patriot Act's most controversial provisions - would require Congress to reconsider about a tenth of the law in December 2005. Provisions that sunset include the infamous "library records" provision, which reduces judicial review when counter-intelligence agents seek secret court orders for the production of a wide array of personal information, including library, business, genetic, medical and even gun purchase records.

Notably, the commission does not recommend that any sunseted provisions should be made permanent.

In addition, the commission's report contains a list of 10 separate missed "operational" opportunities to foil the attacks. While the report stops short of calling the attacks preventable, it clearly shows that the intelligence and law enforcement communities were not using their existing counter-terrorism powers to their fullest potential.

"The administration has yet to explain why it didn't use its already expansive power to the fullest before 9/11," said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The commission's report suggests that the White House claim that the worst parts of the Patriot Act are needed to stop terrorism is dubious, to say the least."

The report also cites both excessive government secrecy and overclassification as threats to open government and, more notably, as threats to national security. The ACLU pointed to the finding as evidence that the government should stop stonewalling the series of Freedom of Information Act requests submitted by the ACLU and other civil liberties groups on the Patriot Act, the Abu Ghraib scandal and other matters of public interest.

Characterizing the current Congressional intelligence watchdog system as "dysfunctional," the commission's strongest recommendation is the need for more aggressive Congressional oversight of the intelligence community, including making the intelligence budget public. The ACLU applauded the move but emphasized that the structure of the committee would be less important than whether its operation was in turn open to public scrutiny.

As the report stated: "Secrecy stifles oversight, accountability and information sharing. Unfortunately, all the current organizational incentives encourage over-classification. This balance should change; and as a start, open information should be provided about the overall size of agency intelligence budgets."

Contrary to earlier reports, the commission explicitly rejects - in part, for civil liberties reasons - the creation of a domestic intelligence agency modeled after Britain's MI-5. The ACLU, a critic of any domestic intelligence activity that is not linked to law enforcement, applauded the move.

Unfortunately, there are some recommendations that raise civil liberties concerns; two of the most salient are calls for the backdoor creation of national ID cards in the form of a standardized drivers licenses and a cabinet-level intelligence czar.

"A Senate-confirmed intelligence director sitting in the White House would be in the hip pocket of the president," Romero added.

The ACLU questioned whether pitting the FBI's culture of case-oriented law enforcement against the CIA's culture of covert, subversive operations, under one chief, would result in a further weakening of civil liberties protections in the FBI's intelligence work. Similarly, if the new director were to have operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence work - that is, real authority over both the FBI and the CIA - he or she could blur the lines between the agencies' two very different missions.

Finally, the ACLU expressed concern that if the director of national intelligence ends up controlling the purse strings of the entire intelligence community, there are very few contingencies that could keep the director from exercising specific, operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence.
------------------------------------------------------------

The 9-11 Commission's report can be found at:
http://www.9-11commission.gov

For more information, see:
http://www.aclu.org/safeandfree

Gonna be a Long Nite! The kids are squabbling over old Patriot Boogey Man talking points. Yikes! Here comes Global Warming and Ye Olde Economy with Iraqi's "Throwin' Flowers" bringin' up the rear.

Re: I Got 99 Problems And George Bush Is One


I've heard this before. Who is 'the left' and how do you know if they know "America". Do you know America? America is a very very big place and I don't pretend to know all about it, but according to the polls the country is pretty neatly divided down the middle -- just like the last election. I would like it if that would change but it's only gotten worse in the last four years.

I will say this, the conservative voices in this forum may be fewer but they are also much louder.

Re: I Got 99 Problems And George Bush Is One


The "liberals" get more than you think. . . .

Those who fight for progress understand the great concepts that our founding fathers built into the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America.

Despite crafting the greatest documents ever written for the creation of government (with limited powers), there is no question that our founding fathers fell far short when it came to practicing what they preached.

With each new generation, this country makes progress. We still have a long way to go. Therefore, I agree that there still exist millions of people in this country who do not understand the enlightened concepts of "separation of church and state," and "equal protection" and "due process" under the law.

I doubt that understanding and enlightenment will come in my lifetime. So, I expect George Bush and others like him will rule our nation for many generations yet to come. Yet, the "liberals" will keep chipping away at the traditions that have oppressed and someday we will be a nation of people who are tolerant of each other's differences. We will work together to build bright futures for our children.

The "liberals" of the past kept chipping away at the tightly held ideals of the "conservatives" and finally brought slavery to an end and women were granted the right to vote. We can now look back in time and despise our sordid history of slavery and the oppression of women.

Likewise, in a few hundred years, a more advanced and enlightened society of people will look back on days when millions of people voted for George Bush (and others like him) and shake their heads in disgust and wonder why. . . .

That, my fellow Americans, will be the accomplishment of "liberals."

That was a fine post JustWonders.

Debra - I mispoke and of course you're right, the liberals do get it which is all the more amazing. They "get it" on an intellectual level. For instance, if they think that the "average" American gives a hoot about the opinions of the Hollywood crowd when it comes to politics, they're misguided. I'm not saying these good folks (the average Americans) are dumb, either. The fact that states like Massachusetts, New York and California voted heavily for Gore in the last election is not lost on them.

While I don't think the upper class is comprised mainly of "leftists" I think you'd be hard put to convince the heartland of this. Yes, they know Mr. Bush comes from a privileged background, but he doesn't come off as "elitist", has the common touch and is seen as genuine. These are people who, right or wrong, see the left as arrogant and as trying to "correct" them, rather than understand them.

The only point upon which I disagree with your post is that it will take "a few hundred years" for some of the changes to take place, although I agree it won't be in our lifetime. The left could, I suppose, accomplish their goals sooner if they were willing to change their image (actually the way they're perceived by most "regular" people.)

They won't be doing this anytime soon and that's why I believe the majority of the white-working class will vote for Mr. Bush.