Bill of Rights Under Bush: A Timeline (or What have the Dems Done for Me Lately?)
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Friday, December 14, 2007 21:45
VIEWED: 3846
PAGE 1 of 1
I did not write this. I am not looking for credit for it. I don't believe the author would mind my posting it here either. I have provided below the link to the original article as well. I realize that this is still a "crime" but I don't care. This is an important message and I believe the author would love to have as many peoople reading it as possible.
(BTW: If you want to read the links from many of the different parts of this timeline, you will have to go to the original site in the first place, so you should probably just go there. I just prefer looking at Firefly's dark background to the bright Red on the other site.)
http://mondoglobo.ning.com/group/questionauthority/forum/topic/show?id
=1509099%3ATopic%3A2937
By Phil Leggiere, writing for QuestionAuthority
Vote for this on Digg | Reddit
2001
January
Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. Link
Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. Link
February
The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. Link
Spring
Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. Link
May
US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. Link
September
In immediate aftermath of 9-11 terror attacks, Department of Justice authorizes detention without charge for any terror suspects. Over one thousand suspects are brought into detention over the next several months. Link (pdf)
October
Attorney General John Ashcroft announces change in Department of Justice (DOJ) policy. According to the new policy DOJ will impose far more stringent criteria for the granting of Freedom of Information Act requests. Link
September-October
NSA launches massive new database of information on US phone calls. Link
October
The USA Patriot Act becomes law. Among other things the law: makes it a crime for anyone to contribute money or material support for any group on the State Department’s Terror Watch List, allows the FBI to monitor and tape conversations between attorneys and clients, allows the FBI to order librarians to turn over information about patron’s reading habits, allows the government to conduct surveillance on internet and email use of US citizens without notice. The act also calls for expanded use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records of US citizens without a court order, exempts the government from needing to reveal how evidence against suspected terrorists was obtained and authorizes indefinite detention of immigrants at the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities.
NJ Superior court judge and civil liberties scholar Anthony Napolitano, author of A Nation of Sheep, has described the law’s assault on first and fourth amendment principles as follows, “The Patriot Act’s two most principle constitutional errors are an assault on the Fourth Amendment, and on the First. It permits federal agents to write their own search warrants [under the name “national security letters”] with no judge having examined evidence and agreed that it’s likely that the person or thing the government wants to search will reveal evidence of a crime… Not only that, but the Patriot Act makes it a felony for the recipient of a self-written search warrant to reveal it to anyone. The Patriot Act allows [agents] to serve self-written search warrants on financial institutions, and the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2004 in Orwellian language defines that to include in addition to banks, also delis, bodegas, restaurants, hotels, doctors' offices, lawyers’ offices, telecoms, HMOs, hospitals, casinos, jewelry dealers, automobile dealers, boat dealers, and that great financial institut
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
What is your own political identification?
Thanks,
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why do I need to have one?
Why do you, for that matter?
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why did you publish the link and then paste it here? You could have and probably should have simply posted the link and then your opinions regarding this article.
Personally I think it is crap. Just a bunch of dooom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You're a load of crap. The article mentions the Supreme Court and other courts at least a dozen times. You should be bitch-slapped for being egregiously stupid.
Personally I think it is crap. Just a bunch of dooom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
6ix: Many, many more Dems than Repugs voted against various restrictions. Unfortunately these are individually motivated people who don't reflect Party leadership. The Congresspeople with a conscience really belong in a third Party bc they get stabbed in the back over and over again.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Why do I need to have one?
Why do you, for that matter?
Hello,
'What have the Dems done for me lately?' suggested to me that you feel the Democrats are responsible for protecting you from Bush's stomping of your rights and liberties.
That inspired me to ask your own affiliation, because it seemed like an odd sort of supposition. I thought, 'perhaps he is a Democrat and feels that the Democratic party owes him some protection from this wrongdoing.'
A better question might be, 'What have the Republicans done for me lately?' and the answer is, 'Work in unison to shrink my rights and misspend my dollars to the tune of a trillion or more.'
A best question might be, 'What have I done for me lately?' and the answer is, 'Not a hell of a lot. I mostly talk about how I don't like this stuff, and complain to my friends and associates.'
In my own case, the sins are worse. I helped to vote that bastard in. I suppose that means I have only myself to blame for the aftermath.
Incidentally, I'm registered Independent.
That makes my coat a kind of brownish color.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If I had to give it a name, I'd say Jack was a proto-anarchist Libertarian of the "Get the fuck outta my business!" stripe.
I myself am an outright Anarchist.
And what he's bitchin about, is the Dems getting the votes, majorities, and offices on the promise and premise that they were gonna STOP this shit, and then dropping to their knees and unzipping the administrations fly voluntarily.
And the bitchin comes of knockin your head against the futile brick wall of the idocy that is incumbency, helped along by morons who blindly allow Gerrymandering, and vote in blocs not necessarily supporting their interests, thus removing any threat value whatsoever of the individual constituent.
By all means, feel WELCOME to get all up in Conyers ass for practically hiding under the judiciary committee table hoping we don't notice him tryin not to rock the boat, heaven knows his wife, cindy sheehan, and his whole damn district is so far up his ass about it he's been practically hiding out like a fugitive - and still not doin a damn thing... look at the so-called "justice" dept - they laughed off those subpeanos, more or less spat in his face and dared him to DO anything about it, and we haven't heard shit since, have we now ?
Was that me, I woulda deputized some returning troops into the capitol police and showed those fuckers the business end of a dynamic entry warrant service, which is what they'd do to us mere peons if WE laughed off a subpeano like that.
More than anything, Jack strikes me as a pissed that damn fools are pinning their hopes on a bunch of chickenshit bastards who not only won't put a stop to it, but are likely to commit the same abuses if the political reins shift into their hands - they never wanted to stop that shit, they just wanted to be the ones holding the leash, is all....
And I TOLD folks that, back when they voted these pissants into office in the first damn place.
It's like handing the One Ring to Boromir and telling him to whup Saurons ass - sure, he might do it, but all you've done in the end is simply change who's sittin in the throne pissing on you.
And folks pinning their hopes on Ron Paul, great guy that he is, facing a system that will isolate, stonewall and politically nullify or ignore him, or just downright give him the Bulworth treatment - it's a great idea, but in practice not a hope in hell even IF the rigged game would allow the election of a candidate who actually represented the peons instead of their corporate masters.
Once again, it's takin cough syrup for tuberculosis, treating the symptoms instead of the problem.
You got any decent ideas, I'd like to hear em, cause I sure as hell don't.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Jack, you and I have butted heads briefly in the past, but I like your style, boy.
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Why do I need to have one?
Why do you, for that matter?
You GO girl Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
Why did you publish the link and then paste it here? You could have and probably should have simply posted the link and then your opinions regarding this article.
Personally I think it is crap. Just a bunch of dooom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.
Hello Rallem.
I published the link because
a) I don't imagine that the original poster of this article would mind this message being disseminated in any way shape or form.
b) People are more prone to read what is in front of them, rather than click links to read it.
c) I piss on copyright laws whenever I get a chance at any other given moment because they do absolutely nothing to protect the brains and talent behind what is copyrighted in the first place, while suits make a mint off their backs.
d) Having said that, I would not hesitate to take a post from somebody else down if they requested and I would apologize to them profusely for having angered the original writer, and hope that they view me as an individual who doesn't have bad intentions. This is why I posted their link in the first place. I'm not trying to steal anything from anyone.
d) It pisses people off who disagree with me on any of these points.
e) I don't know how long you've been in the real world, but it's not as if this is the first post which has been printed here from another site, and I'm hardly the only one who does it.
...
As for the second portion of your post, though I don't agree with any word of it, you are of course more than entitled to your own opinions. Perhaps you might change your stance if you were to re-read it and retain it without skimming and you did it on the other site where you can click the links available after most, if not every single point made.
Quote:
Signym: Many, many more Dems than Repugs voted against various restrictions. Unfortunately these are individually motivated people who don't reflect Party leadership. The Congresspeople with a conscience really belong in a third Party bc they get stabbed in the back over and over again.
Yes Signy. I have no doubts that many many more Dems voted against various restrictions. There is absolutely no denying that. But the point is, this is a totally fixed game where the American people can never win. Dems dropping the ball now and not ending the nightmare is just the most blatant example of this in the history of my life.
Besides, if I were to vote Hillary or Obama into office next term, smoking would be absolutely forbidden in every private establishment in the country by the time the second term was up. Any Dem run state, such as Illinois with their complete ban of smoking in any business or building whether public or private is a stellar example of that.
I don't want to choose the lesser of two evils. Meddling is meddling no matter if you're the big dumb dufus who right now is whipping it out and pissing on everybody in broad daylight or you're the next Democratic man/woman behind the curtain pulling at the liberal heartstrings until we find ourselves so smothered and restricted in what activities we choose to partake in ourselves that we may as well be an automaton singing for the upcoming generation of MTV's brainwashed "Choose or Loose" genration at Chuck E Cheeses. (When it does come to that, remember that I've already claimed dibbs on being the huge gorilla with the keyboard in back. That guy ruled!)
That, my friend, is not a win situation for me.
And now they lied to all of you. All of you who wanted to end this war and knock the office of the President back down a few notches, safe within the system of checks and ballances. You've all been fooled. You all know it too. The silver tounge of the Harpy Democrats who pull at those heartstrings with their Lifetime movies fooled you all.
Sorry Signy. I've never doubted that your heart was in the right place on any of your threads, but to not see that the Dems brainwash and use their followers just as
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?
Chuckles.....
Read my previous posts and you'll know why. What a childish retort.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?"
In the 70's it was put more succinctly as "America - love it or leave it." And it makes about as much sense now as it did then - which is - none.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?
Yep, that's the kind of priciples this country was founded under. If you don't like it, roll over and take in the rear, or just go away.
Thank God people like you didn't run the revolution. We'd still be Brits.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
In the 70's it was put more succinctly as "America - love it or leave it." And it makes about as much sense now as it did then - which is - none.
Yeah... that's pretty much what I was thinking when I posted, but though it was on the tip of my tounge, I couldn't have put it so eloquently.
And storymark... that would have me falling out of my chair in laughter if it weren't so true.
Don't mean I'm not smiling now though.
EDITED TO ADD: I'm still waiting for Dems to come in here and try to tell me I'm wrong though. Any opposition I've had was to the obvious bash at Rethugs, but this post was meant to be even harder on the somehow celebrated Demons.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't see how anyone could read 6SJ's list and not be made a little uncomfortable. The one thing that is encouraging to me is that Anarchists, Libertarians, Republicans, Independents and Democrats seem to agree on that for the most part. The only reason more Republicans voted for these is because they have the White House. If a Democrat was in oval office you could just reverse the numbers.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?
Chuckles.....
Read my previous posts and you'll know why. What a childish retort.
Which of your previous posts? I am sorry, but I am at work and do not have the luxery of reading every single post, and if you answered the question earlier thus making my question "childish," then I appologize, but it was not intended as a retort. It was a simple question.NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?
Yep, that's the kind of priciples this country was founded under. If you don't like it, roll over and take in the rear, or just go away.
Thank God people like you didn't run the revolution. We'd still be Brits.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
Actually there were several people with the attitude that if you are sick and tired of the system then go somewhere else, back in the days of the Colonies before the Revolutionary War, and I believe they were called Tories. The primary differences here are that nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us, and the people who were not satisfied with the Government had other ideas for change. I cannot go back to see if Jack is one of those people who is saying that other countries have it better than we do, but I am certain that I have read more than once of people here pining away about how these certain European Countries are happier than us, and to those people I ask why not move to those countries then? I honestly don’t think anyone would be willing to move, because I think we all know how good we actually have it here in the United States, and I think these blubbering idiots like Jack who try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government, know that real happiness can only be found at home, and it has nothing to do with our Government.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Because we love the ideal, the dream, that is America - even tho through all this time it's been mostly bullshit, sure, the IDEA remains - we seek it, strive for it, in spite of a long history of Government that actively spites it, your average american damn well wants the ideals that this country was founded on.
Maybe a lotta folks have forgotten it, to swipe a paraphrase from Citizen "Better than a tinpot dictatorship isn't much of a yardstick to measure your freedom by..", but not all of us have.
As long as there is any hope at all, and I am doubtful enough in this respect to actually have a full-blown exit plan that I don't intend to share - many of us have decided to hold out, hope, and try to kick our country back onto the rails of the freedom train, until it becomes clearly impossible to do that, not out of some psychotic rabid flag waving nationalism, or because we think we're better than anyone else, but because we were born here, lived here, the communities and people who have touched and influanced our lives... they're all HERE...
It's an act of love, and we don't leave this country for the same reason Mal didn't just dump the wreck and get another ship at the end of Serenity, it's OUR ship, and we mean to keep her in the air, no matter what it takes.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Jack, I dunno, really.. what creates "People like us" - but I am learning, cause both of my Nieces are like that, and it seems that certain pre-dispositions combined with certain stresses and experiences virtually guarantee it to one degree or another - and while not identical, the thought processes are very similar, as are many of the personality aspects.
Delved into that a bit in a different threads, but dude, there's a LOT more of "us" than anyone ever realised, we are, socially, the newtownian equal and opposite reaction to the kool-aid chuggers, and as our society polarizes further, you WILL see an explosive growth of those who formerly covered it in social veneer and played along because they just can't stomach the game anymore.
Strangely, there seems to be an unusually wide range of such, politically, racially, of social and financial status - so apparently we're equal opportunity assholes
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I promise that I'll come back to this and answer these responses when I get home tonight.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Because we love the ideal, the dream, that is America - even tho through all this time it's been mostly bullshit, sure, the IDEA remains - we seek it, strive for it, in spite of a long history of Government that actively spites it, your average american damn well wants the ideals that this country was founded on.
Maybe a lotta folks have forgotten it, to swipe a paraphrase from Citizen "Better than a tinpot dictatorship isn't much of a yardstick to measure your freedom by..", but not all of us have.
As long as there is any hope at all, and I am doubtful enough in this respect to actually have a full-blown exit plan that I don't intend to share - many of us have decided to hold out, hope, and try to kick our country back onto the rails of the freedom train, until it becomes clearly impossible to do that, not out of some psychotic rabid flag waving nationalism, or because we think we're better than anyone else, but because we were born here, lived here, the communities and people who have touched and influanced our lives... they're all HERE...
It's an act of love, and we don't leave this country for the same reason Mal didn't just dump the wreck and get another ship at the end of Serenity, it's OUR ship, and we mean to keep her in the air, no matter what it takes.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
Here is my reply.
To Jack, I will look at your earlier posts to see why it was childish of me to ask why you didn't leave, but not now because I am tired. It has been a very stressful day for me.
To Fremdfirma,
It is great that you wish to take this country back to its roots based on freedom, but to what avail? Are you willing to take up arms? That is what founded this Country, it is why our second amendment rights are to keep and bear arms, (my opinion only) and it is why I own firearms, but if people were to ask me to take up arms against our current Government I would not only not comply but I would probably do everything in my power against the rebels. I do not believe the Government is that far corrupt from the original intent of our Forefathers.
In the list which started this post it stated several incidents in which the Government had tried to trample on the rights of its citizens, but nowhere were any of the details of those incidents printed showing who was targeted by these incidents, why these incidents were instigated, or any other detail unless possibly the detail somehow supported the case of the author. Also the current checks and balances scheme of our Government where the Legislative branch makes the Laws, The Executive branch enforces the laws, and the Judicial Branch decides if the laws are Constitutional or not, and where each branch has certain abilities to check the others ever mentioned in that article. Actually in the article posted above it was implied that the actual checks and balances of our Government was between the Republican and Democratic parties, and that is not the case. It might be the valid form of checks and balances for other Governments, but it is not for ours. This is outside anything I have read here, but it is often joked that there isn’t any real difference between the Republican and Democratic parties anymore, but if we think about it that is logical because each party has been around for so long that they most certainly would have burrowed ideas which were appealing to voters about the other party and made them their own.
I have to be very careful about what I write and mean because in another post I claimed that the Soviet Block Nations were all Socialist when in fact they were all Communist, but that was a simple case of my fingers typing one thing while my mind was thinking another. Actually I sort of recall thinking about Hungary while typing that post and in my mind it was the closest thing to a Socialist Government in the Soviet Block. Actually I believe it was called the Goulash Communist Government. I al
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
rallem
That was an interesting post.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I'm not prepared to take up arms against my government, either. I think we are years away from that. Possibly decades. I don't mind saying that the US is still the best fish in the sea.
Hopefully, peacable discourse and votes will steer the country in the direction of greater liberties, changing our course for the better long before we degenerate to the point of armed rebellion.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Is anybody here pushing for Ron Paul?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
-dup-
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
Is anybody here pushing for Ron Paul?
I am.
http://theunreachablestar.com/freedomdan.wmv
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Me too
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How about criticizing ? Complaining ? Exposing ? Impeaching ? Convicting ?
The problem is, is that people who do this (or want to do this) are accused of being anti-American. Invited to move elsewhere. It's not so much the 'taking up arms' that many seem to have a problem with, it's exercise of democracy at all.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Rallem
The reason why I found yur post interesting is b/c I too am first generation (Polish) and know many immigrants, including those from Hungary. But we have a diferent take on the US and it's good and bad points than you do (which I have to say you seem to have adopted direclty from your father).
One thing I found puzzling is that you remember a conversation w/ your father from the 90's. It left me with the impression that either you don't talk with your father much at all, or you don't talk about anything serious. So that that kind of conversation sticks out in your memory from roughly a decade ago. That would be sad, if true.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Rallem
The reason why I found yur post interesting is b/c I too am first generation (Polish) and know many immigrants, including those from Hungary. But we have a diferent take on the US and it's good and bad points than you do (which I have to say you seem to have adopted direclty from your father).
One thing I found puzzling is that you remember a conversation w/ your father from the 90's. It left me with the impression that either you don't talk with your father much at all, or you don't talk about anything serious. So that that kind of conversation sticks out in your memory from roughly a decade ago. That would be sad, if true.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
I remember conversations with my father from the 1990s, the 1980s, from before then, and after. I actually have a very good relationship with my parents. It is true that many of my beliefs and opinions do follow very closely to my father's because I guess it is true the apple doesn't fall far from its tree. With that said my opinions and beliefs do differ somewhat for instance My dad is pulling for either Giuliani or Romney, and I told my dad that I would rather vote for Clinton than Giuliani because he scares the crap out of me. I then told my dad that I am pulling for Paul, but would vote for Romney if he were the one to receive the Republican nomination.
To answer your earlier post, I think that the author of this post complained like he did in a totally non-relevant medium like this to draw out these types of remarks, as did many of the following posters, so they were getting in my opinion what they wanted. I am not going to appologize.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I am not going to appologize."
My opinion - All of these quotes here indicate to me you have little repect for the actual process of democracy - including the right to voice an opinion critical of the government.
If you are so fed up with the system why not move
nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us
people who were not satisfied with the Government
these blubbering idiots
try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"I am not going to appologize."
My opinion - All of these quotes here indicate to me you have little repect for the actual process of democracy - including the right to voice an opinion critical of the government.
If you are so fed up with the system why not move
nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us
people who were not satisfied with the Government
these blubbering idiots
try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
Are you still looking for an apology?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, just expressing my opinion. Which is that , consistently, over time, you've expressed an idea that no one should ever criticize the government. Which seems very out of place from someone who claims to love democracy.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
No, just expressing my opinion. Which is that , consistently, over time, you've expressed an idea that no one should ever criticize the government. Which seems very out of place from someone who claims to love democracy.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
I didn't say that nobody should ever criticize the Government.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Then what do these mean ?
If you are so fed up with the system why not move
nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us
people who were not satisfied with the Government
these blubbering idiots
try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government
***************************************************************
Please elucidate.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Then what do these mean ?
If you are so fed up with the system why not move
nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us
people who were not satisfied with the Government
these blubbering idiots
try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government
***************************************************************
Please elucidate.
You are giving partial quotes, but I've been thinking about one thing I did say and will issue an apology for it. I said that this was not an appropriate venue for these types of comments and I was wrong. This is a perfect place for them, so I do apologize for that.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I give partial quotes in the interest of saving space - that are still able to point to the particular quote and highlight the particular phrase or idea that caught my attention. I COULD simply copy/past all of your posts, but that would be stupid.
So I take it you'd rather dance defensively than discuss. S'OK. I get it.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I give partial quotes in the interest of saving space - that are still able to point to the particular quote and highlight the particular phrase or idea that caught my attention. I COULD simply copy/past all of your posts, but that would be stupid.
So I take it you'd rather dance defensively than discuss. S'OK. I get it.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
You quoted me with
Quote:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move
which looks like a criticism, but if you had left the question mark attached it would have looked like an honest question. I did mention in a later post that my father did exactly that.
With the rest of the quotes you provided there is no context to what I originally wrote. I know what you are doing is ethically proper, but I believe you are supposed to mark these quotes which you alter so the readers will know they are not verbatim. I think that if there is something taken out of the quote before the text you provide, that you are supposed to give three periods before to show there was text before your quote, “…quote,” or three periods after for text afterwards, “Quote…” or if anything is different about the quote you should use a [sic] to show that.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I just figure people will find (word ...) to get to the first instance. But either way you seem to think that people who say that other countries have it better should move, that people who aren't quite ready to take up arms should shut up, that people who criticize the government are blubbering idiots just trying to sound smart. In other words, you find no justification why people should be able to criticize the government. That's what I noticed.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How much space did you really save by omitting my question mark? Oh wait, that much. So why else would you omit it but to change the meaning of what I said? You lied when you said you only gave partial quotes to save space and the real reason was to change the context of my messages.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Rallem
Here I am trying to have a civilized discussion and you seem to be stuck on trying to derail it with cavils about one question mark in one quote.
So here are extended quotes and my impressions:
Just a bunch of doom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders. Aside from being untrue as SignyM pointed out, the question to this is - so what ? If they were cheerful cockeyed optimists for whom nothing was ever wrong would you feel so compelled to minimize their opinions ? Probably not, for reasons given below.
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs? If people complain about and criticize 'the system' why would that be your first response ? B/c in the end it does come down to - American, love it or leave it. Which is not an expression of a democratic ideal.
The primary differences here are that nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us, and the people who were not satisfied with the Government had other ideas for change. There are several problems with this post. The first is that you're saying that people who are making comparisons (which even US News and World Report acknowledges are valid - google "How They Do It Better") are pining for foreign countries. Way to go mischaracterizing what people are saying ! And you complain about a question mark ... 
The other thing you seem to be saying is - if you're not ready for armed revolt, STFU. Again, certainly not in the spirit of democracy where people are supposed to be able to discuss their political opinions.
... I think we all know how good we actually have it here in the United States, and I think these blubbering idiots ... who try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government, know that real happiness can only be found at home, and it has nothing to do with our Government. There are multiple problems here as well. Do we all really know how good we have it here in the US ? And even if we did, does that mean there's no room for improvement ? Does just criticizing the government qualify people as 'blubbering idiots' ? That certainly doesn't seem very democratic. Do we all - like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz - have to find happiness in our own back yards no matter what the government does ? That would have disqualified your father from leaving Hungary, b/c - according to you - his happiness should have been in his own back yard irrespective of the government.
It is great that you wish to take this country back to its roots based on freedom, but to what avail? Are you willing to take up arms? Here's that theme again ... if you aren't ready to violently overthrow the government you should STFU.
... I think that the author of this post complained like he did in a totally non-relevant medium like this to draw out these types of remarks, as did many of the following posters, so they were getting in my opinion what they wanted. Non-relevant medium - RWE in a discussion board where people discuss ??? If this is a non-relevant medium, what, in your opinion is the appropriate medium for political discussion in a democracy ?
Overall I get the impression you might like the country but you seem very unhappy with the democracy.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thank you for your reply. I am spacing the text differently than in your original post for my ability to keep track of my responses. I hope you do not mind.
Quote:
Just a bunch of doom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.
Aside from being untrue as SignyM pointed out, the question to this is - so what ? If they were cheerful cockeyed optimists for whom which nothing was ever wrong would you feel so compelled to minimize their opinions ? Probably not, for reason given below.
I had written more about this saying that no checks and balances were mentioned in the original article posted, and that the article seemed to imply that the necessary checks and balances for the actions listed rested in the arms of the Democrats, and that is not the case. The question here in my opinion is whether the Executive Branch is wrong for making these requests which might affect the rights of America’s citizens, or is it alright for them to make these requests expecting the Judicial Branch to catch any un-Constitutional practices?
Quote:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?
If people complain about and criticize 'the system' why would that be your first response ? B/c in the end it does come down to - American, love it or leave it. Which is not an expression of a democratic ideal.
This is a very valid question with a very valid answer, and whether or not it strikes a chord of “America, love it or leave it,” in your mind is irrelevant because it is an expression of Democratic ideas. I have the right to voice my opinions too. With that said, it is only “America, love it or leave it,” in your mind, because the valid answer of, “I prefer to stay in this country and make it better,” [sic] or any other valid answer given satisfied my query.
Quote:
The primary differences here are that nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us, and the people who were not satisfied with the Government had other ideas for change.
There are several problems with this post. The first is that you're saying that people who are making comparisons (which even US News and World Report acknowledges are valid - google "How They Do It Better") are pining for foreign countries. Way to go mischaracterizing what people are saying ! And you complain about a question mark ... The other thing you seem to be saying is - if you're not ready for armed revolt, STFU. Again, certainly not in the spirit of democracy where people are supposed to be able to discuss their political opinions.
What my post pointed out was that the people back in the days of the Revolutionary War, both Loyalist and Rebellion had different options available.
Quote:
... I think we all know how good we actually have it here in the United States, and I think these blubbering idiots ... who try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government, know that real happiness can only be found at home, and it has nothing to do with our Government.
There are multiple problems here as well. Do we all really know how good we have it here in the US ? And even if we did, does that mean there's no room for improvement ? Does just criticizing the government qualify people as 'blubbering idiots' ? That certainly doesn't seem very democratic. Do we all - like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz - have to find happiness in our own back yards no matter what the government does ? That would have disqualified your father from leaving Hungary, b/c - according to you - his happiness should have been in his own back yard irrespective of the government.
I'll leave this one alone.
Quote:
It is great that you wish to take this country back to its roots based on freedom, but to what avail? Are you willing to take up arms?
Here's that theme again ... if you aren't ready to violently overthrow the government you should STFU.
In my original post I said that taking up arms was needed to create this
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And yet out of all this:
Quote:
2001
January
Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. Link
Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. Link
February
The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. Link
Spring
Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. Link
May
US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. Link
September
In immediate aftermath of 9-11 terror attacks, Department of Justice authorizes detention without charge for any terror suspects. Over one thousand suspects are brought into detention over the next several months. Link (pdf)
October
Attorney General John Ashcroft announces change in Department of Justice (DOJ) policy. According to the new policy DOJ will impose far more stringent criteria for the granting of Freedom of Information Act requests. Link
September-October
NSA launches massive new database of information on US phone calls. Link
October
The USA Patriot Act becomes law. Among other things the law: makes it a crime for anyone to contribute money or material support for any group on the State Department’s Terror Watch List, allows the FBI to monitor and tape conversations between attorneys and clients, allows the FBI to order librarians to turn over information about patron’s reading habits, allows the government to conduct surveillance on internet and email use of US citizens without notice. The act also calls for expanded use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records of US citizens without a court order, exempts the government from needing to reveal how evidence against suspected terrorists was obtained and authorizes indefinite detention of immigrants at the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities.
NJ Superior court judge and civil liberties scholar Anthony Napolitano, author of A Nation of Sheep, has described the law’s assault on first and fourth amendment principles as follows, “The Patriot Act’s two most principle constitutional errors are an assault on the Fourth Amendment, and on the First. It permits federal agents to write their own search warrants [under the name “national security letters”] with no judge having examined evidence and agreed that it’s likely that the person or thing the government wants to search will reveal evidence of a crime… Not only that, but the Patriot Act makes it a felony for the recipient of a self-written search warrant to reveal it to anyone. The Patriot Act allows [agents] to serve self-written search warrants on financial institutions, and the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2004 in Orwellian language defines that to include in addition to banks, also delis, bodegas, restaurants, hotels, doctors' offices, lawyers’ offices, telecoms, HMOs, hospitals, casinos, jewelry dealers, automobile dealers, boat dealers, and that great financial institution to which we all would repose our fortunes, the post office. Link 1 | Link 2
November
Executive order limits release of presidential documents. The order gives incumbent presidents the right to veto requests to open any past presidential records and supercedes the congressionally passed law of 1978 mandating release of all presidential records not explicitly deemed classified. Link
2002
Winter
FBI and Department of Defense (DOD), forbidden by law from compiling databases on US citizens, begin contracting with private database firm ChoicePoint to collect, store, search and maintain data. Link
Spring
Secret executive order issued authorizing NSA to wiretap the phones and read emails of US citizens. Link
Spring
Transportation Security Adminstration (TSA) acknNOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:[sic] indicates that an error in grammar or spelling in the quote is original, and not added. It's like saying "I know this is wrong, but in order not to change the original quote I have included it as is".
Originally posted by rallem:
I think that if there is something taken out of the quote before the text you provide, that you are supposed to give three periods before to show there was text before your quote, “…quote,” or three periods after for text afterwards, “Quote…” or if anything is different about the quote you should use a [sic] to show that.
It's latin, originally sicut meaning "just as that".
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Citizen, thank you for correcting me. Rue, I basically won't reply to that post because I don't want to repeat myself. I was going to try and research some stuff from the Supreme Court, but until a I get a day off it is too difficult to manage my time.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nearly all of the points are well documented. But unless you want to go to the congressional record (for example) to read the USPATRIOT Act (which I have done - be prepared for most of the bill to be by reference to previous bills) - you'll have to depend on the media for the executive summary. Before you put in that kind of effort, ask yourself if you have any trust in the media - assuming you will scan several reliable sources for your information (not Drudge, TownHall, or FOX).
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I could tell from what I have been able to check out that you did research this well, but I would like to research it myself.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Absolutely ! Just a small friendly hint that it may be a big mountain of work, is all.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For my limited time ability while at work I will try to tackle a few of these bulletins per post
2001
Quote:
January
Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. Link
Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. Link
I have no comment regarding this other than I think you are probably right if your thoughts are suspicious, but personally I believe that most suspicions here are cast upon the Vice President.
Quote:
February
The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. Link
Spring
Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. Link
I think this goes back to my statement that I think it is the job of the Executive Branch of our Government to enforce our Countries laws and securities by any means available, and for them to depend upon the Judicial Branch to catch any possible Unconstitutional acts.
Quote:
May
US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. Link
This goes back to the 1969 I believe when Timothy Leary was able to have the Supreme Court rule that The Marijuana Tax Act was unconstitutional, and has nothing to do with our current Administration.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Don't forget S. 1959, a bill to prevent "Radicalization".
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bil
ls&docid=f:s1959is.txt.pdf
Oley
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070321181940.htm
Date: March 22, 2007
Moral Judgment Fails Without Feelings
OR
a wllingness to torture and taze an individual might indicate brain damage ...
Consider the following scenario: someone you know has AIDS and plans to infect others, some of whom will die. Your only options are to let it happen or to kill the person.
Co-senior author Antonio Damasio said the feeling of aversion normally blocks humans from harming each other. Most people waver or say they could not, even if they agree that in theory they should. But according to a new study in the journal Nature, subjects with damage to a part of the frontal lobe make a less personal calculation.
A total of 30 subjects of both genders faced a set of scenarios pitting immediate harm to one person against future certain harm to many. Six had damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPC), a small region behind the forehead, while 12 had brain damage elsewhere, and another 12 had no damage.
The subjects with VMPC damage stood out in their stated willingness to harm an individual -- a prospect that usually generates strong aversion.
"Because of their brain damage, they have abnormal social emotions in real life. They lack empathy and compassion," said Ralph Adolphs, Bren Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Caltech.
"In those circumstances most people without this specific brain damage will be torn. But these particular subjects seem to lack that conflict," said co-senior author Antonio Damasio, director of the Brain and Creativity Institute and holder of the David Dornsife Chair in Neuroscience at USC.
"Our work provides the first causal account of the role of emotions in moral judgments," said co-senior author Marc Hauser, professor of psychology at Harvard and Harvard College Professor. But, Hauser added, not all moral reasoning depends so strongly on emotion.
"What is absolutely astonishing about our results is how selective the deficit is," he said. "Damage to the frontal lobe leaves intact a suite of moral problem solving abilities, but damages judgments in which an aversive action is put into direct conflict with a strong utilitarian outcome."
It is the feeling of aversion that normally blocks humans from harming each other. Damasio described it as "a combination of rejection of the act, but combined with the social emotion of compassion for that particular person." "The question is, are the social emotions necessary to make these moral judgments," Adolphs asked.
The study's answer will inform a classic philosophical debate on whether humans make moral judgments based on norms and societal rules, or based on their emotions.
The study holds another implication for philosophy.
By showing that humans are neurologically unfit for strict utilitarian thinking, the study suggests that neuroscience may be able to test different philosophies for compatibility with human nature.
***************************************************************
Jack Bauer - my hero.
Not.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME