Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Congress goes off the deep end
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 1 of 126 (353010)
09-28-2006 11:32 PM


You know, I honestly didn't think that our government has lost their sense of reality so badly as to proceed with this. All I can say is "holy . . . fucking . . . shit". It's only in the prelimanary stages (having passed House approval), but the fact that they have even considered this is more than scary. I have lost, as of now, any respect I had left for the republicans in these federal offices.
What the asinine Congress has done

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Taz, posted 09-28-2006 11:55 PM kuresu has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 2 of 126 (353016)
09-28-2006 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by kuresu
09-28-2006 11:32 PM


Kuresu, what you just said is blasphemy! You are unpatriotic to disagree with our godly president.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by kuresu, posted 09-28-2006 11:32 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by kuresu, posted 09-29-2006 12:13 AM Taz has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 3 of 126 (353018)
09-29-2006 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Taz
09-28-2006 11:55 PM


crap--the thought police must be coming soon--and you're just the first wave!
(just to piss off any illegal wiretappers--haha, you're fat, and ugly, and your mom slept with a dog!)does this show my contempt enough?

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Taz, posted 09-28-2006 11:55 PM Taz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 09-29-2006 12:25 AM kuresu has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 4 of 126 (353019)
09-29-2006 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by kuresu
09-29-2006 12:13 AM


it's about values
There you go insulting dogs, what did they ever do to you to deserve such treatment?
The republicans are showing they have no american values.
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by kuresu, posted 09-29-2006 12:13 AM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by nwr, posted 09-29-2006 12:40 AM RAZD has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 5 of 126 (353020)
09-29-2006 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by RAZD
09-29-2006 12:25 AM


Re: it's about values
RAZD writes:
it's about values
Yes it is. Once again the republican-lunatic party demonstrates that his has none.
Once again the so-called "moderate" republicans have abandoned principle to vote along party lines.

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 09-29-2006 12:25 AM RAZD has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 6 of 126 (353037)
09-29-2006 4:23 AM


Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
Rather than purely venting, though I understand that feeling, I'm interested in people who have supported Bush and the Republican party explain passage of the bill.
The reason I am interested is that I am neither a republican nor democrat, but have generally agreed with republican standards of keeping gov't small, keeping gov't out of peoples lives, keeping the federal gov't weaker than states, and not allowing any single branch of the gov't to become more powerful than the others.
What's more I support a strong military and am not into "coddling terrorists".
So what I want is an explanation of how this bill which allows a single branch of the federal gov't to intrude on people's lives, based on its own say so and with no real oversight, is consistent with traditional republican (i.e. conservative) principles?
I doubt reps in Congress'd be handing this to a Dem prez, of course that might be why they installed a renewal clause. It'll be good right up until a Dem steps into office and then its intrusive gov't.
But more importantly I'd have expected this more from a dem position than a rep one. Ronald Reagan and traditional reps used to hoist the image of Big Brother as something we should fear and avoid. Now it appears Bush reps are hoisting the image of terrorists to get us to rush toward Big Brother. Hey I still remember the good arguments against that.
So please explain how you view it as consistent and acceptable from a traditional Republican vantage point. And if it isn't, why is it worthwhile for Reps to change their traditional platform? If the answer has anything to do with "terrorism", explain why court sanctioned wiretaps, with flexible time for requesting the tap, is not sufficient? Why is it thought that a single person has the ability to make such a decision with no true checking power by the population?
Edited by holmes, : typos, abe

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 09-29-2006 1:12 PM Silent H has not replied
 Message 9 by nwr, posted 09-29-2006 2:27 PM Silent H has not replied
 Message 24 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-02-2006 11:21 PM Silent H has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 7 of 126 (353130)
09-29-2006 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Silent H
09-29-2006 4:23 AM


Re: Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
I've been keeping track of this debate ever since it made the big splash a couple years ago.
The best explanation I've heard so far is the one liner that the president and several republican reps and senators have been saying for a long time now: "We are doing what is necessary to insure the safety of the American people."
Just last night, there was a debate about a similar issue. The democrats were saying how America has been known as the nuremberg nation for the last 50 years and the last thing we need is for the world to start thinking that we are now the quantanamo (sp?) nation. Immediately, a republican rep responded by saying that the democrats aren't willing to take the necessary steps to keep this nation safe. It's more complicated than that and you may be hearing from a very bias perspective (mine), so sucks for you for not keeping track of the politics.
But the point is there really has not been any good explanation for the act.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Silent H, posted 09-29-2006 4:23 AM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by FliesOnly, posted 09-29-2006 1:40 PM Taz has replied

  
FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 4144 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 8 of 126 (353136)
09-29-2006 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Taz
09-29-2006 1:12 PM


Re: Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
gasby writes:
The best explanation I've heard so far is the one liner that the president and several republican reps and senators have been saying for a long time now: "We are doing what is necessary to insure the safety of the American people."
Look, it's not that Dems are saying that we shouldn't listen in on calls. That is a bunch of fear mongering BS put out by the Republicans to once again scare people into winning them an election. Instead, Deems are saying that you need to get a friggen search warrant. I mean, seriously, if they're such terrible people (the ones being "spied upon") getting a search warrant should be no big deal...correct? Why all the fuss, just get a search warrant and the problem is solved.
gasby writes:
It's more complicated than that and you may be hearing from a very bias perspective (mine), so sucks for you for not keeping track of the politics.
Actually, it's not really that complicated. Simply follow the law(s) we already have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 09-29-2006 1:12 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 09-29-2006 3:09 PM FliesOnly has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 9 of 126 (353151)
09-29-2006 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Silent H
09-29-2006 4:23 AM


Anarchists
holmes writes:
Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
There are no republicans. Or, more correctly, there very few republicans, and those few that remain are so overcome by fear that they have lost the courage to stand up for republican principles.
The last real republican president was Nixon (ok, Ford, but he doesn't count). The Republican party has been taken over by radical extremists. Bush senior had some traditional republican principles, but he bought into a Faustian bargain and allowed the neocons too much say.
Ronald Reagan and traditional reps used to hoist the image of Big Brother as something we should fear and avoid.
The rot had already set in with Reagan's presidency. The neocons were the script writers for Reagan's acting role. Sure, Reagan did understand the importance of consensus, and was able to somewhat restrain the neocons. But it was Reagan who gave them a foothold in the party.
The neocons are anarchists. In their idealized kind of anarchy, there would be a minimalist government to just provide essential services. Everything else would be negotiated between rational people. They had Reagan run up a gigantic debt, in order to bankrupt the government. This was part of their strategy to put the government out of business, and make room for their idealized anarchy. The Bush debt is a continuation of this attempt to sabotage our system of government.
If you want to know what anarchy is really like, look to Iraq. The idealized anarchy of the neocons cannot exist, for it is incompatible with human nature. That Iraq is so much of a mess, might well be due to the influence of the neocons. They don't understand government and what it entails. They naively thought they could leave Iraq to the "marketplace".
Bush and Co might have succeeded in Iraq, had they immediately brought in substantial forces to keep the peace, immediately started rebuilding the infrastructure, rehired the Iraqi civil service to run the bureaucracy, and instituted something like the South African "Reconciliation commission" to redress long standing grievances. But they did not, because this was contrary to the neocon objective of an idealized anarchy.
That's my analysis.

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Silent H, posted 09-29-2006 4:23 AM Silent H has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 10 of 126 (353160)
09-29-2006 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by FliesOnly
09-29-2006 1:40 PM


Re: Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
FliesOnly writes:
Actually, it's not really that complicated. Simply follow the law(s) we already have.
I'd like to think that it is as simple as you say it is. I'm not a politician and have no political ambition so I can't say I know exactly what's going on. With that said, if it's as simple as you say it is, how come the dems aren't screaming their heads off to make the public more aware of what's going on?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by FliesOnly, posted 09-29-2006 1:40 PM FliesOnly has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by FliesOnly, posted 09-29-2006 3:57 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 12 by subbie, posted 09-29-2006 8:58 PM Taz has not replied

  
FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 4144 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 11 of 126 (353187)
09-29-2006 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Taz
09-29-2006 3:09 PM


Re: Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
gasby writes:
With that said, if it's as simple as you say it is, how come the dems aren't screaming their heads off to make the public more aware of what's going on?
Because I, like yourself, am not a politician so I see no difficutly. It is simple...follow the law. However, simply because one group of Politicians can't do that, while another group seems incapable of "screaming their heads off", does not make the issue complicated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 09-29-2006 3:09 PM Taz has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 12 of 126 (353249)
09-29-2006 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Taz
09-29-2006 3:09 PM


Re: Calling all Republicans to explain what's going on.
how come the dems aren't screaming their heads off to make the public more aware of what's going on?
Because they have allowed the Repugnantcans to define the issue as being about protecting the safety of the country, and the Dimwitcrats know that they can't get re-elected if the Repugnantcans paint them as being soft on terrorists.
After 9/11 people were scared. A leader would have reassured them. Dumbya and the Repugnantcans instead played on that fear, and the Dimwitcrats sat back and let them do it.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 09-29-2006 3:09 PM Taz has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 13 of 126 (353400)
10-01-2006 6:06 AM


bump, for the proWarrantless conservatives
Thanks everyone for replying to my post, but so far no republican actually in support of warrantless wiretapping has stepped in to defend it, specifically in relation to its consistency with core conservative principles.
Is there no republican in support of this? Why not complain about it then? Or is it too much to bash Bush and Co with an important election on the way?
Edited by holmes, : one to rep

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Chiroptera, posted 10-01-2006 9:25 AM Silent H has not replied
 Message 15 by jar, posted 10-01-2006 10:49 AM Silent H has replied
 Message 18 by ThingsChange, posted 10-02-2006 8:34 PM Silent H has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 126 (353414)
10-01-2006 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Silent H
10-01-2006 6:06 AM


Re: bump, for the proWarrantless conservatives
quote:
Or is it too much to bash Bush and Co with an important election on the way?
Heh. Maybe that's it. Maybe they don't like warrantless wiretapping, but it's better than the alternative: gay marriage!

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." -- George Bernard Shaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Silent H, posted 10-01-2006 6:06 AM Silent H has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 15 of 126 (353434)
10-01-2006 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Silent H
10-01-2006 6:06 AM


Re: bump, for the proWarrantless conservatives
Well, I am a Republican and I have spoken out against warrantless searches and in support of Gay Marriage.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Silent H, posted 10-01-2006 6:06 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Silent H, posted 10-01-2006 12:27 PM jar has not replied
 Message 17 by kuresu, posted 10-02-2006 2:42 PM jar has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024