Tempers flare on Senate floor

[Viva_La_Revolution]

Source: cnn

-In a rare public display of political and personal acrimony, freshman Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky squared off Wednesday with the powerful Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Tempers flared on the Senate floor over how many amendments Paul could offer to a measure extending the main anti-terrorism surveillance law enacted after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.

Key provisions of that law – the Patriot Act - are due to expire Friday, and the dispute between the two senators threatens to cause a brief lapse of the law. If that happens "it could have dire consequences for out national security," warned Reid, D-Nevada.



Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/25/tempers-flare-on-senate-floor/

[Ian David]

1. Reid should just let Rand Paul filibuster The "Patriot" Act. n/t

[99th_Monkey]

42. Wow, now THERE is one-hell-of-a splendid idea!! From your lips to Harry's ear. nt

[aquart]

2. Let the evil thing lapse, Harry.

It truly needs to die.

[DJ13]

3. Uh, Rand

A little advice....... he may be old, but he was a former boxer.

[RKP5637]

7. +1, n/t

[Iliyah]

17. If there was a fist

fight, I would put money on Reid. Reid has always been one of my favorite senators, although I do disagree with him on this act.

[high density]

4. Reid needs to tone down the hyperbole by about 100%

Every time the PATRIOT ACT comes back up, people like Reid tell us that it's the only thing keeping us from being bombed into oblivion by the terrorists. It's time for a study of what specific terror plots have been foiled by the powers granted by it. I'm tired of being told that we need this endless erosion of civil liberties with absolutely no explanation of the supposed benefits we're reaping from it.

[Angry Dragon]

5. +1000

[UpInArms]

15. +3000

I abhor the piece of shit "USAPatriot Act" - despicable piece of legislation crafted by evil beings intent on destroying the Constitution.

[Scuba]

43. More pluses.

[Ed Suspicious]

6. I'm sort of with Paul on this one. That Patriot act as scary as hell. n/t

[Hardrada]

18. Paul is right on this. Get rid of this odious legislation!

[lovuian]

20. I'm with Rand Paul with this

the patriot act needs to be tossed

[ebayfool]

22. This isn't @ Paul wanting to block the act - he's protecting gun owners.

Which people would know if they bothered to actually read the article!

snip/
The disagreement focuses on how many amendments to the bill Paul is allowed to offer, in particular, one aimed at preventing warrantless access to some gun records.

"They are petrified to vote on issues of guns because they know that a lot of people in America favor the Second Amendment to own guns and want to protect it," Paul said, adding that he wanted to prevent the warrantless access to some gun records because "we don't want our records to be sifted through by a government without judicial review."

I'm so sick of the knee-jerk responses to shit people around don't even bother to read first. Yay, Rand Paul! DU's hero du jour! Until someone else points out that the little shit said nothing @ wanting to block the Patriot Act. He's just objecting to a weeny little portion of it!

But ya'll go right on cheering the little shit.

[bjobotts]

27. exactly right! Rand Paul will always be a worthless ignorant self perserving idiot.

[bjobotts]

28. We no longer need this Patriot Act or the thousands employed because of it.

[bjobotts]

29. The only reason we have it is due to the anthrax attacks.1000 pages suddenly appeared after 9/11

[bjobotts]

30. The authors were just looking for any reason to make it law as it was written before 9/11 occured

[ieoeja]

48. It was written in '98. Gore chaired the committee. Republicans called it a coup attempt.

And voted it down.

Then after 9/11 they decided it would have prevented 9/11. This, however, ignores the fact that we already HAD enough intelligence to prevent 9/11.

But the new people in charge were still focused on the "communist threat". In fact, they spent the entire 2000 presidential campaign mocking Al Gore's claim that Islamic terrorists were the number one threat to national security.

Odds are, had Gore won that election, 9/11 would have been prevented even without the USAPATRIOT act.

[2banon]

35. So? He's concerned for the wrong reasons.. at least he's fighting it!

He uses the gun ownership issue as an example of why the patriot act is dangerous. I don't really care that he uses it for that purpose. whatever works to make the case, you know?

Unless you're for the fascist, illegal Patriot Act? you may not care about your rights, but I damned sure the hell do. Once they take it away, they never ever give it back. Once they're gone, they're gone. Period end of story.

[ebayfool]

40. Where do you see he's using it as an example? Adding an amendment is not fighting it ....

it's pandering to the NRA. Fighting it would be something else entirely, like mebbe authoring a bill striking it down!

And the insinuation that if you're agin the little shit means you're for the Patriot Act & don't care for our rights is a piss poor way to make your case, buddy! Cheering the little shit also don't make you a defender of our rights ... just a cheerleader for little shits.

[2banon]

46. There's a video clip of RP the day before arguing against the PA

on the Senate floor, the day before yesterday. He explained his opposition to the Patriot Act more fully, argued that this is about the 4th amendment, argued the case for full constitional rights, not just the 2nd amendment or the first. He mentioned gun rights towards the end of his remarks as an example of why extending the Patriot Act is so odius. (my words). I don't support Rand Paul.

The issue of concern is the Patriot Act and whether or not it should be extended. The Patriot Act is not only an anathema to our Constitution, it renders the bill of rights amendments to extinction.

I give a shite less about Rand Paul. But it's pathetic that he's the only Senator against it. if Russ Feingold was still in office, there would two Senators against it. Both for different reasons.

Personally I don't really care if Rand Paul's reasons are about gun rights. One might think that an amendment for gun rights is likely to make the Patriot Act so odious to most Senators, it wouldn't be passed. Not likely to happen but I suppose it was worth a try.

[quakerboy]

37. I see why you say read the article

However, if somehow we could use gun rights as an effective lever to do away with the patriot act, would you turn down a victory just because some votes were for reasons unrelated to your own?

In the mean time, I will cheer anything that has the potential to tear the Republics apart. If that's really Rand's reason, then every bit of publicity he gets on the topic just shoves the hypocrisy of the rest of the Republics into the face of the NRA types who have supported them so strongly in eventually voting for a bill clear of this ammendment, or alternately if successfully added gives dems who will vote for it a claim to be on their side.

[ebayfool]

39. How is him adding protection for gun owners a victory?

That doesn't block the act, nor will it convert any of the nra wingers & make them see the light @ the dangers of the act. They are 1 trick ponies - as long as that one interest is protected, they will be fine w/the rest of the bill. Paul adding amendments does nothing to block the damned thing ... THAT'S why the silly cheering is pissing me off! Like wingers recognize hypocrisy if it hits 'em in the face? Sorry. Grabbing at Rand Paul straws is nothing short sensless & stoopid.

And do you seriously, I mean seriously?, think this will tear the repubs apart? Bwahahahaha! Tell me another one!

[slay]

49. ME TOO! People need to remember this shit when it's time to vote

regardless of party. Why was it bad when Bush did it, but ok under Obama? WTF?

[Poll_Blind]

8. I read the actual article. I would encourage others to as well.

PB

[oioioi]

13. +1

[ebayfool]

23. now why would DUers let facts get in the way of agreeing w/Rand Paull?

Reading shouldn't be required before a rousing game of dogpile, should it? Even though they're cheering for something he's NOT doing ... ie blocking the ACT?

I swear, the assumptions ... !

[Blacksheep214]

9. Fuck the Patriot Act!

Gee, did I say that out loud?

Let's have agreement, okay? Anything with New Speak in it must die.

Homeland Security

Patriot Act

I'm sure there are more with some name which is politically motivated to use against anyone not voting for it. Bush/Cheney were expert at this game.

WE the people, yeah right!

[xchrom]

10. Paul is out of his league if he wants to take on Reid.

Whether I agree w/ the patriot act or not.

[coalition_unwilling]

31. Big bad Harry Reid, playing the big, bad fear card. What's next,

calling Paul a 'traitor'?

Sometimes the Dem leadership really disgusts me. This would be one of those times.

[w4rma]

11. Paul is correct. Reid should back down from this fight. (nt)

[comtec]

12. dont worry reid will... he's a spineless piece of shit

why even bother pretending he's not?
WE would have been better served if that psycho tea bag bitch had been elected instead.
at least we would have gotten a REAL democratic leader in the senate.

[Iliyah]

16. If that was

Paul's daddy who was prez and this came up more than likely he would be in favor of it. Heck if it was a goper such a bush in office, he would be in favor for it. And nothing will change my opinion on that.

That said, regardless, this act was created by the gopers and believe me they want to keep it in case one gets into office in the next four years which will be continue again.

Unfortunately, OBL did what he wanted to do, we as American overall have changed for the worst. I don't like this act but the government I guess feels they need it to protect the U.S.A.

[jerseyjack]

14. Reid is wrong on this one.

Reid, sucks be to you.

[frylock]

19. oh noes!!1 dire consequences!

dunh-dunh-DUNH!

[pmorlan1]

21. Shame on Harry Reid

I'm a liberal Democrat but I agree with Senator Paul. Shame on you Senator Reid for using Bush tactics to try to end debate. We had to endure the scary terrorist meme and false accusations that dissent supported terrorists during the Bush years. We don't need a repeat of these tactics coming from the Democrats.

[plumbob]

24. Neither one said go fuck yourself. Hardly qualifies as temper.

Let that law lapse. If some asshole from Kentucky can help do that, good.

[krabigirl]

25. Agree with Paul on this one. Also, wasn't Reid against the Patriot Act a few years ago?

The "patriot" act needs to die.

[ebayfool]

34. Paul is NOT trying to revoke the Patriot Act, he's in favor of extending it WITH the provision ...

to shield gun records. This is not about civil liberties. It's more NRA crap.

Reading IS fundamental.

[alfredo]

26. Paul is a spoiled brat.

[Lugnut]

32. Let the damned thing lapse. n/t

[LetTimmySmoke]

33. No more fucking patriot act.

I don't care who's holding it up. It would be nice if more dems followed Wyden and Udall's lead and did the same thing.

[Scottybeamer70]

36. and how many Democrats

are speaking out about this? Are they concerned with out rights or not?
That piece of nonsense was written BEFORE 9/11, so it either has nothing
to do with that, or they are all lying. If it REALLY is/was a result of
the attack............then you figure it out. If it WASN'T the result
of the attack, then exactly why was it put into law? Can't have it
both ways!

[Pharaoh]

38. Let the fascist thing lapse

fer fuck sake why are these people such morons.

[JDPriestly]

41. I think that the Patriot Act is vague and overbroad.

The definitions of a terrorist, terrorist acts, terrorism are all pretty meaningless. They could include childish acts of vandalism. Terrorism involves having the intent to cause terror.

How can you prove someone has the intent to cause terror for purposes of justifying eavesdropping on them. A person may have committed an act for the purpose of causing terror or could plan to commit an act for the purpose of causing terror. But just using surveillance on someone because they have the profile of someone who might commit an act of terror makes no sense.

[ixion]

44. I fully support Rand Paul on this. The unPATIROTic Act is unconstitutional

and should be repealed immediately.

[Enrique]

45. Rand Paul is right on this

as we all know.

[harun]

47. To hell with the Patriot Act.