OK, Kerry Fans. What's JK's "Excuse" for Voting for the Patriot Act.

[David Zephyr]

We know...God, we know. Bush "misled" him about the War and that why he voted for Bush's pre-emptive war against a non-threatening Iraqi people and government. But what is his "rationale" for voting for the most sickening piece of federal legislation in the last 100 years, the so-called Patriot Act?

And those of you who support another candidate, don't you think we deserve his "reasoning" behind his lame vote?

OK, Kerry supporters, here's your chance to cover for your candidate again. What's with his vote for the Patriot Act? Do you think the Patriot Act was good for America?

Please explain to those of us who support Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, Dennis Kucininch, Al Sharpton, Carol Mosely-Braun why we should now look the other way here with John Kerry's stripping us of our fundamental constitutional rights and empowering some freak like John Ashcroft to crunch down on dissent, to spy on Americans and to lock us up without formal charges?

Your "front runner" candidate has some serious explaining to do.

[Catholic Sensation]

1. After Dean's supporters can rationalize his support of the NRA

and the death penalty, I'll be more than happy than to find out why Kerry voted for the Patriot ACT.

[David Zephyr]

3. Unartful Dodge by a Kerry Supporter. Please Stick to the Questions.

Or go highjack another thread.

This is a serious one about your candidate's voting in Congress for the most fascist piece of lawmaking in 100 years.

Address the question or find another thread. Bye!

[adamrsilva]

Dean doesn't support the NRA

He has practically the same positions as any other Democrat, but he's realized that the gun issue destroys you in the swing states. That's something Kerry better learn.

Dean only supports the death penalty for a few, very heinous crimes. And Kerry better do at least the same if he hopes to win.

[David Zephyr]

8. Adamrsilva, Notice How Kerry Supporters Are Trying to Change the Subject?

They have no answer so far.

[HFishbine]

18. Dean supports the NRA?

Link? Source? Assair?

[sandnsea]

2. What's Dean's excuse for not repealing it?

This is a nonissue.

[JVS]

4. Seeing as Dean has not been President, he has no authority to repeal it.

[sandnsea]

17. He doesn't support repealing it

So why do people bring it up as an issue. If he isn't going to repeal it, wholecloth, he knows there are things in it we need. He hasn't even stated what parts of it need to be revisited. At least Kerry has introduced legislation on the worst parts of it. At least he knows what the problems are.

[JVS]

At least Dean didn't make the mess. Kerry did.

typo

[sandnsea]

27. What???

That's the lamest argument I've ever heard.

[JVS]

I think it is lame for a candidate to help Bush along, creating messes...

and then claim to be the one who can help fix the problems. It is similar to a fireman lighting fires and then claiming to be a hero because the FD put them out.

Dean might not have been in a position to prevent Bush's crimes, but at least he didn't assist them like Kerry did.

[sandnsea]

68. See post #63

Give me a break. Howard Dean was the chief right wing enabler for the entire decade of the nineties. I wouldn't trust him with my dog, let alone the Presidency.

[JVS]

59. Why did you ask why he hasn't repealed it?

[David Zephyr]

5. Another Kerry Supporter Without an Answer. This is Amazing.

Why did John Kerry vote for the Patriot Act and why should we give him a pass on this?

Please go attack Howard Dean in one of the million threads that exist here to do that.

This thread is about Kerry's voting for the Patriot Act. Apparently, you do not know the answer or are ashamed to give it.

[sandnsea]

23. Because it is necessary

And Howard Dean knows it or he'd support repealing it. If you're a Kucinich supporter, fine. I don't know what purpose it serves to make only Kerry and Edwards responsible for a bill that no other viable candidate supports repealing. I don't get the need to bash them above all else. What are they going to do, make you eat worms and drink urine? I don't get the need to bash them, I just don't.

[Hawkeye-X]

28. Don't be surprised

I'm still waiting for my question on another thread that asked what Kerry did to propose, craft, fight for, and passed a significant piece of legislation correctly answered. All I got was sponsorship, accomplishments, awards and not even a single piece of legislation that Kerry wrote in his entire Senate career.

[sandnsea]

34. Unbelievable

I gave you a list. Other people gave you lists. You ignore it. Whatever. You people are just too much.

[Hawkeye-X]

39. Dude.

Take a look at the list again. NONE shows me a significant piece of legislation that Kerry wrote. I asked a simple question, and I still don't have it.

[sandnsea]

66. Dudette

They're there. I listed them. If you want to pretend you can't see them, fine by me.

[Carrion]

6. How so?

[HFishbine]

22. In his own words

"Too many in my party voted for the Patriot Act. They believed that it was more important to show bipartisan support for President Bush during a moment of crisis than to stand up for the basic values of our constitution. They trusted this President, knowing full well that John Ashcroft was the Attorney General. Only one senator had the courage to vote against the Patriot Act--- Senator Russ Feingold, and he deserves credit for doing so. We need more Democrats like Senator Feingold—Democrats who are willing to stand up for what is right, and stand against this President’s reckless disregard for our civil liberties. We don’t need John Ashcroft—or any other Attorney General—rifling through our library records. As Americans, we need to stand up—all of us—and ensure that our laws reflect our values. As President, I will repeal those parts of the Patriot Act that undermine our constitutional rights, and will stand against any further attempts to expand the government’s reach at the expense of our civil liberties."

- Howard Dean, June 17, 2003

http://www.moveon.org/pac/cands/dean.html

[sandnsea]

26. those parts

Those parts. What parts? Specifically? Vague platitudes.

And he obviously knows it's important or he'd just support repealing it like Kucinich. Passing it was the right thing to do.

[sangha]

63. Dean's words on civil liberties on 9/13/2001

Dean's comments on civil liberties cause alarm
http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/33681.html

"...Dean said Wednesday he believed that the attacks and their aftermath would “require a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties. I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street.”

Dean said he had not taken a position on these questions. Asked whether he meant that specific rights described in the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — would have to be trimmed, the governor said:

“I haven't gotten that far yet. I think that's unlikely, but I frankly haven't gotten that far. Again, I think that's a debate that we will have.”

Mello said Thursday, “the civil liberties Dean seems to be talking about so blithely, that's exactly what makes us different from the murderers who committed these acts.

“It's why they attacked us,” he continued. “I think our freedom is what they find so threatening, our freedom and the power that I think results directly from that freedom.” "

You hear that? Dean says "they hate us for our freedoms". Does that ring a bell?

[adamrsilva]

7. Even I'm tired of these discussions

Everyone but Russ Feingold voted for the war and the PATRIOT Act. Either you believe they were mislead, and you can forgive them like most seem to, or you can't support them. Isn't that what it boils down to?

[David Zephyr]

10. Tired of Civil Liberties? And Your Wrong.

Dennis Kucinich, who is running for President, voted AGAINST the Patriot Act. Please don't smear his record.

[adamrsilva]

19. I was referring to Senators

To clarify.

[cthrumatrix]

133. you have an excellent point

[DjTj]

9. Edwards and Kerry say:

John Edwards:

John Ashcroft has trampled on our rights and claimed unprecedented power. We need to rein in this attorney general. I will amend the Patriot Act to protect the basic rights of U.S. citizens, repeal provisions that do not work and make sure the public is better informed about how the Patriot Act is actually working.

I believe we need to reform the Patriot Act to:

Protect the basic rights of U.S. Citizens. Due process doesn't just protect criminals-it protects all of us. No American should be detained forever, without any chance to argue before a judge that he is innocent.

Repeal provisions of the act that don't work. The Patriot Act allows the Attorney General to get the records of a library or business if he tells a judge that these records are related to a terrorism investigation. We must change the law to require the Justice Department to prove that there is a real justification for getting these records. We must also rewrite the provision that allows searches without notice to the target to more narrowly limit the circumstances in which those searches are allowed.

Make sure the public has information about how the act is working. This administration has classified even the most minimal information about how the Patriot Act is working. We need more disclosure of the number of wiretaps under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as amended by the Patriot Act.


John Kerry:

I will replace the Patriot Act because the spirit of the law has been abused by the Ashcroft Justice Department. I'll scale back several provisions to assure our security doesn't come at the expense of our civil liberties. I'll keep effective provisions, like those that help cut off terrorist financing.



We must stop indefinitely detaining American citizens and give basic rights to those who are detained. American citizens should have the right to a lawyer and foreign citizens should be given the right to hearings to determine their status.

We need more oversight of "sneak and peek" searches to assure strong safeguards on the use of roving wiretaps and the seizing of library and business records.

We need to use terrorism laws to combat terrorism and not in ordinary criminal cases, or to send the FBI to churches or anti-war demonstrations

We need to mandate regular reporting to Congress of all anti-terrorism activities and follow established protocols to protect privacy and security.

I'll keep the Patriot Act provisions that help the war on terrorism and improve information sharing between the intelligence community and local law enforcement.


http://www.votebyissue.org/primary/issue.asp?i=38

[spooky3]

11. Thanks, DjTj. Makes ya wonder why people who have these burning questions

don't just go to the candidates' websites (or other sources such as your link, which has been posted before) to get the answers rather than start threads here.

[DjTj]

16. It's like playing whack-a-mole...

...or whack-a-troll! :spank:

[spooky3]

20. LOL!!!

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangha]

64. Posting the candidates words is not disruption

.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

47. One major point ..to David Zephyr

Many aspects of the Patriot Act were drafted during Clinton's tenure as a result of the Oklahoma City bombing. Certain aspects of the act pertaining to the tagging of explosives and the like were rejected by Repubs. After 9/11 the choice was this BAD bill or NO BILL and certainly NO BILL would not have been acceptable to the majority.

[David Zephyr]

50. Aware of This.

Still, Kerry voted for it.

No bill would have been better. I hope you are justifying the Patriot Act now.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

52. No bill would have been better two weeks after 9/11?

We are looking BACK now at this...we are not looking through the eyes of a nation that saw the towers burning and anthrax in congress and postal workers and television anchors being treated for anthrax.

I'm not defending the bill, nor the lack of clean up legislation nor the abuse of the bill to prosecute dissent. I AM defending the vote of someone that was forced to choose between a bad bill and NO bill.

[Old and In the Way]

62. Exactly, NSMA.

In spite of some of their so-called "supporters" of particular candidates, I will not smear any aspect of any candidate's record. I'll happily vote for whoever is our nominee.

I am reasonably confident that any of our nominee's will make fixing the Patriot Act to disable civil rights aspects of this POS legislation.

[sangha]

65. And please how

DZ demands an answer to his question that is acceptable to him, but his response to NSMA does not respond to her points.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

72. Careful...DZ is a close friend of mine

We often disagree with no snippiness. ;-)

[sangha]

81. No personal animosity here

The fact is that these are complex issues, unsuitable for sloganeering. DZ is quick to demand answers, but he wasn't responsive to the points you raised.

As deplorable as the PATRIOT is, there are some good things in it. Things Clinton and Gore wrote, and many good Dems supported. DZ hasn't shown any effort to reconcile the good with the bad. He has merely passed judgement, and will not defend his opinion by resorting to facts.

[mike_c]

128. sorry, no bill is always better than a bad bill....

Rational action always trumps irrational action simply for the sake of appearances. We pay these folks big bucks to act in our best interests, not those of the facist of the moment.

[Terwilliger]

84. I didn't hear Americans clamoring for a crackdown on civil liberties

and certainly heard no reassurances from any politicians

The time to point out that the law(s) should not have gone into effect until some due and careful consideration was BEFORE they voted for it.

[Ramsey]

112. Actually that doesn't answer the question

OK, fine and dandy, they would both repeal it or amend the Patriot Act to a more palatable form. That doesn't explain why EITHER of them voted for that monstrosity in the first place. Every single DUer opposed that act when it was first passed. Why didn't they see what we all saw?

It amuses me that people who have screamed bloody murder about how horrible the Patriot Act is for years are now defended those who SUPPORTED it, by voting for it.

And excuse me, but Kerry and Edwards seem to be implying that the act itself was worthy of support, it's simply been "abused" by Ashcroft. But that excuse is really lame. First, they shouldn't have passed a law that was so easy to abuse. Second, they TRUSTED John Ashcroft?? That's incredibly hard to believe.

I must say, much more so than the IWR vote, which has gotten all the attention, I am much more disturbed by the support of the Patriot Act by both Kerry and Edwards. How can I trust them after that?

[Cocoa]

12. it contained some important tools to stop terrorism

It also contained some things, like sneak and peek, which should be discontinued.

[David Zephyr]

31. Kerry Voted for Sneak and Peak as You Call It.

He helped make it the law of the land.

[Cocoa]

45. and he's calling now for it to end

civil libertarians raised alarms, and Congress is listening.

Courts are also bringing things back into balance since Sept. 11.

[Submariner]

13. It's called "Going with the Flow" David

I served on the boats when JK was 'In-country', thus I'm from his era and hometown.

The vast majority of the country was behind resolution 1441 to attack Iraq, with qualifiers. Proof certain that there were WMD's, an imminent attack was apparent, and that military action would NOT occur until ALL diplomatic options are exhausted.

Well, guess what! Bush lied about everything, especially the diplomatic solution process, and went off to war without ANY congressional debate.

What JK the future presidential candidate did was play to the masses that he supported the prospect of war to get the majority on his side for obvious pre-election reasons. If one did not vote for the war, they were labeled unpatriotic Saddam supporters, etc....not a good label for a future prez candidate. BUT, at the same time he called for the aforementioned qualifiers from Bush, that chimpy just brushed off anyway.

So in the final analysis, it was a melting of his ideals with the reality of having to face Rove animal tactics in 2004.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Lives for votes.

23 senators voted against the resolution. Kerry didn't. Saying that he was willing to vote to have people killed so he could appear to be patriotic is hardly the mark of courage.

[David Zephyr]

32. Sure Looks Like It,, Submariner

And isn't "going with the flow" sort of the exact oppositie of leadership?

[Submariner]

41. Yes it is David

but in the reality of the dirty politics played to character assassinate the opposition out of the running, I'm prepared to give JK a 'pass' on his tactics knowing full well that if he is successful in replacing Bush, the real Leadership will show when he is inaugurated. JK, myself, and others from the Vietnam era, see the parallels with Iraq, and that it is not a police action we support.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. The "duh, I was misled." excuse is being replaced by "It's not so bad."

I guess the Kerry and Edwards supporter's finally came to the realization that "I was misled" translated to "I'm really, really, stupid" and, are now trying to justify their candidate's cowardice by telling us that their votes, were really in our own best interest.

Like the threads saying that Kerry's IWR vote was really for peace.

Amazing how many supposedly "thinking liberals" are taken in by such facile crappola. Used car salesmen must love 'em.

[Cocoa]

25. did they ever say they were misled?

Sincere question, is that a factual or imaginary change in their positions?

[David Zephyr]

36. Bandera, Maybe That's Kerry's Reason: "It's Not So Bad"

Kerry doesn't get a pass on the Patriot Act with me.

He's gotten his pass on the war with others already, but the Patriot Act is simply Un-American.

[sangha]

69. So is it "Un-American" to question our civil liberties?

Dean's comments on civil liberties cause alarm
http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/33681.html

"...Dean said Wednesday he believed that the attacks and their aftermath would “require a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties. I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street.”

Dean said he had not taken a position on these questions. Asked whether he meant that specific rights described in the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — would have to be trimmed, the governor said:

“I haven't gotten that far yet. I think that's unlikely, but I frankly haven't gotten that far. Again, I think that's a debate that we will have.”

Mello said Thursday, “the civil liberties Dean seems to be talking about so blithely, that's exactly what makes us different from the murderers who committed these acts.

“It's why they attacked us,” he continued. “I think our freedom is what they find so threatening, our freedom and the power that I think results directly from that freedom.” "

[David Zephyr]

99. It's Un-American to Strip Away Our Constitutional Rights.

If that isn't un-American, then what, pray tell, is?

[sangha]

127. Yes, it was un-american of Dean to call for a review of the Bill of Rights

.

[isbister]

43. Re: I'm really, really, stupid

The Patriot act had much needed improvements. It also had loopholes. Some people will use loopholes for their evil twisted right-wing agenda. Some people will close them. Democrats will close, republicans will exploit.

We do not control Congress, so, to stop the republicans we Democrats go through the election process and try to figure out which person will represent us, which person will unseat the evildoers.

We are all comforted by the fact that none of the candidates we will choose from is an evildoer and all will put a better AG in place....better by far.

[killbotfactory]

15. Here's the excuses I've read over the past year...

He didn't have time to read the bill...

Everyone else was doing it...

It's not what's in it, it's how it's enforced...

Uh... okay some parts go over the line, and he'll fix it...

That's why he fought for sunset provisions...

Dean said somethingerother about rights, too...

[Feanorcurufinwe]

24. What is Dean's excuse for questioning the Bill of Rights?

Dean's comments on civil liberties cause alarm

Gov. Howard Dean's call for a “re-evaluation” of some of America's civil liberties following this week's terrorist attacks was criticised Thursday by a Vermont Law School professor. “Good God,” Vermont Law School Professor Michael Mello said when read the remarks Dean made at a Wednesday news conference. “It's terribly irresponsible for the leader of our state to be saying stuff like that right now.”

<snip>

Dean said Wednesday he believed that the attacks and their aftermath would “require a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties. I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street.”

Dean said he had not taken a position on these questions. Asked whether he meant that specific rights described in the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — would have to be trimmed, the governor said:

“I haven't gotten that far yet. I think that's unlikely, but I frankly haven't gotten that far. Again, I think that's a debate that we will have.”
http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/33681.html

What's Dean's excuse? He really thinks we should have a debate on trimming the Bill of Rights? Even Ashcroft hasn't gone that far.

[killbotfactory]

29. Yep, the "Dean said,,," defense.

He wasn't asking about Dean, he was asking about Kerry.

[David Zephyr]

42. Exactly. This Thread is About John Kerry Voting for the Patriot Act.

Thank you Killbotfactory!

Looks like we've hit a very sore point with the Kerry supporters.

I'm asking an honest question here and asking how they justify this truly crappy and un-American vote.

[Cocoa]

53. "un-American?"

John Kerry, un-American? Did you really write that?

[blm]

54. Nope. Looks like YOU bring up Dean in your original post

as a challenge, and you're getting some info you didn't want in return.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

70. I apologize if my point went over your head.

But I don't think it actually did. I'm pretty sure you 'get it' lol.

[XanaDUer]

33. Yes,

I love arguments on how great Dean is, in areas he NEVER had to vote on or make decisions on.

You don't think a major grandstander like Dean, after 9/11, and the anthrax, and everything else, would not have gone along with whatever the President and Crew wanted, and actually risk getting his ass handed to him on a platter by a terrified American public saying "DO SOMETHING!" to our leaders?

Like Dean's much-vaunted brave stance on gays and marriage in VT:


"For incumbent Governor Howard Brush Dean III, it was a fight he never asked for. The four-term governor (two-year terms in Vermont), had refused for years to publicly state his position on gay marriage. Dean is a Yale graduate (1971) and a medical doctor. Fiscal conservatism and universal health care are his issues. Dr. Dean describes his seat on the mandala of politics as that of a "passionate centrist." Again and again he told the public he would not comment on the same-sex marriage issue because it was a matter before the court..."

Link: http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/3867


And,


"No one breathed a louder sigh of relief than Howard Dean. By a whisker he cleared the fifty percent threshold, and thus kept the final outcome out of the hands of the incoming legislature in January. And he put a period at the end Vermont’s same-sex marriage debate..."

Same link.


How easy to be brave when you make all your decisions after the fact.

[Cocoa]

35. what was he thinking?

what purpose could talking like that serve? He should have been much more careful at that time.

[blm]

37. What makes you think Dean wouldn't have voted for it?

Dean SUGGESTED a Patriot Act 3 days after 9-11. His record of statements on civil liberties issues is appalling. He was still a compromising centrist then, DZ.

btw...Kerry already sent up legislation to repeal parts of the Patriot Act a couple months ago.

[David Zephyr]

46. Why Did Kerry Vote For It?

And do you think he was right doing so and why?

This thread is not about Dean or the other candidates.

[blm]

51. Parts of the Patriot Act are useful.

Other areas were more troublesome so they made sure those were sunsetted.

Basicly, I believe the most important feeling at the time was showing national unity just after 9-11 for whatever lay ahead.

Wellstone, Byrd, and Kennedy agreed.

btw....you were the one who brought up Dean as an example of someone whose word you trust on this issue, so...I'm just following your point.

http://www.talkleft.com/archives/003739.html
……He once addressed a meeting of defense attorneys by stating that "my job is to make your job as difficult as possible." He is a man of his word, at least on this campaign promise. He did not want to fund public defense.
……Dean has made no secret of his belief that the justice system gives all the breaks to defendants. Consequently, during the 1990s, state’s attorneys, police, and corrections all received budget increases vastly exceeding increases enjoyed by the defender general’s office. That meant the state’s attorneys were able to round up ever increasing numbers of criminal defendants, but the public defenders were not given comparable resources to respond.
http://rogueimc.org/2003/11/1757.shtml
Dean, in 1999, wanted to refuse a $150,000 federal grant to the public defender's office for aiding mentally disabled defendants. "That was unusual, to say the least," says Appel. The state legislature overrode Dean's opposition. Dean spokesman Carson responded that Dean didn't want to create a program that the state couldn't afford to fund if federal money disappeared in the future. But he did not disavow Dean's anti-defendant bent. "This is a governor who was tough on crime and is a big believer in victims' rights," Carson says.
(Note:The state legislature overrode Dean's opposition and forced him to take it.)
Source: http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/912159.asp?cp1=1
Dean: “I got life without parole through our legislature. The problems with life without parole is that it’s not life without parole. There are always people who get out.”
http://richmond.indymedia.org/newswire/display/4371/index.php
.. “I’m looking to make it easier to convict guilty people and not have as many technicalities interfere with justice, and I’ll appoint someone to fit that bill”.
Asked if that reflected a “get-tough-on-crime” approach, Dean responded: “I’m looking for someone who is for justice. My beef about the judicial system is that it does not emphasize truth and justice over lawyering. It emphasizes legal technicalities and rights of the defendants and all that.” Such comments may play well with the general public, but they have sent a chill through the collective spine of lawyers – particularly defense lawyers – around the state.
http://rogueimc.org/2003/11/1757.shtml
He attempted an explanation of his support for capital punishment, even while agreeing that in some cases "the wrong guy" might be executed…. ...he thought the death penalty was preferable in some instances to a sentence of life without parole, Dean noted that in some instances criminals who are locked up for life might be freed on a legal "technicality" only to commit more horrible crimes. "That is every bit as heinous as putting to death someone who didn't commit the crime," he said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1907-2003Jul2?language=printer
William Cohen: …..In all my years writing about the death penalty, I have never heard any politician admit that he would countenance the death of an innocent person in order to ensure that the guilty die. Dean is maybe the first to acknowledge the unacknowledgeable. For that, I suppose, he ought to be congratulated. But by equating the murder of one individual by another with the murder of an innocent person by the government -- the unpreventable with the preventable -- he has casually trashed several hundred years of legal safeguards.
http://www.vpr.net/vt_news/stories/sharedlegacy/shared3.shtml
Vermont Public Radio, Bob Kinzel: "It's likely that Howard Dean's tenure in office will also have a long term effect on the state's criminal justice system. In his first years as Governor, Dean was often critical of judges who Dean thought did not hand down tough enough sentences. Over the last 10 years, Dean has appointed more judges than any previous governor and Dean describes his appointees as "law and order" judges. Dean's judicial philosophy appears to be having a significant impact - during his tenure as governor the average sentence handed down in Vermont has doubled - a situation that has led to an overcrowding of the state's prison system."
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles8/Bister-Estrin-Jacobs_Dean.htm
His governorship was a campaign against reasonable approaches to substance abuse. ….. the only other option in his bag of tricks is tougher penalties. He has endorsed fully the National Governors Association's policy, which calls for increased involvement of law enforcement and disavows any form of legalization not only as a policy but also as a philosophy. In short, Dean not only believes in the war on drug users, but also would like to see it intensified.
…..While Dean vocalized his opposition to methadone treatment clinics and decried any efforts to reduce the penalties on marijuana use -- even labeling the latter as a gateway drug (a statistically questionable claim at best) -- the population of Vermont's prisons increased to potentially dangerous levels. There is a correlation between these two phenomena. The more police go after individuals who use drugs, and the more judges are instructed to put them in jail, the more prisoners there are. ……. according to the DEA, the number of drug arrests in Vermont increased under Dean's watch, peaking in the year 2001, with the imprisonment of women increasing by over 140%.
http://rogueimc.org/2003/11/1757.shtml
Robert Appel, former head of the state's public defender system, said he had constant clashes with Dean over funding for the service. According to Appel, Dean said on at least one public occasion that the state should spend less money providing the accused with legal representation, saying that "95% of criminal defendants are guilty anyway." He later claimed that he was kidding.
http://www.loper.org/~george/archives/2003/Aug/946.html
(He appointed) state judges who were willing to undermine the Bill of Rights. In a 1997 interview with the Vermont News Bureau, Howard Dean admitted his desire to expedite the judicial process by using such justices to 'quickly convict guilty criminals.' He wanted individuals that would deem 'common sense more important than legal technicalities.' Constitutional protections (legal technicalities) apparently undermine Dean's yearning for speedy trials. 
 

  

[Feanorcurufinwe]

73. Sorry, but your power to limit the discussion to only the topic you choose

is nonexistant.

[paulk]

38. There are 99 other Senators you could also ask that question.

But the simple answer is that it would have been political suicide to vote against it. If you don't like that answer, you are free to support another candidate, up to and including GW Bush. I want a Democrat in the White House next January, David, and I am willing to overlook a lot to get one there.


"Please explain to those of us who support Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, Dennis Kucininch, Al Sharpton, Carol Mosely-Braun why we should now look the other way here with John Kerry's stripping us of our fundamental constitutional rights and empowering some freak like John Ashcroft to crunch down on dissent, to spy on Americans and to lock us up without formal charges?"


This is hyperbole, and you know it. Most of these candidates, with the exception of DK, were not in a position to vote on the bill, and I know of no Democratic candidate who doesn't think it needs to be changed.

[XanaDUer]

44. Thank you , paulk.

well said.

[David Zephyr]

49. You Justify Kerry's Vote for "Political" Reasons? Wow!

"It would have been political suicide to vote against it."

So we lost our civil liberties, our right to a lawyer and a open charge of a crime, our rights to privacy, for John Kerry's "political" future?

Wow.

[library_max]

58. Politics! From a U.S. Senator! I am shocked, shocked!!

How ridiculous. Every single candidate running for the nomination is a politician and will therefore do things for political reasons. And the "we lost our civil liberties . . . for John Kerry's political future" line ignores the fact that the act would have passed overwhelmingly even if Kerry had voted against it.

[Cocoa]

61. no, we didn't lose all those things

there are serious excesses in the act, but we still have our rights.

[George_Bonanza]

40. To disrespect Kerry on this is to disrespect many many liberals

Paul Wellstone voted for it. Dean, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 called into question civil liberties. Everyone but DK would've voted for it IMHO. Personally, my opinion was that people like Wellstone and Kerry voted for it because of fear: Fear of doing nothing in the rubbles of the deadliest attack on America ever, and fear of looking like doing nothing in the rubbles of the deadliest attack on America ever.

Was what Kerry did the greatest thing in the world? Absolutely not. But is it a litmus test of any sort, or a tell-tale indicator of his character? Unless you're exceedingly pessimistic, then a big NO.

[IndianaGreen]

79. We should not elect cowards to the Presidency

If they made a conscious choice to sacrifice our civil liberties on the altar of political expediency, then we should reject them at the polls.

Sorry, but behaving like the 1933 German Social-Democrats won't do!

[cthrumatrix]

134. ouch....I don't think he's a coward....

[Dancing_Dave]

48. Kerry sure does have some explaining to do!

I noticed that when Kerry started getting somewhere, he was talking about Constitutional issues like the need for a post-Ashcroft Justice Department. But Kerry sure wasn't one of the first brave independent-minded spirits in this land to oppose Ashcroft and the Patriot Acts! Now that it's clear how many Democrats AND Republicans have problems with losing their constitutional liberties, he really does seem to be changing his tune. :think:

[David Zephyr]

56. Yes, He Does, Dancin' Dave.

A lot of explaining.

[library_max]

55. Well, this is just a theory, but

A) it was going to pass anyway, and
B) those were paranoid McCarthyist times when politicians had to watch their asses.

To read your post, you'd think Kerry wrote the damn thing, or was the only Senator to vote for it, or the only Democratic Senator. As a matter of fact, only one Senator voted against it.

It's easy to make your preferred candidate a profile in courage when he or she didn't have to vote for or against the thing. Kucinich supporters, you may disregard the previous statement, as your guy did vote against it. None of the rest of you can say that.

[David Zephyr]

57. He Didn't Write It, But He Voted For It, Making It the Law of the Land.

He should be ashamed of himself.

No more giving Kerry a pass on this. Sorry.

[library_max]

60. No.

His voting for it did NOT make it the law of the land. A single Senator does not have veto power.

[Cocoa]

67. you're getting a lot of good answers here

You might as well read them, I'm sure your support of Dean is secure enough to withstand it. People can support Dean and learn new things at the same time.

[David Zephyr]

74. The Only Answers I've Received From Kerry Supporters Were

in the following two veins:

Either Kerry was swept up in the emotion of the moment after 9/11 and voted for it...

Or Kerry did it for political reasons only.

The other responses by Kerry supporters have been only to deflect away from the questions I posed and to attack Howard Dean.

I'm waiting for a Kerry supporter to explain to me how the draconian measures empowering John Ashcroft to spy on me and all Americans, to lock us up without a charge for years (as has been the case already with some), to spy on the books we read, to enter our homes without a warrant, and more...explain how I should accept John Kerry's vote for this.

Waiting.

[blm]

76. They SUNSETTED parts. Kerry sent up legislation

a couple months ago to repeal parts of the act.

If you want to be angry about that, that's your choice.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

77. But that isn't a fair assessment of my response

Either Kerry was swept up in the emotion of the moment after 9/11 and voted for it

I certainly wasn't implying that. I was saying the Patriot Act contains some very necessary provisions for both tracking dangerous persons as well as tracing explosives. Those provisions WERE necessary and reasonable.

It is UNREASONABLE to assume the vote was for political reasons when there WERE holes in our laws that provided safe harbor for enemy combatants.

There are already NUMEROUS circumstances in which law enforcement can enter your home without a warrant. If a cop comes to the door and smells pot smoke for example...no warrant is needed.

If I were John Kerry, I might well have voted for the act. We were 9 months into an administration and NO ONE knew the degree to which this and other acts would be politicized.

Prior to this time, throughout all the administrations in which Kerry was a legislator, many policies were passed that contained negative or unintended consequences and the usual remedy was that CLEAN-UP legislation would be passed to address the failings of the original legislation. That is the way things USED to work in DC.

[David Zephyr]

85. Answer.

The fertilizer tracing/tracking aspects were requested by Janet Reno and President Clinton after Waco. I agreed with that, but Senator Phil Gramm of Texas and the Republicans made sure it never happened.

The Patriot Act was known as an insidious assault on civil liberty at the time it was being pushed through Congress with Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt leading the Democrats to go along. The Nation Magazine had plenty to say at the time.

I posted here angrily at the time (can't be angry anymore, though)about the Patriot Act along with a lot of other DU'ers. I was furious about it then and am furious about it now.

I respectfully disagree with your belief that "NO ONE knew the degree to which this and other acts would be politicized." I did and so did a lot of other people. John Ascroft was our Attorney General and salivating to get the Patriot Act. Did you see the hearings?

Kerry messed up on the War and on our Civil Liberties. What else could be more important than those two things in judging who should lead the nation.

[sangha]

89. Grade: Incomplete

The good parts of the PATRIOT were not limited to fertilizer tacking/tracing. Until you address the needs our nation faced after 9/11 (and before, which the Repukes ignored) your conclusion that it was "un-american" to vote for it is premature. It is an assertion that is NOT generally accepted, not even on DU.

[David Zephyr]

96. The Patriot Act is Un-American.

Even Albert Gore says so. Would you ban him from the DU?

It appears that the Patriot Act is a very touch issue for John Kerry.

[sangha]

119. Take a deep breath

1) I don't agree with everything Gore says, and I'm not persuaded by "arguments from authority"

2) No one said anything about banning anyone.

3) As far as I can tell, Kerry isnt posting in this thread.

4) It appears that discussion of the merits and demerits of the PATRIOT Act is a touchy issue.

[library_max]

82. Explain to me why you haven't stopped beating your wife.

No, don't tell me you've never beaten your wife. Don't tell me you're not even married. Those answers are unacceptable to me. I only want a direct answer to the question of why you haven't stopped beating your wife.

Waiting.

[David Zephyr]

91. Wow. Who Would Have Known the Patriot Act Would Be So Sore A Subject?

Wife beating? That's Peggy Noonan's gratutious and low charge about Howard Dean. Wrong thread.

Do you support the vote that John Kerry cast as a Senator for the Patriot Act? Do you support the Patriot Act?

[library_max]

94. Read it again, Sam. Try to get the point this time.

Hint: it has something to do with asking loaded questions and brushing aside the answers that aren't what you wanted to hear and don't support your preconceived notions.

[sangha]

83. You might try reading your own thread

See my post #71

To go further, no person is perfect. We all make mistakes. One sign of a leader is to recognize when thigs have gone wrong and act to correct them. That is exactly what Kerry is doing. Kerry has called for eliminating the most deplorable parts of PATRIOT.

[sangha]

71. IMO, there is no excuse for the PATRIOT Act

It was a mistake. Sort of like saying, on 9/13/2001

"Dean said Wednesday he believed that the attacks and their aftermath would “require a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties. I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street.”

Dean said he had not taken a position on these questions. Asked whether he meant that specific rights described in the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — would have to be trimmed, the governor said:

“I haven't gotten that far yet. I think that's unlikely, but I frankly haven't gotten that far. Again, I think that's a debate that we will have.”

Mello said Thursday, “the civil liberties Dean seems to be talking about so blithely, that's exactly what makes us different from the murderers who committed these acts.

“It's why they attacked us,” he continued. “I think our freedom is what they find so threatening, our freedom and the power that I think results directly from that freedom.” "

[liberalpragmatist]

75. It was after 9-11 and there was widespread hysteria

The Patriot Act was a mistake. But it was rushed out when the national mood was shocked and when Congress felt as though it had to act.

Kerry voted YES on the war. So did Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, and, yes, even Paul Wellstone. Here's the senate roll call: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313

The vote was 98-1; Only Feingold voted against it. Landrieu did not vote.

The Patriot Act was wrong, but it's a horrible litmus test, far worse than the IWR vote is.

Plus, Kerry DID NOT SAY the Patriot Act was good. All he said was there were some good things about it, but also plenty of bad things. Kerry has stated that he will replace the Patriot Act with a far narrower law:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1201.html

> We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft.

That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.

Much of what is in Patriot Act are good ideas. The Act increased penalties for terrorists, limited the statute of limitations for terrorist crimes, and allowed for greater prosecution of overseas acts against America. I fought to include important money laundering restrictions to clamp down on the cash flowing to terrorist enterprises. I had been pushing for these ideas since the late nineties – and after September 11th they were more important than ever.

I voted for the Patriot Act right after September 11th – convinced that – with a sunset clause – it was the right decision to make. It clearly wasn’t a perfect bill – and it had a number of flaws – but this wasn’t the time to haggle. It was the time to act.

But George Bush and John Ashcroft abused the spirit of national action after the terrorist attacks. They have used the Patriot Act in ways that were never intended and for reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism. That’s why, as President, I will propose new anti-terrorism laws that advance the War on Terror while ending the assault on our basic rights.

***

Now, take this if you wish. I have no hope of persuading some people. There are plenty who believe Kerry is worse than a Nazi. They will continue to think so no matter what the record.

[IndianaGreen]

78. After the 1933 Reichstag fire, there was widespread hysteria

"It was after 9-11 and there was widespread hysteria"

After the 1933 Reichstag fire, there was widespread hysteria, and the DLCers of their day, Germany's Social Democrats, fell all over themselves passing the Enabling Act giving Hitler dictatorial powers.

The Social-Democrats were complicit in the death of Germany's fledging democracy, while those Democrats that voted for PATRIOT were complicit in the death of the Bill of Rights. The fact that we still have some Democrats running for President that want to keep PATRIOT on the books for their own sinister purposes, makes me recoil in horror at the sort of undemocratic Trojan Horse we are being asked to vote for in November.

[David Zephyr]

80. Thank You, Very Much!

The "Patriot Act"! What a low mark in American history.

[blm]

100. Yet your outrage is limited

to.....??????? You don't seem to have a problem with Dean's stance yet you want us to believe that 99 Senators, including Wellstone, Byrd, and Kennedy, et al are beneath contempt?

Dean sounds just like Bush here. They attacked us for our freedoms ring a bell?

Dean's comments on civil liberties cause alarm

http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/33681.html

"...Dean said Wednesday he believed that the attacks and their aftermath would “require a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties. I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street.”

Dean said he had not taken a position on these questions. Asked whether he meant that specific rights described in the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — would have to be trimmed, the governor said:

“I haven't gotten that far yet. I think that's unlikely, but I frankly haven't gotten that far. Again, I think that's a debate that we will have.”

Mello said Thursday, “the civil liberties Dean seems to be talking about so blithely, that's exactly what makes us different from the murderers who committed these acts.

“It's why they attacked us,” he continued. “I think our freedom is what they find so threatening, our freedom and the power that I think results directly from that freedom.” "

>>>>>>

[sangha]

121. And no response from the one who is concerned about civil liberties

This has been brought up several times in this thread and it has been studiously avoided.

[kerryistheanswer]

86. Patriot Act Vote - 99-1

99-1 - if you are going to fault Kerry, might as well fault Kennedy, Byrd, Leahy, and Jeffords.

This is a ridiculous thread.

[David Zephyr]

88. This is Not a "Ridiculous Thread".

My civil liberties are not "ridiculous" to me.

You don't want to answer my question, that's fine with me.

[sangha]

90. Yes, it is a ridiculous thread

Which is why you have to ignore my posts in order to misportray Kerry supporters as not being able to answer your question.

[IndianaGreen]

87. Clark: "I don't support the PATRIOT Act!"

Wes Clark made this emphatic statement just now on the town meeting on C-SPAN.

[David Zephyr]

92. Well, Kudos for General Wesley Clark.

He's gaining more and more esteem in my eyes every day.

[kerryistheanswer]

95. Who supports the Patriot Act? This is totally ridiculous

The Democrats had less than 24 hours to vote on this atrocious bill post-9/11. Both Clark and Dean didn't have to vote.

If Clark was in the Senate in 2002, he would be a Republican so he would vote for it anyway.

The previous statement was a cheap shot but so is going after decent Democrats such as Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt for voting for the bill.

[IndianaGreen]

Any Democrat that takes my civil liberties away is not "decent"

The previous statement was a cheap shot but so is going after decent Democrats such as Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt for voting for the bill.

My freedoms are not for sale! The Democrats cannot take my freedoms away anymore than the Republicans. No one put a gun to the Democrats and forced them to vote for PATRIOT without debate, without reading the bill, without even a public hearing.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

98. OK I'll trade you one Patriot Act for one SOA defense

I like Clark but I have already communicated my misgivings about his defense of a school that made the dirty wars a bit more dirty.

[David Zephyr]

101. I Could Never Be Angry With You.

Ooops, I'm a Dean supporter using the Scarlett "A" word.

I love you dearly and I've been very generous to Kerry of late, but this isn't about the SOA (which I loathe), my "ridiculous" thread is about Kerry and the Patriot Act.

He shouldn't have voted for it. It was wrong.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

107. OK so we do we use that same litmus test on every other senator as well?

I am hardly pleased with the Patriot Act. That's why I want a president that will leave in the provisions that are reasonable and necessary and move to remove the provisions that aren't.

BTW...I don't have a problem with most Dean supporters and don't have a problem with much of his platform. ;-)

With all due respect though, it really isn't fair to take Kerry's vote and TAR him with it while ignoring your own candidate's sentiments on civil liberties which were also made in close proximity to the time frame of Kerry's vote....more proof Kerry's vote didn't happen in a vacuum and the only way you can really prevail in this debate is if you take Kerry's vote minus Dean's statements on civil liberties...otherwise, it appears we both support candidates with no regard for civil liberties (except guns maybe..on that one you may have me beat)

[David Zephyr]

111. Dean's Statements Hardly Approach the Measures of the P.A.

Come on, NSMA. A cop asking for I.D. on the street is equal to rounding people up, letting them dissapear for over a year without a word to their families, not letting them have a lawyer, spying on what we read and what books we buy, wholesale wiretapping, and more.

I'll glady let a cop ask me for I.D. if I get to go home afterwards and not dissapear forever.

I don't want it revised like you, I'm with Al Gore, I want it repealed completely.

[sangha]

123. Dean's statement - “I haven't gotten that far yet. "

He's talking about the Bill of Rights! BoR is the first ten, and he hasn't gotten that far yet? "We" will have to have a debate about that? About the Bill of Rights?

[library_max]

104. Interesting.

Kerry has also said that the Patriot Act needs to be scrapped and replaced with something else (read post #9), but that's different, I guess.

:shrug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

93. Good for Clark. My doubts about him are diminishing.

I'm glad to see him step up to the plate and take a courageous stand instead of mealy mouthing his way around it like Kerry & Edwards.

[David Zephyr]

97. What Would Have Been Refreshing Here Would Have Been...

one single (just one) Kerry supporter saying that they wish he hadn't voted for it.

One of you called it "deplorable", but then took me to task for calling it un-American.

You don't save freedom by taking it away. A real patriot named Ben Franklin said as much.

[library_max]

102. Why don't you start?

Tell us some things Howard Dean has done that you wish he hadn't.

[David Zephyr]

103. I Have.

And have upset some of my fellow Dean supporters doing so.

I went ballistic about his "confederate flag" comments here alone.

Check the archives, Library_max.

[library_max]

105. What was wrong with Dean's "confederate flag" comments?

He asked, innocently.

O8)

[David Zephyr]

106. Not Pertinent to This Thread.

And you'll find it in the archives.

This thread is about Kerry voting for the Patriot Act.

[library_max]

108. Ahhh. Do as I say, not as I do.

MY thread!!!

:argh:

[blm]

132. Dean's statement on civil rights post9-11 is relevant

since you hold him up as a pinnacle on this issue.

Why won't you address his words on the issue? Is the answer that Dean's words sound eerily like Bush's?

[liberalpragmatist]

113. WTF?

Did you even read my post? Re: Post 75? "The Patriot Act was a mistake."?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=158373#158924

[David Zephyr]

117. Answer.

Did you read my post that you are addressing?

I wrote this: "...one single (just one) Kerry supporter saying that they wish he hadn't voted for it.

I'm glad you admit the Patriot Act was a mistake, but do you wish that Kerry hadn't voted for it?

[sangha]

125. Keep telling yourself that

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=158373&mesg_id=158897&page=

One of you called it "deplorable", but then took me to task for calling it un-American

That's because I must have missed the directive as to how exactly I was supposed to word my post, and how I was to not criticize you in any way no matter what.

Now why don't you tell us about something "deplorable" Dean has done? As a Kerry supporter, I have no need or desire to deify my candidate. He is not perfect, but he is willing to fight to make things better.

[wheresthemind]

109. Nearly all of the congess voted for it!

Including Paul Wellstone among many others we would consider principled Democrats.

They were LIED to, they were told more attacks were IMMINENT and this would stop them. Most of them did not even READ the Patriot Act because of the manner it was brought to the floor.

We were shocked, and to be exploiting that day to pass legislation is just wrong.

All they knew is that if they did not pass it there would be more attacks according to Rummy, then their party leadership said vote for it. At a time like that they made a rushed decision in taking the administration and their party at their word, that was a mistake, they should of read the bill. But please, when you attack Kerry for his vote please attack EVERYONE ELSE WHO VOTED FOR IT INCLUDING Paul Wellstone!

If Dean had been in congress I have no doubt he would have voted for it.

[David Zephyr]

110. Are You Saying that Kerry Didn't Read the Patriot Act Before He Voted?

I can't imagine John Kerry admitting that.

You've made a pretty bold assertion with "most of them did not even READ the Patriot Act because of the manner it was brought to the floor."

How do you substantiate this? Since my thread is about Kerry, are you suggesting Kerry didn't read what he voted for?

[wheresthemind]

114. I did my term paper on the Patriot Act

and it was rushed through so quick that most were not able to read it. They listened to the Administration and their Party

Here is the roll call:

http://www.civildisobedience.us/documents/voting-records-USAPATRIOTACT.html

Notice we had ONE Senator voted against.

[IndianaGreen]

115. They should all be fired for sheer incompetence

Any politician that believed what Bush told them is unfit for public office. No wonder the Congressional Democrats are so fucked up! They believe in Bush more than they believe in their constituents.

[wheresthemind]

116. What do you think most of the constituents would have said at the time?

It was not just Bush, it was EVERYONE pushing for this.

[David Zephyr]

118. Exactly.

"I believed Bush."

"Bush misled me".

Astonishing, huh?

[bigtree]

120. Some 'splainin'

Most of the Patriot act amends existing federal statutes that were targeted by conservatives before the 9-11 terrorist attacks. (Like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was enacted in the wake of FBI surveillance of U.S. citizens in the '60's and the '70's) This national security intelligence tool is now being recklessly manipulated in the administration's zeal to prosecute their cynical "war on terrorism."

The FISA was sponsored in the ‘60's by Sen. Edward Kennedy and others in an attempt to reign in warrantless surveillance. But the FBI and the NSA have used the act to set up a secret courts and have perverted the act to conduct surveillance for domestic criminal investigations in addition to their foreign counterintelligence probes. http://home.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/fiscshort.html

The FISA court and the Court of Review authorize government wiretaps in foreign intelligence investigations. Under FISA, all hearings and decisions are conducted in secret. The government is normally the only party to FISA proceedings and the only party that can appeal to the Supreme Court.

In an appeal, the ACLU argued that,"These fundamental issues should not be finally by courts that sit in secret, do not ordinarily publish their decisions, and allow only the government to appear before them."

The ACLU and its supporters have asserted that some of their members and many other Americans are currently subject to illegal surveillance, noting that the FBI has already targeted its members in numerous other ways. Under the FISA statute, a U.S. citizen may be subject to a FISC surveillance order for political statements and views that are determined to be unpopular by the secret Court of Review.

So this administration has used the Patriot Act, and the FISA to subvert the constitution and evicerate rights, far outside of the mandate of Congress; far outside of their intentions expressed in the legislation. It happens. Sometimes presidents exceed the authority given to them by Congress.

Kennedy's not a dupe for passing the FISA. The other Democrats aren't dupes for expecting the Patriot Act to be used without recrimination or guile.

[bread_and_roses]

122. No excuse is acceptable

in my opinion, though Kerry is more or less my second choice candidate, after DK. No excuse, none, he is far too intellegent a person not to have known exactly what he was voting for. I feel the same about the IRW vote.

Since these threads always seem to be about Dean vs whichever other (I admit to only reading a few posts; I would like to read them all but my computer doesn't handle these long threads real well) I will say that nothing in Dean's record makes me think that had he been in the Senate he would not have voted for it too. This of course is a purely subjective judgement.

It comes down, for me, to Kerry having the better over-all record.

It's an imperfect world.

[sangha]

124. You are right

There is no excuse. It was a mistake, and what leaders do when mistakes are made is to take action to correct the mistakes, which is exactly what Kerry is doing. Kerry is calling for repealing the mistakes in the PATRIOT Act

[bigtree]

126. Paul Wellstone voted for it

Go ahead. Question his judgement. Question his character. I'll stand way back here.

Go 'head now.

[ldoolin]

130. I'll bite

Wellstone was a fierce fighter for liberal causes during his first term and most of his second.

He unfortunately appeared to be headed down the same road John Kerry went down after about 1990: Casting votes with an eye on future runs for public office, not with an eye on doing the right thing.

The Wellstone I remember fondly was the one who personally confronted Bush I over the Gulf War, not the one who voted for the Patriot Act. The Kerry I remember fondly was the one who led the investigation of Iran-Contra and the fight against Reagan's Central America policy, not the one who voted for the Patriot Act.

There is only one Democratic Senator worth his salt right now and that is Russ Feingold. There is possibly another: Byrd seems to have gotten a backbone too but only after the Patriot Act passed. The rest need to be replaced with Democrats who will stand up to the national security state's agenda instead of promoting that agenda. I'm starting to rethink my longterm opposition to term limits.

[bigtree]

131. Paul Wellstone

Never cast votes with an eye on future runs for public office. That is an amazing charge. Every thing the man did was out of principle and he was suffering. In pain most of the time from some injury. I've never heard any of his peers or constituents claim that he acted on anything out of self-interest. I think that the lengths that we go to to taer these people down over their votes is sickening. We ignore their statements, their record, and we attack. Years of service sullied because we disagree with some vote they took. Maybe Paul would say his vote was a mistake. He would admit it. That was the type of man that he was. But he did not, as far as I know. So, I will take the man at the measure of his life, not sizing him up on one vote that I may disagree with.

Paul was my hero.

[JI7]

129. he sees it as needed to fight terrorism

he says there are flaws in it, but the sunset provision for it to expire was what got him to support it.

[drfemoe]

135. what's the expiration date?