Does anybody agree with Dems who voted to renew the PATRIOT ACT?

[Cascadian]

Seriously. Does anybody really feel good about the decision of Democratic Senators that voted to renew it? My Senator Maria Cantwell just dug herself deeper by supporting it. Another reason why I am not supporting her. I am very disappointed but that disappointment has been numbed to the fact I am not surprised. Nothing surprises me about the many of the D.C. Democrats anymore. It makes me wonder if these people are going to vote for "Patriot Act II" which will solidify the death of our freedoms in this country.

Don't people realize that the Democratic Party is only weakened when our lawmakers pull this crap? It is like watching a slow suicide.


John

[madmark]

1. i dont agree with the renewers

[Tom Joad]

2. Regarding bushies dem servants.... Let's tap their phones!

[sandnsea]

22. We've tapped phones for decades

Unless you're proposing we just stop fighting crime altogether, that's a ridiculous statement.

[acmavm]

3. The people who voted to renew that insane piece of intrusive legislative

garbage are not dems. They are republicans in dem clothing.

[Cascadian]

7. I wonder why Kerry and Kennedy voted for this?

Both Mass. Senators, some of the most ardent critics of Bush and the Neocons especially Kennedy voted for this. Explain this one.


John

[acmavm]

9. Believe me, I can't. I don't understand it at all. Maybe they need to have

the question put to the directly? How would one go about doing that I wonder. And being sure of getting an answer I mean.

[sandnsea]

20. Or Boxer or most of the rest of the Senate

They voted for it because most of it is necessary and Democrats had been fighting for some of those laws for years before 9/11.

[radio4progressives]

41. "They voted for it because most of it was necessary" -- NOT!

[blm]

46. See how that works in Nov when you argue that terrorists and their funding

do not need to be tracked.

If you can't distinguish between the majority of the bill that was needed and the onerous aspects put in by BushInc then I certainly hope you aren't advising any Dem candidates this year.

[radio4progressives]

78. Existing Surveilance Laws sufficed ..

We really didn't need anything beyond FISA, which is essentially a rubber stamp for all the surveilance and tracking that NSA and intelligence agencies have ever needed. please.


the entire act was always a ruse to set up the notion that we didn't have the "tools" to prevent 9/11 - which is complete and utter horsehit.

[blm]

31. I did above - 90% of that bill is needed and WAS needed long before 9-11

and many solid Dems help craft the anti-terror legislation in the mid90s that was fought by the GOP and then BushInc. when it took office.

That legislation was for REAL terror tracking including the tracking of their funds.

We can put a Dem in office in 2009 who will keep the 90% that is needed to fight real terrorism and dump the added onerous 10% of the bill that BushInc put in after 9-11.

Even Feingold supported the Senate version that was passed some months back with the onerous parts removed.

[emulatorloo]

34. Here's what Kennedy said

http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/06/03/2006302A36.html

KENNEDY ON PATRIOT ACT
STATEMENT OF SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY ON SUNUNU COMPROMISE (S. 2771) AND THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RE-AUTHORIZATION OF THE PATRIOT ACT


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Laura Capps/Melissa Wagoner [phone]

For months, we have been ready to roll up our sleeves and get back to work on the PATRIOT Act, but the White House has continued to block bipartisan efforts to improve the original bill and accept oversight of its intrusive surveillance programs. Again, and again, the Administration has refused to join in serious negotiations with Republican and Democrats on matters of national security, including the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretaps and the FBI's use of National Security Letters. The latest proposal offers improvements, and deserves to pass; however, it is unacceptable and undemocratic that further amendments could not even be considered.

We need to implement these improvements quickly given the Administration's disregard of Congressional oversight. The proposed re-authorization bill requires public reports on the use of two of the most controversial provisions, Section 215 and National Security Letters. It also requires the Inspector General to audit their use, and it mandates a report on any data-mining activities by the Justice Department.

Americans deserve national security laws that protect both our security and our constitutional rights, and more changes are clearly needed. One of the most glaring omissions in the proposal is the failure to include a four-year sunset provision on National Security Letters, even though it would be consistent with the new reporting and auditing requirements that will take effect.

The latest changes provide some additional protection for libraries, but these safeguards should apply to all of the means used by the government to obtain sensitive information, including financial documents and library records. We also need a report on the government's use of computerized searches from all federal agencies and we will continue to seek such a requirement as part of efforts toward other reforms.

We have not yet achieved the 9/11 Commission's goal to maintain governmental powers that enhance our national security while ensuring adequate oversight over their use. With so much at stake, the Administration's refusal to work with Congress can only weaken our national security and further undermine the public's trust in their government. So this battle will go on, and I regret we could not accomplish more in this needed legislation.

[realFedUp]

73. Senator Boxer's statement

Statement by Senator Barbara Boxer on the Reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act
March 3, 2006

I voted for the conference report because on balance I believe it is necessary legislation to give our law enforcement officials the tools they need protect the American people from terrorist attacks. Before the Patriot Act, various law enforcement agencies did not have the ability to share information and work together, and this was a vulnerability that needed to be fixed after 9/11.

But this was a difficult decision. The bill had flaws, and two in particular concern me the most –the so-called “sneak and peek” and library search provisions. Given my concerns about these provisions, I voted for every opportunity to make further improvements to the bill.

But ultimately I believe that by voting for the conference report I will be in a stronger position to help improve the Patriot Act in the future, working with Judiciary Committee Chairman Specter, Ranking Member Leahy and Senators Feingold and Sununu.

I also wanted to show my support for Senator Dianne Feinstein’s anti-methamphetamine bill, which was included in the conference report. Meth has become a terrible scourge across our country and Sen. Feinstein’s bill will go a long way to combat the spread of the drug by restricting access to the ingredients used to make meth

[radio4progressives]

40. The Dems crafted the original .. that's why we're being sold out on this

because they're the ones who initiated this UN-Constitutional Act against Citizens in the first place .

[blm]

45. They crafted the parts against terrorism. BushInc crafted the onerous

parts of the bill.

You want to go on record for being against the tracking of terrorists and their funding sources?

[blm]

4. The problem is the 90% of the act that is needed for real antiterror

efforts. BushInc unnecessarily added about 10% of the onerous aspects.

Even Feingold would have voted for the Patriot Act had the Senate version remained intact.

We need to make sure a Democrat gets in office in 2009 who wants the more onerous aspects taken out and will use the bully pulpit to do so.

[RC]

36. None of the PATRIOT ACT is needed

What is needed is for the United States to quit meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. We TRUTH and FACTS and ACCOUNTABILITY from the people WE elect to run OUR Government.

Right now we have very little of what is needed for this country to survive in more than name only.

[blm]

44. That's just plain wrong - we needed to track terrorists and their funding.

BCCI proved that. The Bushes AND the Bin Ladens and various armsdealers would have been exposed long ago.

[RC]

47. Check with the criminals in the White House.

It starts and stops with them and the Nazis that put them there...

We did not need it until bu$h was installed. Get rid of the criminals, get control of our country back and it would be hard to even make a case for it.

The Patriot Act is for gaining control of the citizens of this country, not for going after terrorists.

[rman]

68. 9-11 proved that we don't need to track terrorist funding,

or at least the 9-11 commission thinks so.

Also i wonder how jailing without trial of *suspects* of terrorism is going to help track terrorist funding.

[blm]

80. Don't mix up the onerous crap BushInc put in with the real legislative

goals that Dems tried to push through for for years before 9-11.


BCCI did prove that we could track terror funding and more was needed. BushInc just didn't want to because the BFEE is in the thick of it.

[rman]

86. I'm still wondering how jailing without trial of *suspects* of terrorism

is going to help track terrorist funding.

The individuals that came up with the Patriot Act as an instrument to track the financing of terrorism, is the same cabal that's in the thick of it and doesn't want to investigate the financing of terrorism.

Makes sense, doesn't it.

[Cascadian]

50. I totally agree

Why must we stick our noses in every country's business. There are too many things we need to fix in this country. This is why many people hate America so much. Not because of our freedom. That is b.s.!


John

[treestar]

61. And it doesn't matter what it "needed" by law enforcement

LE will always say it "needs" unconstitutional legislation. But that must never yield to the constitution. We put up with the dangers of freedom in this country.

Terrorism is rare and exotic - even after 911 - the surprise factor is gone on 911, and we don't "need" any unconstitutional legislation, period.

Ben Franklin said it best. There is no way to trade liberty for security. Give up your liberty, there goes your security for sure. Keep your liberty, you will have some insecurity, but never as much as you will under and government with enough power to "protect" you.

[Savannah Progressive]

5. I couldn't agree more

I have commented time and time again, about the futility of agreeing with the Busies on anything.

I don't understand how the Democrats in Washington expect to be the opposition party, while agreeing in the end with everything the Repugniks put out. There isn't one thing I can think of where we stood fast against the Repugniks, and did what was right. We have literally folded on every issue, and in November, we can expect that to seriously affect us in the election.

[CrispyQ]

6. My DINO senator voted for it.

I'm not surprised, only disappointed that I worked hard & sent money to help get him elected. Funny how he hasn't responded to my letters expressing my extreme disappointment in his job performance.

[asjr]

8. We didn't need a patriot act in the

first place. No one was unpatriotic after 9/11. I am so fed up with our government and them using 9/11 to push through anything they want.It has become "terror" every word out of Republicans mouths.

[radio4progressives]

42. Dems are running on Terra too now..

they figure the boogyman is working for the repukes, we'll keep the phantom bogyeman alive so we look like we're tough on terra, that's just about it in a nutshell. They're not going to tell the American people the truth about this bullshit - they're keep this fvcking lie going on and on.

it's very profitable politically and financially.

fvck the people, fvck the constitution - it was shredded so long ago anyway why act like that's important anymore?

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

10. Because they are still playing by the rules

and hoping that sanity returns.

They apparently cannot see that is hopeless and it will take bigger efforts to end this.

[MSgt213]

11. I agree with you 100 percent. The Dems are also weaken when THEY

ABSOLUTELY refused to stand beside other demos that do speak out against stuff like this.

[GreenArrow]

12. no.

There's no excuse to vote for it in any form. It was noxious from its inception, being composed of distillated fear, bullshit and moonshine, with a little pork thrown in for good measure.

[ikojo]

13. Absolutely not. I do not agree with senators choosing

to remove various amendments from the constitution.

Hillary voted for it yet many on this board support her or will should she campaign and win the primaries and become the crowned candidate of the "Democratic" party.

[neverevergivein]

14. Does it really matter?

The question I've been asking is - why do we vent with so much anger, and continue to vote these DINOs into office? The obvious answer is: We have no other choice. But if we continue to vote the status quo, can we really expect change? I think not.

[Cascadian]

15. To some people, a "D" at the end of their name is enough

There are some very naive and short-sighted people who think any politician with a "D" at the end of their name is enough for them to support and vote for them. Whatever happened to the actions speak louder than words? Senator Cantwell has herself wrecked her chances to get reelected for another Senate term just by playing DINO. If we all had to vote for a person just because they have a "D' at the end of their name yet plays along to get along with the Neocons, then this democracy is a joke.


John

[Greyhound]

57. This is true. I've been trying to have a discussion with another DUer

on just this topic. She (I think it's she) has taken the position that any Dem is better than a re:puke:, and will brook no dissent. Logic has no meaning at all, it is just a visceral response, the proverbial knee-jerk reaction, against the re:puke:s, which I totally sympathize with, but the fact is that re:puke:-Lite will not only not solve any of the myriad problems we have, but will, in fact, just continue to drag this country down the road to a literal hell-on-earth.
I equate this mind-set with the kool-aid drinkers from the dark-side.

[Cascadian]

59. Thats exactly it.

How long is it going to be before people realize this? I hate this "we must be in lockstep" attitude of some Democrats which is very short-sighted and naive. Some of those people will highlight that a Repuke Lite Senator or whoever voted to stop drilling at ANWR or saving the California Sand Flea or what small issue. That's great but what about Alito, Iraq, Patriot Act I and maybe II? Aren't these important issues too?

I find this attitude disturbing and can only contribute to the death of the Democratic Party as we know it. It may die if things don't turn around either that or it may just become a token opposition party just to give the illusion of us having some kind of democracy.


John

[Greyhound]

66. I'm afraid it's too late to "become" a token

They have been completely irrelevant since '94.

You are also correct about the appearance of progressiveness by supporting doomed or irrelevant legislation while selling us out on the vital issues. The lack of patriotism shown by these traitors during the Scalito fiasco was the last straw for me.

[Hippo_Tron]

92. It's a mix of both

The fact of the matter is that that if we take back the Senate, we get a majority on the judiciary committee and can block any judicial nominee that we want because leadership will make it so that the DINOs don't sit on the judiciary committee. So having a senate majority even with DINOs would decrease the damage of the GOP but not necesarilly equate to passing a progressive agenda.

Part of the problem is that everything that the House and Senate votes on is the Repuke agenda. Democrats aren't given a chance to vote on their agenda. It seems like the only way a democrat can take a progressive stand is to vote NAY on every piece of legislation and in that case it appears like they are getting nothing done. If Democrats had the House and Senate, some of these more conservative dems would look a little better because they would also have an opportunity to cast their votes FOR some positive legislation.

The more Democrats in the House or Senate, the easier it is for Democrats to get things done. That being said, we ABSOLUTELY need progressives with a vision or we are never going to have progressive legislation to vote on in the first place.

[Talismom]

16. I'm furious about my corportist (fascist) "dem" senators voting for this

act--both Clinton and Schumer can kiss my vote goodbye! The intelligence was available and clearly ignored prior to 9/ll. As far as I'm concerned the purpose of this legislation is to gut our civil liberties so as to rapidly further the corporate agenda. It is the purposeful destruction of our constitution and bill of rights and any supporter is a traitor. I will be fighting this agenda to the end of my days!

edited for spelling

[abluelady]

17. I also don't agree.

It is getting harder and harder for me to support the Democratic party as it is today.

[realFedUp]

18. no

it was a mistake to vote for this again.

[sandnsea]

19. Most people support it, including Feingold

So he runs for President, he has to explain how he supports 90% of the Patriot Act, but voted against it. Especially when he can't prove anybody has been harmed from it.

[Hippo_Tron]

62. You mean all of those people that were dragged off to gitmo

And held there until the courts forced them to be released because they couldn't find any charages to bring them up on, weren't harmed by the patriot act?

[rman]

87. The ACLU Freedom Files - Beyond the Patriot Act

http://chomskytorrents.org/TorrentDetails.php?TorrentID=705

<snip>

"Through personal stories of ordinary Americans, Beyond the Patriot Act tells how a misguided law and other government overreactions to Sept. 11 have restricted our most basic constitutional freedoms and threaten America’s system of checks and balances. Beyond the Patriot Act is the first episode of The ACLU Freedom Files from the American Civil Liberties Union and Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films (Unconstitutional, Outfoxed). It is produced and directed by award-winning filmmaker Jeremy Kagan.

Beyond the Patriot Act features people like Patricia David, a Houston woman who was left nearly destitute with a young daughter to raise after her husband was shipped off to Pakistan during the post-Sept. 11 interrogations and deportations of thousands of South Asians and other immigrants. And Abdulameer Habeeb, an Iraqi artist tortured under Saddam's regime, who was arrested while traveling across the U.S. to start a new job in Washington, D.C. Repeatedly interrogated and imprisoned, he has lost his job as well as family members, who have withdrawn from him now that the FBI has interrogated them.

The program also tells the uplifting story of a growing grassroots campaign of Americans of all political affiliations that led to the passage of nearly 400 community resolutions opposing the Patriot Act. There’s also a university librarian talking about the need to dump library records to protect the privacy of her patrons. And a "raging granny" singing (to the tune of “Oh My Darling Clementine”): "If you are not with them, you are against them, better not protest or think. If you don't spy upon your neighbor, they will throw you in the clink.”

Using an edgy mix of various styles of media -- documentary, dramatic, comedic (including a funny take on the Bill of Rights with Harry Shearer), animation, music, interviews, re-creations and graphics – the show is a sight-and-sound collage that creates a powerful emotional effect certain to motivate viewers to action."

<snip>

[MrBenchley]

21. I do....

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

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

[MrBenchley]

25. Because I think most of the hysteria on here about it

is just hysteria....

Most of the country supports this act. And I suggest you go and peddle your "true Democrat" crap to somebody who gives a shit.

[Cascadian]

26. Apparently you don't care....

about our rights and freedoms.



John

[MrBenchley]

29. Apparently

the right to dissent from what a handful of Chomskyite nimnoms are chanting in unison is under attack from some here....but it's not much of a threat.

But then I've always been bemused by what sort of specimens get dredged up here as a "true Democrat" by the kool kidz. Especially the ones who are NOT Democrats at all.

[fujiyama]

67. Is that the best you can do?

Call names at those concerned about civil liberties?

Call them Chomskyites, etc? Well, of course we've all got used to your arrogance and insults.

Do you really ever have ANYTHING productive to say? Is Carl Levin a Chomskyite? Patrick Leahy?

Most Americans supported the war at one time. According to some polls, most Americans believed Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and support warrantless wiretaps.

You can call everyone a Chomskyite, but your willingness to support Bush on anything that is "popular" makes me believe you fall very easilly for authoritarian propaganda. You would have fit in well in East Germany under the Stazi. Your guiding philosophy is likely the same as all other sheeple - "I have nothing to hide - let them search me".

[MrBenchley]

75. Really, what else was needed?

[w13rd0]

27. "Most" of this country...

...supported Bush at one time too. Turns out that, twice over, that was the stupidest fucking thing they coulda done, and they were completely wrong. So pardon me if I don't cowtow to the majorities wishes at every opportunity.

[MrBenchley]

32. Hey, if you want to be out of step with everyone, feel free.....

But then don't piss and moan that you've got an unpopular opinion not held by many people....

[Cascadian]

37. I suppose you will support Patriot Act II as well

MrBenchley, let me ask you a question. Are you a Republican? Just admit that you are!


John

[Cascadian]

38. You know you are right.

By god, you are so right! The Democrats should be just like the Republicans because that's what the majority of Americans want. In fact, I think the Democrats should just forget about 2008 for a presidential candidate and just endorse the GOP's choice. What is the point in having two political parties? Let's just merge with the Republicans. :sarcasm:

It's people like you that are bringing down the Democratic Party. Wake up!

[MrBenchley]

56. You know, when I care what your opinion is

it'll be a cold day in hell.....

"It's people like you that are bringing down the Democratic Party."
Tough titty, chief.

[Quantess]

48. uh...what did you say?

"..you've got an unpopular opinion not held by many people"

A good percentage of the American people oppose the patriot act, including some lawmakers. The editors of my local newspaper oppose the Patriot Act, and they are hardly liberal.
I can't believe I'm reading your statement here at D.U.

[MrBenchley]

55. Feel free to trot out that percentage, then....

[Freddie Stubbs]

74. Apperently a vast majority of Democratic lawmakers support this law

Only 10 of the 44 Democrats in the Senate opposed the bill:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00029

[MrBenchley]

76. You'll notice the lack of response....

Guess that percentage was fictional....

[Cascadian]

85. And because the majority of voters backed Bush

To you that is okay. In fact, you probably DID vote for Bush!


John

[MrBenchley]

88. You really hate democracy and your fellow citizens, don't you?

[fujiyama]

69. As George Clooney said yesterday

I'm proud to be out of touch.

I suppose we should all be good Americans and follow what our party leadership tells us at all times, right?

Sorry, not all Dems voted lock step for this and I'll remain with the few that had the sense to vote against this garbage.

[Hippo_Tron]

65. Most of the country hasn't read the act

Most of the country probably can't name one provision of the act. There's a reason that we elect legislators to do write laws for us, because we don't have the time to read and understand every single law.

A majority of the country doesn't support warrantless wiretaps, a majority of the country wouldn't support government looking at their library records if you polled them, and a majority of the country wouldn't support hauling people off to the gitmo without charges, especially if they knew that many detainees have been released because they couldn't be brought up on charges.

Public opinion would have changed in our favor almost overnight if we had held up the Patriot Act and had the DNC start running ads about big brother looking at your library records. This is one of the reason that President Clinton was successful. He held up Republican bills and had his strategists frame the issue to the American people the way he wanted. That's how he beat Gingrich in the budget battle, that's how he won re-election, and that's how he survived monica-gate.

[Freddie Stubbs]

71. Are you saying that Barbara Boxer isn't a true Democrat?

She voted in favor of this bill.

[ProSense]

23. The Democratic Party is not weakened by the Patriot Act vote.

Since all Democrats are in favor of most of bill. In fact, this bill, which can still be amended in the future, gives them more leverage to hold Bush accountable, especially on the port deal.

[Duer 157099]

28. The port deal? You mean the deal that will pass

prior to the mandatory 45-day review period? Well, clearly this Pat Act has helped make Bush accountable already eh?

You really think they need more tools? How about using the tools they already have?

[ProSense]

33. Wasn't the deal approved by circumventing the process? n/t

[TreasonousBastard]

30. They got some of the worst stuff pulled from it, but...

it ain't easy being a congresscritter-- it was engineered to make it very difficult to vote against.

[skipos]

35. Everything sucks because we are the minority power, if you

want improvement, help make dems the majority power.

Republicans have been able to push to the right because they control the presidency, house, senate and governorships. If democrats controlled those, we would be able to push to the left.

[radio4progressives]

39. Absolutely 100 Per Cent NOT...

Period. end of story. :banghead:

[ShortnFiery]

43. No, IMO they're traitors to all hard working Americans!

We are losing our losing all our civil rights while our fat-cat representatives sell our country to the highest WTO bidders and allow this Administration to spy on the common people.

[Freddie Stubbs]

79. Is Barbara Boxer a "fat-cat representative?"

She voted for the bill. Perhaps it's not as bad as some are making it out to be.

[k_jerome]

49. i'm neutral. nt.

[wisteria]

51. I understand why some felt compelled to vote for it.

It isn't perfect, but when you are the minority party you have to act on what you are delt. Some changes were made and if the Dem's gain some power back we can be in a better position to bargain on important changes.

[Catrina]

52. No, and I hate the words 'Patriot Act' since it was a deliberate choice

of words to paint anyone who disagreed with it as 'unpatriotic'.

9/11 would have been prevented had they wanted to prevent it. The tools in place at the time were sufficient according to those who tried. They were ignored.

'An over-lawed society is a failed society' ~ we don't need anymore laws, we need leadership whose loyalties are to this country ~

Oh, and yes, maybe if we stopped bombing other countries and stealing their resources, there wouldn't be any terrorists ~ this 'Act' does absolutely nothing to address the root cause of the problems. And while they're listening in to ordinary Americans ordering pizza or whatever, and putting veteran journalists on their 'no-fly' lists, any 'terrorist' who is determined to commit crimes will not be stopped by this Patriot Act.

Meantime we lose a few more rights ~ but not one person responsible for 9/11 has been brought to justice, after five years ~ Osama is freer than we are ~ the Patriot Act won't bother him at all, will it?

[Harald Ragnarsson]

53. Dems tried to get a version of this bill through after the OKC attacks

That's when Clinton made the statement about "Maybe Americans have too much freedom" or some crap like that.

To see how much the PATRIOT Act is needed, just look at how it has been used to protect us so far: Tommy Chong is no longer selling bongs on the internet. Strippers and hookers in L.V. and N.O. have been brought to justice. How many terrorists have been dealt with under the Zct? Zero.

We don't need this turd no matter what. 911 didn't happen because we are not surveilled enough or have enough laws dictating life to us. It happned because the government WANTED it to happen.

Don't ever forget that.

We don't need a PATRIOT Act.

[threadkillaz]

54. No.

Feingold/Akaka '08 looking better and better everyday aye?

Do these people think they will NOT have primary opponents in any future elections ever?

Judging by Hackett, guess so.

[anotherbob]

58. screw them

I've already emailed Kerry and Kennedy telling them I'll never vote for them again. Can't really see it happening with Teddy, but his nomination petitions were recycled last week. They all must be held accountable.

[Charlie Brown]

60. The only Dems who will get my vote in 2008

are one of the 10 who voted against it.

No Hillary, No Kerry, No Boxer, No Biden.

[hollowdweller]

63. I don't feel good about it.

[Hippo_Tron]

64. The Democrats could have easily held it up and demanded a better act

This is really what everyone is missing here. Bush is at an all time low in approval ratings and he lost a huge amount of credibility on the issue due to the NSA spying bullshit. This was a perfect opportunity for the democrats to stick it to the GOP and demand that the the bullshit provisions like government access to libraries be taken out. This was a perfect opportunity to tell the administration "we have no problem with you wiretapping terrorists' phones, just get a fucking warrant like the constitution says you have to." The Democrats could have easily made this a campaign issue for November but they played it safe and once again, BLEW IT.

[NMMNG]

70. No. The Patriot Act is nothing more than fascist BS

wraped in the cloak of patriotic rah-rah. Harmless, law-abiding Americans are being harmed far worse by it than any real or potential terrorists.

[enough already]

72. Bush won again

While our "leaders" bent over and asked "Thank you sir, may I have another?"

[sarahlee]

77. No n/t

[karynnj]

81. A bipartisan group already have a bill to correct it.

"By Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. LEAHY, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. SUNUNU, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SALAZAR, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. OBAMA, and Mr. KERRY ):

S. 2369. A bill to require a more reasonable period for delayed-notice search warrants, to provide enhanced judicial review of FISA orders and national security letters, to require an enhanced factual basis for a FISA order, and to create national security letter sunset provisions; to the Committee on the Judiciary. "




The sponsors include people who voted for and against the PA. There was going to be a PA bill in place - either the one just voted in or the original one. The new one is significanly better. It will be in effect. Meanwhile this bill fights the issues that were not fixed. It's very unlikely it can pass now - but as time goes on it may fix things.

[Dr Fate]

82. They are frightened little girls. I am back to being uninspired. n/t

n/t

[LaCrosseDem]

83. try googling "democratic infighting"

It returns 13,100 hits

[ProSense]

84. Welcome! That's nothing!

"impeach Bush" 3,240,000


"Bush impeachment" 278,000


"Republican corruption" 216,000


"Bush failure" 153,000

[MrBenchley]

89. The more the Democrats chances improve for 2006

the more furious the calls for a witch hunt from the far left become....

[Radio_Guy]

90. I will not vote for any senator that voted for it

Of course, both my senators are rethugs, so that is easy. But I encourage everyone to only vote for progressives that are 100% against the Patriot Act and against wiretapping without judicial consent. I swear this administration is like Nixon again on how he treats his growing list of enemies.

[mvd]

91. Not exactly a good time for its reauthorization when..

Bush is spying on everyone. More Democrats needed to support a continued filibuster. Those three minor changes shouldn't have meant anything.