Patriot Act extension fails in House

CG: Unfortunately the PA extension will ultimately get pushed through, as both Obama and the Republicans want it. But for the time being it's a moral victory.

******************

Patriot Act extension fails in House

The House last night failed to pass an extension of the Patriot Act--the Bush-era law expanding federal powers of counterterrorism surveillance--despite strong support from the GOP.

The measure required two-thirds support to advance, but came up seven votes short: 277 to 148. A total of 210 Republicans voted for the extension, but 26 Republicans joined with a majority of Democrats (122) to vote against it. Sixty-seven Democrats voted with Republicans for the extension.

The vote was an embarrassment for the GOP, which had expected to clear the two-thirds hurdle.

Opponents of the bill believe the law infringes on civil liberties and hands unwarranted power to the government. Many Democratic leaders in Congress have long endorsed that view, but some Republicans and tea party groups have lately seconded it.

Many Republican freshmen, some of whom are affiliated with the tea party, joined most House Democrats in opposing the law's extension last night.

While Democrats opposed to the Act drew attention to the GOP miscue, House Republican leaders were quick to note that the White House also backs an extension of these provisions (though the White House officially supports a longer extension than the one offered in yesterday's measure.)

"I am surprised that so many Democrats who supported an extension of these very same provisions last Congress suddenly changed their votes," House Judiciary Chair Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said in a statement. "President Obama supports a reauthorization of these important national security tools. And the House bill provides Congress with the opportunity to engage in a thorough review of the provisions as we consider a longer reauthorization. It's unfortunate that partisan politics seems to have prevented so many Democrats from doing what's best for America's national security."

The measure would have extended three provisions of the Act, including one granting authority to to the federal government to conduct roving wiretaps and search individuals' bank and library records.

Smith's office indicated Republicans are already planning to bring the bill back to the floor--this time for a vote requiring just a simple majority for passage. The Senate has been preparing its own version of the bill.

(Photo of Lamar Smith, left: Harry Hamburg/AP)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thetic...RyaW90YWN0ZXg-

It's no surprise with the stuff they keep adding to the original.

It's just this simple, and looks like it may expire real soon:

Quote:

---

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF SUNSETS OF PROVISIONS RELATING TO ACCESS TO BUSINESS RECORDS, INDIVIDUAL TERRORISTS AS AGENTS OF FOREIGN POWERS, AND ROVING WIRETAPS.

(a) USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005- Section 102(b)(1) of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-177; 50 U.S.C. 1805 note, 50 U.S.C. 1861 note, and 50 U.S.C. 1862 note) is amended by striking `February 28, 2011' and inserting `December 8, 2011'.

(b) Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004- Section 6001(b)(1) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458; 118 Stat. 3742; 50 U.S.C. 1801 note) is amended by striking `February 28, 2011' and inserting `December 8, 2011'.

---

Wow, Tea Partiers living up to their word! I applaud the young Republicans who didn't fall in line with the elder statesmen.

And WC, didn't I say a few years back that gov't would abuse the Patriot Act?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

Wow, Tea Partiers living up to their word! I applaud the young Republicans who didn't fall in line with the elder statesmen.

And WC, didn't I say a few years back that gov't would abuse the Patriot Act?

---

I never doubted it would happen. The original act was OK, and I'm pretty sure at the time that I said it wasn't the act that bothered me, but how individuals privy to the information would abuse it. These last few years though, the lawmakers have been adding more to the patriot act. Things that simply did not belong. I'm very surprised how blatant some of it was.

Didn't I see something a bit ago about a bill allowing the govt. to shut down the internet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I never doubted it would happen. The original act was OK, and I'm pretty sure at the time that I said it wasn't the act that bothered me, but how individuals privy to the information would abuse it. These last few years though, the lawmakers have been adding more to the patriot act. Things that simply did not belong. I'm very surprised how blatant some of it was.

---

For someone who's so conservative, I'm surprised you didn't see that coming miles away.

Give them an inch, right?

Maybe next time you'll be more inclined to believe me :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sickdsm

Didn't I see something a bit ago about a bill allowing the govt. to shut down the internet?

---

Yes, the liberals are looking more and more like for dictatorial type authoritarianism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Yes, the liberals are looking more and more like for dictatorial type authoritarianism.

---

:lol

Quote:

---

The measure required two-thirds support to advance, but came up seven votes short: 277 to 148. A total of 210 Republicans voted for the extension, but 26 Republicans joined with a majority of Democrats (122) to vote against it. Sixty-seven Democrats voted with Republicans for the extension.

---

It's not just liberals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

:lol



It's not just liberals.

---

Please....

Don't tell me that you believe republican = conservative...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Please....

Don't tell me that you believe republican = conservative...

---

So you think that all Republicans who voted for it weren't conservatives?

In other words, there are only 26 Republican conservatives in the House?

Does this mean that there are more Democratic conservatives than Republican conservatives? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

So you think that all Republicans who voted for it weren't conservatives?

In other words, there are only 26 Republican conservatives in the House?

Does this mean that there are more Democratic conservatives than Republican conservatives? :lol

---

No, it get's more complex than that, including compromising.

Some things should not be compromised on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

No, it get's more complex than that, including compromising.

Some things should not be compromised on.

---

Is this a vote that should or should not have been compromised on?

And you talk about complexity, after saying above that "liberals" are looking for authoritarianism. You can't talk about complexity after you dismiss it yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

Is this a vote that should or should not have been compromised on?

And you talk about complexity, after saying above that "liberals" are looking for authoritarianism. You can't talk about complexity after you dismiss it yourself.

---

Absolutely not. If the patriot act as a whole is to be voted on, then I say vote no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Absolutely not. If the patriot act as a whole is to be voted on, then I say vote no.

---

So where's the complexity then? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I never doubted it would happen. The original act was OK, and I'm pretty sure at the time that I said it wasn't the act that bothered me, but how individuals privy to the information would abuse it. These last few years though, the lawmakers have been adding more to the patriot act. Things that simply did not belong. I'm very surprised how blatant some of it was.

---

What was added to it that you don't agree with?
Are you even aware that what was voted on today was part of the original act?

Don't tell me you were for it before you were against it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Absolutely not. If the patriot act as a whole is to be voted on, then I say vote no.

---

But when the majority Congress was under Republican control and they voted yes, you didn't have a problem... :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

And WC, didn't I say a few years back that gov't would abuse the Patriot Act?

---

Can you find a quote on this? My recollection is actually the contrary... me pointing out how the administration could abuse roving wiretaps while WC defending the legality of bypassing FISA and the position of a tool to fight terror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Can you find a quote on this? My recollection is actually the contrary... me pointing out how the administration could abuse roving wiretaps while WC defending the legality of bypassing FISA and the position of a tool to fight terror.

---

ElNono, I said that I said it would lead to abuse, not that WC said that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Please....

Don't tell me that you believe republican = conservative...

---

Harsh! But true.

I just don't want anyone getting mad when there's a terrorist attack and the politicians say "if only the Patriot Act got extended." That'll be some cake on your Anti-Federal Powers faces!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stringer_Bell

Harsh! But true.

I just don't want anyone getting mad when there's a terrorist attack and the politicians say "if only the Patriot Act got extended." That'll be some cake on your Anti-Federal Powers faces!

---

What makes you think the PA lead to thwarting any attacks?
AFAIK, every major plot discovered either failed due to the sloppiness of the attacker (shoe guy, the Time Square dude) or through intel leads (ie: the printer cartridge stuff from not long ago).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

ElNono, I said that I said it would lead to abuse, not that WC said that.

---

I gotcha... just really funny/sad to read this flip-flopper now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

What makes you think the PA lead to thwarting any attacks?
AFAIK, every major plot discovered either failed due to the sloppiness of the attacker (shoe guy, the Time Square dude) or through intel leads (ie: the printer cartridge stuff from not long ago).

---

The myth of homeland security stops 60% of homegrown terrorists. Fact.

The other 40% either burn their assholes when their underwear bombs don't go off incorrectly, start to panic when their shoebombs go off incorrectly, run to the airport when their manure bombs go off incorrectly, or hand their jihad mixtape to Circuit City employees before they unleash holy war on a crowded military base via pizza delivery vehicle.

Why do you hate our security apparatus? Why do you hate America?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

What was added to it that you don't agree with?
Are you even aware that what was voted on today was part of the original act?

Don't tell me you were for it before you were against it...

---

There have been things added since the original enactment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

There have been things added since the original enactment.

---

Just out of curiosity, what parts have been added that you don't agree with?

Shortly after the vote to extend PA fails, government comes out with terrorist scare-mongering.

Napolitano warns of ‘heightened’ terror threat

WASHINGTON — The United States is facing "heightened" threats of attacks from extremists, possibly the highest since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the head of US homeland security told lawmakers Wednesday.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/n...terror-threat/

=========

We need a new color-coded metaphor, come on Janet, you can do it!

The eternal GWOT, no matter what the name, is a pretext for violating Americans' freedoms (don't hear much about that kind of violation from tea baggers, do we?), expectations of privacy ( :lol :lol :lol ), etc, etc.

tea baggers are financed by the VRWC, themselves serial, serious tax evaders...

If only the govt were as effective as violating the secrecy and crimes of wealthy personal/corporate tax evaders as it is against terrorism.


Ever wonder why those tax evaders get to keep their $Bs secretly stashed overseas? Note the Repugs are slashing $100Ms from IRS budget. Wonder why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stringer_Bell

Why do you hate our security apparatus? Why do you hate America?

---

:lol

I don't know what I despise more, the fact that some people are too dumb to realize the level of Orwellian reality they live in, or the people that flip-flop on supporting/despising said reality based on the party in power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

There have been things added since the original enactment.

---

So you don't even know what was added, if anything, but you do know you don't like those things... :lol

Nono, are you really surprised WC is talking out of his ass? Honestly

Surprised? no

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

:lol

I don't know what I despise more, the fact that some people are too dumb to realize the level of Orwellian reality they live in, or the people that flip-flop on supporting/despising said reality based on the party in power.

---

Tell me about it, Facebook is so genius because people embrace giving away information because they think the more they share about themselves, the more they are accepted/appreciated. The most dangerous "Orwellian nightmare" is the one that no one ties to politics, and a significant percentage of the population can't seem to hand enough of themselves over to the digital realm. In truth, Facebook Apps do more to track people than the Patriot Act...but the Patriot Act makes the government and contractors money, so I am surprised its having trouble but like you said - the whole flip-flop thing based on political party ensure that yesterday's villains are today's heroes. :king