Reply With Quote
Too bad they still can't permit surveillance on the infamous tri-wolf.
Obama signs one-year extension of Patriot Act
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama has signed a one-year extension of several provisions in the nation's main counterterrorism law, the Patriot Act.
Provisions in the measure would have expired on Sunday without Obama's signature Saturday.
The act, which was adopted in the weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, expands the government's ability to monitor Americans in the name of national security.
Three sections of the Patriot Act that stay in force will:
_Authorize court-approved roving wiretaps that permit surveillance on multiple phones.
_Allow court-approved seizure of records and property in anti-terrorism operations.
_Permit surveillance against a so-called lone wolf, a non-U.S. citizen engaged in terrorism who may not be part of a recognized terrorist group.
Obama's signature comes after the House voted 315 to 97 Thursday to extend the measure.
The Senate also approved the measure, with privacy protections cast aside when Senate Democrats lacked the necessary 60-vote supermajority to pass them. Thrown away were restrictions and greater scrutiny on the government's authority to spy on Americans and seize their recor
Too bad they still can't permit surveillance on the infamous tri-wolf.
Awesome.
"Change."
when was/is it due to expire?
Terrible
did you read the post?
Patriot Act was one of MANY things BUSH ed us with. It's one of the FEW things I was hoping Obama would get rid of. I thought he woulda done it on purely political grounds (Bush sucks, everything he did sucks, Patriot Act sucks, etc...)
Everyone is against everything the "other" guy does...until they get to hold the power the "other" guy created for them.
"we'll keep it for now..."
...and so it goes
You ing LIAR!!!!!!
Oh, and I've got a one-finger salute to you, too.
Can someone please put this man in prison?!? This is why we needed to hold him to account!
Last edited by Darrin; 02-28-2010 at 10:09 PM.
As a man who taught Cons utional Law for 10 years, I shouldn't have to say this. If you legislate with EOs, as you have threatened to do, if you allow the legislation to stand that allows for the expansive powers of the Executive, if you allow for wiretapping, you are leaving in-place the path to abuse of power, it is as bad as if you had abused that power! It is Uncons utional!
This is like calling for a nuclear-free state by saying "Well, I won't use the weapon. You can trust me. We're nuclear-free as long as the President doesn't order its use. No need to destroy the weapons."
As a cat who taught Extraterrerestial Law for 10 years, I shouldn't have to say this. If you masturbate while drinking, as you have done, then you post stupid and think that it's brilliant.
So, if I read this correctly, if the Dems had been able to overcome the republicans in the Senate we would have had more privacy protection in place than we got?
Is this the party of 'too much government that is in there trying to protect Americans from governmental spying but being unable to because of not having a super-majority of 60 votes?
How do the representatives of 'less intrusive government' square this?
When the dirty filthy Moslems are involved, the Cons ution is just a "Goddamed piece of paper."
Of course, I'm not a super American Patriot like Cobra Commander or Southern whatever.
As obvious from my post above. I'm against this.
I was against it from from the beginning. For all the obvious reasons.
I dunno where people get the idea Conservatives liked Bush, or that Bush was a conservative. We didn't like him, and he never was a conservative. Why we didn't come out strong in the last election...there wasn't a conservative running, nothing to vote "for."
As much as we disliked Bush...Obama is about 3 times worse.
The Patriot act sucks, so did a lot of things Bush did. It's now Obama's tho...and it seems he likes it as much as Bush did.
From the constant shouting and meeting protest for protest from to anyone who spoke out against him BEFORE KATRINA as some kind of weak-ass liberal or anti-American. He dangerously expanded the Executive Power and using excuses like "well, times in War are special" to do whatever the he wanted to. A war that has no end. We will never defeat Terrorism! It is as old as society itself!
Cheney continues to support those measures and they aren't in prison. They violated the Cons ution and we didn't out-law what they did. So, here comes a man tacking to the center and he just keeps things status quo. No one can attack him for being weak on Terror now! Look two seconds down the road--to outlaw Bush's Doctrine and the Patriot Act means that a President risks following him to prison to do this ! But there was no political will to do so because it would establish a dangerous precendent (OF FOLLOWING THE CONS UTION!)
Were you ing about how much the Iraq War cost, the nature of the money being thrown away in the first place, or were you nodding your head when the President was calling John Kerry a flip-flopper for voting for and against the 87 billion dollars? You may not be one, but there are a lot of ing hypocrites in this nation.
I don't need to be told how unpopular he is...now.
Last edited by Darrin; 03-01-2010 at 02:28 AM.
Hey people, if it helps us catch more underwear bombers, tea bagger pilots, and pizza delivery mercs...not that the Patriot Act actually stopped any of those notable incidents. But it could!!!!!!! GW is a visionary! Barry is our guide to that vision!
You know, for all the serious faults George Bush has, you cannot fault him for his love of this country and attempts to protect us. I am also thankful he is on the side of the tax payers...
Otherwise, he is a pretty ed up individual.
I thought he would be remembered in a good light? Make up your mind.
He will be. Because the real criticism will be thrown out with all the bull criticism your side makes up.
Ever hear the story "the boy who cried wolf?"
of course he did.
What side is that?
What does this has to do with your argument? Is he a pretty ed up individual or not?
Nope, but I heard of the Bush Administration's calls to fight a war based on "evidence" of yellow cake in Iraq that was in immediate need of neutralization for fear that the holy Al-Q and that godless Saddam would become partners in attacking the US...except there was no link to be found.
And why does a person have to be a on a "side" to question or criticize? Maybe ElNono is a sphere and he has no side? Ever hear of the story "the dude who said 'if you're not with us, you're against us'?"
Nope, but I heard of the Bush Administration's calls to fight a war based on "evidence" of yellow cake in Iraq that was in immediate need of neutralization for fear that the holy Al-Q and that godless Saddam would become partners in attacking the US...except there was no link to be found.
And why does a person have to be a on a "side" to question or criticize? Maybe ElNono is a sphere and he has no side? Ever hear of the story "the dude who said 'if you're not with us, you're against us'?"
Yeah because Saddam was just the king of Camelot minding his own business. Saddam was a partner with Al-Q.
And he had all these WMD...
Yeah because Saddam was just the king of Camelot minding his own business. Saddam was a partner with Al-Q.
Who writes your script, Cheney?
Wait, Evay comments on this Obama decision is directed towards the republicans?
Quelle surprise....
Last edited by mogrovejo; 03-01-2010 at 03:58 PM.
The questionable part is to the extent of their relationship not the existence of a relationship
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
