Five Myths About the New Wiretapping Law or why it's worse than you think

blackascoal said:
No, he didn't.
Click to expand...
Geez...

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul463.html

Statement on FISA

by Ron Paul

Statement on HR 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments before the US House of Representatives, June 20, 2008


Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.


The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.


In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.


Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.
Click to expand...

At least be honest.
 
Desh said:
yeah Im not happy about it.


I think he is doing it to get elected.


He cant really get anything done without getting elected.


Im still going to stand strong for him to get him elected.


Once hes elected I hope they go back and redo this one.


I really think this was done the way it was done to get the issue out of the election process so the republicans could not use it to get traction.

I dont like it but I also know part of what has kept the democrats out of power was how the republicans can play a certain percent of the population.

They can still cheat with the machines this year and will. Obama has to do what he has to do to get elected. Once the playing field is equal again and they cant cheat in the elections I will take a harder line about this stuff but that can not happen untill the dems get elected and fix the system.
Click to expand...

Obama has advantages that Gore and Kerry did not have.

1. Obama voters will vote on still imperfect voting machines, but the machines and the process are much better than they were in 2000, and 2004.

2. Obama has George Bush, the full blown version, a diminshed and rejected Republican Party, and a most seriously flawed candidate in John McCain to run against.

3. Obama has incredible resources and an energized electorate behind him.

4. The vaunted republican attack machine has been reduced to desperation because most Americans see it for what it is .. which is why Rev. Wright didn't stick.

If he doesn't have the balls to take principled stands in this environment, when will he grow them?
 
blackascoal said:
I was honest .. he didn't vote on the bill.

I was unaware of his reasons for not voting as I do not follow Ron Paul.
Click to expand...

I said Ron Paul "would have opposed this" to which you said No.

He showed definitely that he would, in fact, have opposed this.

You were incorrect.

Had I said: "Ron Paul voted against this!" you would have been right.
 
Obama has to say all kinds of stuff to get passed the racists. Once he's elected, you will see the real Obama
 
The only person who stands any fucking chance of stopping this madness we have been living with for years.
 
Epicurus said:
LoL it's true.

This board is all ultra-lefties and libertarians, with a few retard conservatives thrown into the mix.
Click to expand...


:p "ultra-lefties"

I do agree that there are retarded conservatives mixed in with sanctimonious libertarians on the board.
 
Desh said:
The only person who stands any fcking chance of stopping this madness we have been living with for years.
Click to expand...

You're right Desh.

We'll just have to get grass roots organizations together to fight this kind of stuff once he's elected. Its our only viable option, he's not going to be perfect. But I hope Obama's just pandering at this point.
 
Obama is trying to convince you that it's ok to vote for this, because he will be in control.. everything will be flowers and candy!
 
We are in short time now, just 4 months left.

He has to give them no ammunition for the rest of the game.

Failing to realize he has to play some of these cards this way to get elected given the current state of our broken system is what will give McSame the edge he needs to pull this off.
 
Desh said:
The only person who stands any fucking chance of stopping this madness we have been living with for years.
Click to expand...

There’s no option at this point but to hope for the best. But these things are good examples of why I wanted Edwards, not Obama. It was a real toss-up. With Edwards, you had to take the chance that this Edwards was the real deal, and the 2004 Edwards was the Kerry-directed, politically “safe” contrivance. That was a gamble. But I made the judgement early on that Edwards really was much more progressive than Obama.

But at this date, he’s the only option. We can’t have McCain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top