Eric Holder: Suspending Miranda is now OKAY?

"To any great degree"? Any "degree" above zero is too much. "Petty inconveniences" Tell that to those whose civil rights are tossed under the "terrorism" mantra.

If we give up who we are (ie: our very own Constitution) in order to wage this war, then WHAT HAVE WE WON? Nothing, except a new despotic tyranny NOT based on radical Islam. Congratulations. Pick up your boobie prize at the suckers window. The people who are INSANE are the ones who think government will simply GIVE BACK these unconstitutional powers when the current threat is dealt with.

Giving up our freedoms as guaranteed by the Constitution is NOT an acceptable means of winning this, or any war. Doing such is LOSING the real war while claiming victory over a few battles.

Benjamin Franklin

And as I've told Damo, Ben Franklin would slap the taste out of your mouth for misusing his words in such a way. No one is advocating "giving up our Constitution" and no one is having any fundamental right deprived! We do indeed have restrictions and limitations on our freedoms and liberties, and we always will have, unless you wish to live in a state of total and complete anarchy. Let's just stop with the over-hyped melodramatics and hyperbole about this! There has been NO cases presented successfully to the SCOTUS regarding the "violation of rights" of any individual, resulting from the Patriot Act. This tells me (because I have common fucking billy-goat sense) that there must not be very much of a intrusion on people's Constitutional rights! Yet, here you are, insisting that has been the case since the Patriot Act was passed into law, with an overwhelming margin of support from both parties. I have to wonder how much of a brain you have in your head.

Get off your goddamn high horse, quoting Franklin, and waving around the Constitution like a madman, screaming about the sky falling! We get it! I get it! I fully understand we don't want to trash the Constitution and deprive people of fundamental Constitutional rights! The difference between what I believe and what you believe, is that I don't believe our fundamental rights have been violated or are being violated through the Patriot Act, and you obviously feel differently. It would be good if you had some evidence to support your viewpoint, other than long-winded opinions and conjectures... but maybe that's too much to ask?
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You'd think neocon parrots and pundits would be applauding Holder for his mental meanderings. But hey, it's under Obama, so it's a bad thing.

Bottom line: if Holder's mind fart becomes a reality he can look forward to being replaced after the 2012 elections along with Obama, because the people that put them in office won't stand for this.

Tachi, you as well as I know that we basically have the choice between voting for a Republican who will take Obama's precedents and run with it and Obama. We can vote in the primary, but Obama's going to win the goddamn primary. It's hopeless.

Obama has allowed the middle ground to shift too far to the right. It disgusts me. He's a goddamn Republican in Democratic clothing.


Obama's election was a lot of hope mixed with the alternative to more insanity. What's amazing is that with all his pandering to the neocon agenda set before him, the GOP is STILL carrying on as if he's the anti-Christ! I pray for a 3rd Party candidate....but I fear those prayers are going to God's voicemail.
 
Originally Posted by Big Gay Al
Well there is a third option. You could, ya know, try and change the Republican party. It'll be Libertarian soon enough anyways, why not try and ride the inevitable wave of glory that will come with it?
The libertarians do not have a majority in the Republican party. There's little hope there.

I could say I'm strategically voting for Obama, but even if we had IRV I doubt a third party candidate good on civil liberties could make a credible threat. I am, at the end of things, faced with the cold fact that most Americans wildly support fascism.

Libertarians can sneek in here and there, but the nano-second they get a full blown national scrunity, it'll be back to the bush leagues.
 
And as I've told Damo, Ben Franklin would slap the taste out of your mouth for misusing his words in such a way.
prove it. show one piece of historical documentation that says otherwise.

No one is advocating "giving up our Constitution" and no one is having any fundamental right deprived! We do indeed have restrictions and limitations on our freedoms and liberties, and we always will have, unless you wish to live in a state of total and complete anarchy.
complete and total bullshit, again. we didn't start having 'reasonable restrictions' on our rights and freedoms until 1919, with the BS statement of Justice Holmes from the Schenck v. United States case.


you're a fucking authoritarian state lover who prefers security over liberty. Franklin would slap the shit out of YOU for misusing his words.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Libertarians can sneek in here and there, but the nano-second they get a full blown national scrunity, it'll be back to the bush leagues.

please, let you dems and repubs continue your bullshit totalitarian ways and we'll be the ones that the people turn to.

:palm: Actually, you'll note that more "progressive" (people are scared of the word "liberal") candidates are making themselves known in both parties...and the one "libertarian" candidate that the teabaggers claim responsibility for was exposed by Rachel Maddow for the little POS that he is....so keep dreaming, pal.

Personally, I'm hoping for a version of the Green Party to make a showing before I die. Stranger things have been known to happen.
 
:palm: Actually, you'll note that more "progressive" (people are scared of the word "liberal") candidates are making themselves known in both parties...and the one "libertarian" candidate that the teabaggers claim responsibility for was exposed by Rachel Maddow for the little POS that he is....so keep dreaming, pal.

Personally, I'm hoping for a version of the Green Party to make a showing before I die. Stranger things have been known to happen.

maddow couldnt expose her genitals, let alone rand paul.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Actually, you'll note that more "progressive" (people are scared of the word "liberal") candidates are making themselves known in both parties...and the one "libertarian" candidate that the teabaggers claim responsibility for was exposed by Rachel Maddow for the little POS that he is....so keep dreaming, pal.

Personally, I'm hoping for a version of the Green Party to make a showing before I die. Stranger things have been known to happen.

maddow couldnt expose her genitals, let alone rand paul.

Your childish retort aside, outside his chosen profession, Rand Paul's libertarian BS just doesn't cut it under scrutiny.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joan_walsh/politics/2010/05/19/rachel_maddow_demolishes_rand_paul
 
Back
Top