« Antiwar Sentiment Grows Against Obama-Possibility of Primary Challenge | Kali Star's Blog | Chuck Todd on Who's Sheriff in Washington and Who isn't »
Which President Signed the Extension of the Patriot Act Without Any Change?
Reported in the Christian Science Monitor - 3/1/10
Advertisement
Yes! We have got to stop this President!
Let's get behind Sarah Palin now for 2012 to shake things up in Washington like she promised in 2008! You can lead the charge, Kali!
July 28, 2010 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, you believe that the Patriot Act should be extended without substantial or any change at all? Just want to be clear here since we're making up things that other people are saying.
Kali wants Sarah Palin to be President.
Overreach This! hearts the Patriot Act which he believes is perfect in every way.
Do I have everybody's position down right?
July 28, 2010 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just happen to think, unlike the hyperventilating firebagger who posted this, that not Obama alone is responsible for this and that it is a shameful thing to suggest, as was done, that he is.
Shameful and maniacally counterproductive. Which is the norm for so many of us here.
July 28, 2010 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know but Kali doesn't want Sarah Palin to be President, just like I know that you don't want "Patriot Act 4Evah." So be nice. We do share some goals, don't we?
July 28, 2010 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
You both have forks. Maybe you're both just hungry.
July 28, 2010 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bad Spam!
July 28, 2010 10:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's not nice is singling the President out for abuse here, as the poster did and not the article she put up. And no, I will not shut up, and no I have no shared views with firebagging.
July 28, 2010 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've become a complete parody of yourself.
July 28, 2010 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You same firebaggers come on here every day and say something abusive and unfair against Obama, then all rec the abusive comment (*BOR-ING!*), then get called on it and don’t like getting called out and all defend the misbehavior.
You ostensibly don’t want me to comment on it, but I do.
July 29, 2010 5:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
So any criticism of the president is firebagging? Whatever that is. I just call it dissent. But I guess we live in a time where both the political right and center cannot tolerate any dissent.
The president challenged us to keep on criticizing him so we will. Not that he will ever change his mind. He said defiantly that he didn't mind criticism but gave no indication that he would pay it any mind.
Just don't whine, hyperventilate and point fingers when the D's get their asses handed to them in November...it is not the left's fault Team Obama didn't address the 10% unemployment problem, enact HCR that gave immediate help to the American people, didn't address the foreclosure nightmare where many thousands of people lose their homes every month, etc. In short don't blame us for the leadership vacuum that exists in Washington.
July 28, 2010 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Skipping me for a minute, if you can do that, are you saying that the Christian Science Monitor is "shameful and maniacally counterproductive?" I posted a link without comment.
July 28, 2010 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, just saying as others here have rightly pointed out that you are wrongly singling out the President for abuse, and the Monitor article does not support your firebagging headline.
July 28, 2010 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have political beliefs. Yours on the other hand aren't really about politics but something more personal, even dark.
July 28, 2010 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, cram it.
July 29, 2010 5:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
*Consult ASAP*
July 29, 2010 8:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Look up Firebagger in the Urban Dictionary. And don't be vain, no, they don't have your picture there.
July 29, 2010 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
And which Congress sent it to him without a single change? If you are suggesting he should have whipped out his veto pen you live in a world inhabited by unicorns and wood elves.
Even the ACLU doesn't lay the blame at Obama's feet. (from your CSM link)
So while we can bemoan that the Patriot Act was extended without the necessary changes and the narrowing of it's scope. I am not losing sight that still have an opportunity to push for the needed changes.
July 28, 2010 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Politics is more important than civil liberties.
Hey, maybe they'll get around to it later.
July 28, 2010 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why its only a one year extension. There's no way to get any changes passed with only 57 democrats and 41 republicans in the senate. Next year when there are 51 democratic senators and 47 republicans we'll begin to see some real changes.
July 28, 2010 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think that's true on a lot of Patriot Act issues, they don't break down clearly along party lines (immigration is another issue that is that way.)
July 28, 2010 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Next year the filibuster will be eliminated. And you'll need to firebag over something else.
July 28, 2010 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Besides, I don't understand why you're now talking about Congress when your headline blames the President personally.
July 28, 2010 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You really think the democrats, who must at least be pondering the possibility of returning to the minority in a cycle or two, are going to *eliminate* the filibuster? It really seems they aren't doing half the dirty tricks they could be as it sits, if they want to up the ante they can do it. They might decide to "reform" it some, but if Dems don't keep at least 56 I think they aren't going to bother.
I'm not really speculating on election outcome at this point. IMO the current political game looks like a competition over who can come up with the most shockingly impressive way to turn off voters. I'm dumbfounded on how to handicap that really.
July 29, 2010 4:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, *eliminate* was probably too strong as I research it.
Harry Reid is sick of having his hands by Republican abusers tied, as are others. But it's hard to get the needed votes for radical change (people bellyache about "minority interest"), although I do expect something significant. That's Harry's take anyhow.
The Firebaggers' take is always the same, "Blame Obama!"
July 29, 2010 5:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
!Also! Possible incorrect deployment of absurd slur alert!!!
I'm pretty certain OC's comment is saying less Democratic representation isn't going to make a better outcome more likely. It's subtle *cough*. But I think you need to put your firebag back in it's little purple sand teapot and hold on to it for another occasion. (that, or I do downthread ... either way, we've got OC covered on THIS ;-)
July 29, 2010 4:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Yep, you nailed that!
July 28, 2010 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait a second. It's an extension. So they can't pass anything AND they can't block anything? And that's your big shining reason to send Democrats back ... if there are less of them, they'll still be equally lame?
You guys are funny.
July 29, 2010 3:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
they are funny in their blind following. Couldn't do anything with 60, nor anything with a little less.
What the democrats are waiting for is having a few less seata in the senate, then they'll really move!
Sad thing is, Obama is expanding spying powers without a warrant:
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/07/28/obama-administration-wants-to-make-domestic-surveillance-power-grab/
July 29, 2010 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
The extension of the Patriot Act without reform is a stain on our country and a sell out of our fundamental values. When it comes to his promises versus the reality of his Presidency on the issue of Civil Liberties, the President has alot to answer for.
But where is the Congress, the folks who are meant to directly represent the people, and be a check against a powerful executive? This bunch passed the extension in the dark of night as an Amendment to a Medicare Bill by something like a 3-1 margin.
July 28, 2010 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing I'll say for Obama on this issue is that he never really campaigned as a civil liberties guy, not in the ACLU or Electronic Frontier Foundation sense. What's sad to me is that the government at all levels very clearly has no intention of every rolling back any of the post 9/11 laws. But then, I think we were all saying that post 9/11, before these laws were passed. These things are never going to be undone.
July 28, 2010 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a really interesting point about Obama.
So, do you think that the die-hard Obama supporters (like me) just assumed that he would be a civil liberties guy ? Because I was shocked to read this today, even in my current state of "anti-Obamaism."
July 28, 2010 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a really interesting point about Obama.
So, do you think that the die-hard Obama supporters (like me) just assumed that he would be a civil liberties guy ? Because I was shocked to read this today, even in my current state of "anti-Obamaism."
July 28, 2010 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
die-hard Obama supporters (like me)
I think you are going to continue to be disappointed are you are with him if you continue with the savior syndrome. I saw your it in your last post, which came across to me as wishing/hoping that there is some growing anti-war crowd and out of that will come a new miraculous left-of-Obama savior to challenge Obama. And I see it in this one too.
Even if you got your wish, you should not expect that new president to veto a bill passed by Congress a month after he is inaugurated, just because doing so agrees with his principles and yours and a minority in Congress. That would be a system that works best when dictatorships have evolved after elections, though historically it's not often that liberals are able to get any of those.
If you really cared about being an activist on Patriot Act issues, you should not be looking for a savior president on it but should have known about and been working on this in the CSM article, from March 1 until today: But while many Democrats chose to punt on a Patriot Act revision, she says, some did so “on the premise that the extra year would give more time to work out” adjustments that would narrow its scope. “It will be your goal to hold their feet to the fire to make sure that happens."
July 28, 2010 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
In suspect that you assumed, and I think I did too for awhile, that the Democrats never supported all of this Patriot Act B.S. and that they were just swept up in the course of history and were forced to vote for it.
It's a bad way of thinking, I've learned. You have to judge these people by how they actually vote, not by how you think they'd have voted in ideal circumstances.
When Obama voted in favor of immunizing the telecom companies from being sued by the victims of their lawbreaking we knew where he stood on these issues. He believes that the government should have and use the powers it was given. It's as simple as that.
July 28, 2010 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not completely sure on the meaning of your comment. I did not know until reading this article about the Patriot Act Extension.
I think it happened during a period I was choosing to avoid the news. However, I should have known.
July 28, 2010 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not completely sure on the meaning of your comment. I did not know until reading this article about the Patriot Act Extension.
I think it happened during a period I was choosing to avoid the news. However, I should have known.
July 28, 2010 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Next.
July 29, 2010 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink