Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Courting Disaster?
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Dick Morris wonders if the position taken by the majority of Dems on the Patriot Act might not come back to haunt them when the subject of how serious they are about national security emerges in the next presidential election (or in '06 for that matter):
Anyone who wonders whether the Democratic Party in general and Sen. Hillary Clinton in particular are really tough on terror — or are just posing for the cameras — needs to look at the vote by the entire Democratic Senate delegation (excepting only Nebraska's Ben Nelson and South Dakota's Tim Johnson) to prevent closure of their filibuster against the Patriot Act extension.

While the legislation President Bush proposed extends the entire act, certain key provisions are set to expire at year's end. (The rest of the act is good until September 2007.) By voting to allow these provisions to lapse, the Democrats have shown a total disregard for national security.

It is particularly galling that Sens. Clinton and Chuck Schumer — whose New York constituents are in the terrorists' bull's-eye — voted to let these vital protections expire.

How galling? One of the key provisions due to expire in two weeks is one that President Bill Clinton presented as the cornerstone of his response to the escalation of terrorism in the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

The measure allows "roving wiretaps" — so that the FBI can tap all phones a suspect uses, rather than just one specific number. Hillary's vote to let this provision expire is incredible.
Roving wiretaps essentially allow the FBI to focus on the person of interest instead of a particular telephone number, thereby allowing them to legally listen to whatever number the person uses. It's an effort to keep the law up with the prevailing technology and is very important in the era of almost disposable cellular phones. As Morris points out, this was something the Democrats at the time found to be very, very important. In fact, as Morris notes, Bill Clinton excoriated the Republican Congress, with appropriate noises by the minority Democratic Congressional chorus, for moving so slowly on this important measure in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing.

Secondly, and something everyone acknowledges was a problem, is about to again be allowed to be a problem. The famous "wall" which the Patriot Act demolished between the intelligence community and the law-enforcement community is about to be again erected:
As a further Christmas anti-present to New Yorkers, Clinton, Schumer & Co. are also killing the Patriot Act provision that demolishes the infamous wall — erected by Clinton-era Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick — between those who investigate terrorism and those who prosecute suspects.

The goal was to avoid tainting criminal prosecutions, by avoiding the collection of evidence without a full search warrant. But the result was to keep the left hand from knowing what the right hand was doing when it came to preventing acts of terrorism.

Like the 9/11 attacks.
Apparently it's 9/10 again to some in government.

I want to make a point however. My agreeing with Morris on these two points doesn't mean I agree that the entire Patriot Act should be renewed. However I also don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and that is precisely what Congress is doing by rejecting the whole of the Act instead of examining those pieces which are important and renewing them while amending or doing away with those elements that seem to intrusive or aren't doing the job.

But of course that requires hard bipartisan work focused on doing what is best for the country, something, I've become convinced, the Democratic Congressional leadership has absolutely no desire to do.

With any law of this sort - which has the potential for abuse - I'd prefer to see sunset provisons attached, so, at the time designated in the future, the law could again be examined critically and amended or done away with, which ever is more appropriate.

But again, that would be the responsible approach to the legislation known as the Patriot Act. Instead we get the political approach, in which nebulous charges justify a filibuster without the necessary debate or examination this act deserves.

Not that it comes as a particular surprise that the Democrats have chosen to act that way. But if, as I anticipate, all is going well in Iraq in a year or two and, God forbid, another terrorist act happens in the US (no matter how small) that can be traced to a lapsed Patriot Act provision, the Dems will indeed have hell to pay.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
What a load of crap.

You know who joined in the fillibuster? Larry Craig of Idaho. Yes - the Senator from the state that is perhaps the most red in the nation, where Bush’s approval ratings are the highest. (Maybe Utah has the spud state beat.)

No, what you are seeing here is a new divide: On the one side are liberals and real old fashioned conservatives like Craig. On the other are your love of government intrusion, authoritairan types, mostly southern repubs, like Bush.
USA Patriot Act defeated: Libertarians celebrate victory
by Libertarian Party of Ohio
December 19, 2005

The Senate on Friday rejected attempts to reauthorize several provisions of the USA Patriot Act as infringing too much on Americans’ privacy and liberty, dealing a huge defeat to the Bush administration and Republican leaders.

In a crucial vote early Friday, the bill’s Senate supporters were not able to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a threatened filibuster by Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and their allies. The final vote was 52-47.

The Libertarian Party played a crucial role in bringing together conservative and liberal opponents of the PATRIOT Act to form Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances (http://www.checksbalances.org/index.php). The Patriots lobbied Congress intensively over the past year to allow the controversial provisions to expire on Dec 31 2005.

"Through our participation in Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, we were able to work with former Congressman Bob Barr to bring conservatives like the American Conservative Union, Americans for Tax Reform, and Gun Owners of America together with progressive groups like the ACLU," explains Ohio LP Executive Director Robert Butler.

"This represents the great change that has occured in American politics. Many issues no longer break along traditional conservative vs. liberal lines. Current arguments occur between those who prefer liberty and freedom and those who prefer big government’s false sense of security," declares LPO Chair Jason Hallmark, "And today Liberty has won."
Wanna bet Craig’s approval rating goes up? There are still some of us out here who believe in freedom and liberty. Guess we can’t count McQ among us. Some of us, it seems, need a strong daddy type.

Does neo-libertarian mean being opposite of libertarian?
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Good Lord but you are one knee-jerk, off-topic moonbat, MK.

Just when I begin to give you the tinyist scintilla of credit for actually providing a useful comment on another thread, you come up with something like this.

Who comprised the MAJORITY of the opposition, MK? The fact that some Republican joined in or that, as usual, the LP is off in an alternative universe has zip to do with the points I discuss in the post.

Speaking of loads of crap, save yours until you have something useful and on topic to contribute.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Apparently it’s 9/10 again to some in government.
And specifically, some of those recently removed from positions of power within it.

Morris has it right, here. And, there’s much in the way of history backing his position, going back to the Afore-mentioned 1968.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
There’s nothing new here. You’ve got your opportunists, and a few honest ideologues opposed to a controversial bill.

Political opportunists are waiting to see how the scandal-du-jour effects the poll numbers.

The honest ones want to see more debate on the subject.

Who’s using whom???
 
Written By: Keith, Indy
URL: http://
"On the one side are liberals and real old fashioned conservatives like Craig. On the other are your love of government intrusion, authoritairan types, mostly southern repubs, like Bush."

Yeah, liberals HATE government intrusion and authoritarian rule.

Paul, once again, you are full of shit.

 
Written By: Unknown
URL: http://
Yeah, liberals HATE government intrusion and authoritarian rule.
Yes, that’s why liberals are calling for ...

1) The elimination of state laws legalizing medical mj
2) The elimination of state laws creating a right to assisted suicide
3) The re-regulation of sex between consenting adults
4) State mandated school prayer
5) The elimination of the right to an abortion
6) State sponsored religious symbols on public property
7) Non-court authorized wiretaps of phone conversations, monitoring of emails,
and the like
8) Elimination of any notion of a right of privacy
9) Indefinite detention of American citizens without the right of judicial
review

And, Number 10 - a president who gets on his hands and knees and personally begs the New York Times to not report that he is spying on the American people.

No, wait, that’s what wingers are calling for.

CORRECTION: Just in case someone is monitoring this post, or detecting it, or whatever, I love George Bush and believe he can do no wrong. He is our Dear Leader.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
McQ misses the obvious point - in all acts of government the Democrats are blameless. They do not have the numbers to do anything.

The Republicans hold Senate, Representative House and Presidency - all the power and all the responsibility. A filibuster is a disrupting technique that delays, but cannot defeat a bill. If there is another terrorist attack then it will be because the Republicans failed to govern responsibly and if people die pointing at the opposition saying they made us govern badly is not a good selling point. If this is important for the protection of America the Republican govenment must do it - whining that the oppostion is making it too hard portrays them as ineffectual, lazy wimps who want to avoid any disruption to their feeding time at the public trough.
 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://
Dear Mr. mkultra:

You have been "randomly" chosen for an audit of your 2001-2004 Federal tax returns. Please present yourself at our Regional Office at 9:00am on January 2, 2006. Bring all supporting documents. It is advised to wear loose-fitting clothing to facilitate the required fingerprinting, taking of DNA samples, and implanting of a radio-frequency-transmitter. A colonoscopy shall be scheduled at a later date as required.

Sincerely,

Agent 1984
 
Written By: IRS agent 1984
URL: http://irs.gov
McQ misses the obvious point - in all acts of government the Democrats are blameless. They do not have the numbers to do anything.

Nonsense, Angus. They have the ability to obstruct, which is precisely what they’re doing (and have done for the entire time of their minority status).

The question is will the voters appreciate their obstruction on this particular issue or punish them for it.

My guess is the latter will be the case.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Here in Idaho he is a god now

You live in Idaho?!

Heh ... now it all makes sense.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Unaha-Closp wrote:
"McQ misses the obvious point - in all acts of government the Democrats are blameless. They do not have the numbers to do anything."
And this is one the silliest and most pathetic sentences I have ever read. If the Democrats have any ideas worth expressing, then the Senators and Congressmen who are democratic should present those ideals and ideas with vigor, if they are worth something, then their numbers will increase. There are more than enough moderates/RINOs in both houses that a genuienly good Democratic bill will probably win.

The reason the Democrats win so few is that their ideas aren’t worth much, which is also why they are a minority. Whining like Unaha’s is why they will stay a minority, and why that will be a smaller minority at this rate.

Now I’m perfectly pleased to see some of the renewable parts of the PATRIOT ACT lapse, but for Unaha to quiveringly peck out that statement, when most Democrats voted for it without even reading it just makes me want to vomit (and I had a lot of salami and sopressata today, fair warning).

However, for none of them to propose in a separate bill that "roving wiretaps" should continue, this shows they are not serious people when either the Bill of Rights or the security of the nation is concerned. More nails in their coffin.

Good God.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
So it’s the liberals that are in favor of reducing government, mk!?! LMAO!

Tell that to Hillary Clinton: "We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
Dick Morris?!?

If ever, and I mean ever, there was a political pundit whose predictions were more consistently wrong, no one I know could point him/her out.

Don’t believe me? Just google “Dick Morris” and “predictions” and see for yourself.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Nonsense, Angus. They have the ability to obstruct, which is precisely what they’re doing (and have done for the entire time of their minority status).

To place obstruct, not to block. They can make the passage of a bill harder and force the Republicans do work (the horror), but they can’t stop it.

The question is will the voters appreciate their obstruction on this particular issue or punish them for it.

My guess is the latter will be the case.


My guess is that they will not remember the obstruction.

The public will however remember (if there is a terrorist attack) that last time they voted for this Republican government which produced this law with all these holes in it and Al Qaeda flew a plane full of explosives through the holes. That the GOP failed to use the power given to protect.


If the Democrats have any ideas worth expressing, then the Senators and Congressmen who are democratic should present those ideals and ideas with vigor, if they are worth something, then their numbers will increase. There are more than enough moderates/RINOs in both houses that a genuienly good Democratic bill will probably win.

You are not Japanese, you have an adverserial system not a consensus one.

You have a two party government in an adverserial system. Consensus politicians working together to adopt genuinly good legislation are nice ideas but the 2 party rivalry makes it very difficult. At an election no government wants to allow the opposition to point to a popular good piece of legislation it made into law - i, it makes the opposition look good and ii, it makes the government look weak - what happens is genuinely good ideas are adopted/stolen by the government as their own. (Or at least it does here in NZ, but if it different in the USA I would appreciate examples of minority party legislation adopted previously.)

If Americans die because of weaknesses in a Patriot Act renewed by a Republican majority Congress and approved by a Republican President they will see it as the Republicans fault. And this is important because governments lose elections as much as oppositions win them.
 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://
To place obstruct, not to block. They can make the passage of a bill harder and force the Republicans do work (the horror), but they can’t stop it.

So where’s the Patriot Act now?

My guess is that they will not remember the obstruction.

They may not remember it, but they’ll certainly be reminded of it at the appropriate time. Ask Tom Dashle how that works.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
McQ, you must be refering to MKULTRA’s response in the Iran missle post (It caught me by suprise anyway).

I was still talking about that blog post in our chow hall over in Camp Liberty, Baghdad the other day.

MK—You ever watch Hannity and Colmes? You sound like the angry version of Colmes. I bet though that you’d be a riot after a few beers defending the democrats.
 
Written By: Ricardo Branch
URL: http://
McQ, you must be refering to MKULTRA’s response in the Iran missle post (It caught me by suprise anyway).

I was still talking about that blog post in our chow hall over in Camp Liberty, Baghdad the other day.

MK—You ever watch Hannity and Colmes? You sound like the angry version of Colmes. I bet though that you’d be a riot after a few beers defending the democrats.
 
Written By: Ricardo Branch
URL: http://
MK—You ever watch Hannity and Colmes? You sound like the angry version of Colmes. I bet though that you’d be a riot after a few beers defending the democrats.
Naw, Colmes’ only redeeming feature is that he is NOT an angry screaming lib.
MK don’t strike me as a Colmes type, more like a Begala type.
.
.

HEY LOOK, I GOT MY OWN BLOG! check it out guys and tell me what ya think.
http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
 
Written By: Kyle N
URL: http://
gee wonder why it didnt take my http tag?
 
Written By: Kyle N
URL: http://

You live in Idaho?!
I seem to recall that JadeGold lived in Idaho...you don’t suppose he’s reincarnated himself?
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com
gee wonder why it didnt take my http tag?

You need to use the url button and link it to a word, like "check it out"

BTW, I tried to leave a comment on your blog and it kept telling me my authentication failed.

I promise ... I’m authentic.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
I seem to recall that JadeGold lived in Idaho...you don’t suppose he’s reincarnated himself?

Well if he has he’s had a lobotomy.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Doh! My old comment posted twice. :)
Good Lord but you are one knee-jerk, off-topic moonbat, MK.

Just when I begin to give you the tinyist scintilla of credit for actually providing a useful comment on another thread, you come up with something like this.
Was that the "Irans latest missle purchase" ?
Naw, Colmes’ only redeeming feature is that he is NOT an angry screaming lib.
MK don’t strike me as a Colmes type, more like a Begala type.
Paul Begala, well he’s more anti-bush (I looked up his bio) so you’re probably right.

I’ll have to catch Begala when I get back. I normally don’t watch CNN because they are so liberal oriented that it always seems to be bad PR for the president.

Over here in fact when we see Christian Amanpour it’s a bad sign (usually followed by a major incident or a U.S. fatality).

During Kosovo and OIF 1 my dad would call her the Black Angel of Death. Unfortunately you can’t ban news organizations these days because they like to cry foul or accuse us of favoritism.

Case in point, a CNN reporter coming into Iraq to interview the NG unit about the Italian journalist.

That specific reporter came in and said she was covering one unit then rushed to them and tried to score an interview (thankfully they have a gag order on the incident).



I got to hand it to this site, I’m getting informed on politics pretty well, which gives me plenty of table talk during my own crossfires over here at chow.



 
Written By: Ricardo Branch
URL: http://
Isn’t the whole idea behind the Patriot Act is that its temporary and has sunsets?

So essentially this vote can be seen as a ’market’ where the majority think there won’t be many more attacks between now and 2006 elections and thus the Patriot Act is no longer needed.

We’ll see if that is true or not.

(Of course, we can already pre-guess the Dems reply if there is an attack...hint, it will involve pinning blame on Bush and not on the attackers)
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
I wrote:
"If the Democrats have any ideas worth expressing, then the Senators and Congressmen who are democratic should present those ideals and ideas with vigor, if they are worth something, then their numbers will increase. There are more than enough moderates/RINOs in both houses that a genuienly good Democratic bill will probably win."
And in response you wrote:
"You are not Japanese, you have an adverserial system not a consensus one.

You have a two party government in an adverserial system. Consensus politicians working together to adopt genuinly good legislation are nice ideas but the 2 party rivalry makes it very difficult. At an election no government wants to allow the opposition to point to a popular good piece of legislation it made into law - i, it makes the opposition look good and ii, it makes the government look weak - what happens is genuinely good ideas are adopted/stolen by the government as their own. (Or at least it does here in NZ, but if it different in the USA I would appreciate examples of minority party legislation adopted previously.)"
The individual representives are elected as individuals serving districts. When a district is particularly middle of the road or when a moderate party member needs to distinguish themselves from their party, or even if they are themselves convinced a non-party line vote is correct, then members cross the aisle and vote with the other party.

Sometimes party whips put great effort into partyline votes and are successful sometimes the don’t and get one anyway.

If the Democrats had genuinely good ideas, like a separate bill keeping roving wiretaps, then they could pass them in this environment—that is the reality if this system.

And the reality of this time, and for the last 6 years at least, is that the Democrats have no new, good ideas; and mewling complaints like the one you just made above will keep them a minority.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Who the fuck cares what Dick Morris "thinks"?
 
Written By: priscianus jr
URL: http://
Who the fuck cares what Dick Morris "thinks"?

Or you, for that matter.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Who the fuck cares what Dick Morris "thinks"?

I’m with ya’ p,
Dick Morris a.k.a. "the cooler"

His predictions are so bad. And I mean sooooooooooo bad.
If I were to walk into a Vegas casino and I saw Morris, not only would I leave that casino, I would try my luck in Jersey.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
So where’s the Patriot Act now?

The Dems gave notification that they would strenuously oppose sections of the Act. So the GOP gave up. Even though the GOP could win every vote on the bill, it decided to run away and surrender.

They may not remember it, but they’ll certainly be reminded of it at the appropriate time. Ask Tom Dashle how that works.

So the reminder add will be?

"We are the Republican Party, you made us your government. We tried to protect you from these terrorists, but the bad Democrats said we shouldn’t. Choose Republicans as your Government and we promise to protect you from terrorists (except when the Democrats tell us not to)."

Real big motivator to vote Republican.
 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://
Morris is such a buffoon. He could easily have a debate with himself.

Dick:
Hillary Clinton’s Speeches "Usually a Disappointment": "When Bill Clinton speaks to an audience, he famously taps into the emotions of each and every listener. Hillary, on the other hand, never seems to live up to her billing. After the excitement of her dramatic arrival by motorcade has passed, her speech itself is usually a disappointment. ... [S]he rarely gets an emotional response from a crowd." [Morris, Rewriting History, p. 8]
Morris:
"Hillary Was Magnificent!": "Whatever the controversy before she went, Hillary’s trip to China was her most important success of Clinton’s first term. Her speech, a clarion call for justice for women throughout the world, not only electrified the conference, but it served as a broad and encompassing statement of women’s rights as human beings. ... Hillary was magnificent!" [Morris, Rewriting History, p. 130]
1996 Speech "Was a Great Success": "Her [1996 Democratic National Convention] speech was a great success. It moved her husband up two points in that night’s postspeech tracking poll—the yardstick for virtue in those days. It was a great kickoff to the campaign." [Morris, Rewriting History, p. 140]
Dick:
"She Gives No Indication of Having Learned From the Fiasco of Health Care Reform": "In all of Living History there is almost no suggestion of personal growth. She gives no indication of having learned from the fiasco of health care reform." [Morris, Rewriting History, p. 62]
Morris:
"Hillary has ... Shown Signs of Growth ... After the Health Care Fiasco, for Example": "Hillary has, at times, shown signs of growth: After the health care fiasco, for example, she backed away from further attempts at broad-scale, utopian reforms." [Morris, Rewriting History, p. 62 (just four paragraphs later!)]
"She Seems to Have Learned Her Lesson": "Her left-ward tilt in the health care reform days was a thing of the past. She seemed to have learned her lesson." [Morris, Rewriting History, p. 97]
Oh, this is the man I want on my team.
I remember listening to Morris on Bill O’Reilly’s “The Radio Facto” on election day. I specifically remember him calling the election for Kerry, and this is only hours after he called it for Bush.

LOL.

Tip: McQ, your argument holds water better when not stored in a leaky bucket.

(Hey, I’m only looking out for you, my friend.)
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
McQ, your argument holds water better when not stored in a leaky bucket

Pogue ... I’m disappointed you can’t separate the argument from the "bucket". Even MK makes a point occasionally. Hell occasionally so do you now that I think of it.

It’s either valid on its own or it’s not.

I happen to think the argument is valid. So why not leave the personality out of it and address the gist of the argument?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
My understanding is that Democrats have repeatedly offered a temporary reauthorization of the Patriot Act so that important provisions would not expire while a compromise version was being worked out, but that the Republicans have refused anything other than complete and permanent renewal.

So given that there seems to be agreement here that there are at least some questionable measures which should be removed or corrected, it would appear that it is Republicans being unreasonable here and not Democrats. They arent the ones who are forcing needed provisions to expire, it is Republicans who refuse to accept anything short of complete and permenant renewal.
 
Written By: Rosensteel
URL: http://
My understanding is that Democrats have repeatedly offered a temporary reauthorization of the Patriot Act so that important provisions would not expire while a compromise version was being worked out, but that the Republicans have refused anything other than complete and permanent renewal.
Correct, and so the Republicans should.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
So given that there seems to be agreement here that there are at least some questionable measures which should be removed or corrected, it would appear that it is Republicans being unreasonable here and not Democrats. They arent the ones who are forcing needed provisions to expire, it is Republicans who refuse to accept anything short of complete and permenant renewal.

Rosensteel, do you remember when Clinton went on TV and claimed the evil Republicans were stealing Christmas from government workers because they wouldn’t pass emergency spending measures and he was going to have to shut down the government?

Welcome to hardball politics 101.

The minority party has certain tools. They used them. Unfortunately, they now suffer the consequences of using them in terms of political spin.

Obviously, in the case of Clinton, the Congress was trying to use the budget as leverage to get their way. He called their bluff in a way they couldn’t easily explain. The same thing has now happened to the Dems in the case of the Patriot Act. They didn’t get their way so they used the filibuster. Now the Dems have to find a way to explain to a very skeptical public who mostly believes they’re weak on national security why they found it necessary to take the entire act down and how it was all the Republicans fault.

Any guess as to how that will be received?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
I would say the reason nothing has been passed is because the PATRIOT ACT itself, as is, should no thave been passed, and if the Dems offered a decent compromise—which a continuing resolution is not—then they are being obstructionist, not constructive. It is the inability of the Dems to be constructive that will hurt them in this.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Argh, that should read:

I would say the reason nothing has been passed is because the PATRIOT ACT itself, as is, should no thave been passed, and if the Dems offered a decent compromise—which a continuing resolution is not—then they would be the heroes on this, instead they are being obstructionist, not constructive. It is the inability of the Dems to be constructive that will hurt them in this.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
...instead they are being obstructionist, not constructive.

Yup ... I agree. And explaining that to a skeptical public is going to be very difficult.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Yup ... I agree. And explaining that to a skeptical public is going to be very difficult.

Roving wiretaps are a good idea - right. They are being banned.

But what can you do about it?

You won’t vote Democrat because you don’t agree with their ideas. But even if you elect a Republican government they won’t enact the law, because the Democrats are opposed to it. What is the point of voting?
 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://
His predictions are so bad. And I mean sooooooooooo bad.
I seem to recall him saying Kerry would lose... and Gore before him.
Yeah, really bad, huh?

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
"You won’t vote Democrat because you don’t agree with their ideas. But even if you elect a Republican government they won’t enact the law, because the Democrats are opposed to it. What is the point of voting?"

Because not every piece of legislation is on the bare cusp of passing. Why are you seeming to be deliberately dense?

You complained that nothing was the Democrats fault because they were in the mionority, and these events go to show they can still have an influence.

Yours, TDP, ml,msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Tom, yours is an argument I’ve given several times, here and elsewhere.
The bottom line is that the Republicans are far less monolithic in ideas than are the Demorats and thereby a larger majority of Republicans in Congress is needed than would be needed for Democrats to get the same level of percived change.

This is exactly why I’ve said that what we have at the moment is gridlock, regardless what the D’s and R’s add up to.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
"This is exactly why I’ve said that what we have at the moment is gridlock, regardless what the D’s and R’s add up to."

But, the party is controlled by the less centrist members. It is a matter of lack of backbone and fecklessness that they do not more often crack the whip (party funding) and bring more RINO’s to heel a little more often—in fact, they rarely try it at all. This leaves rightist voters with no assurance their efforts will have a payoff.

YOurs, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Tom, yours is an argument I’ve given several times, here and elsewhere.
The bottom line is that the Republicans are far less monolithic in ideas than are the Demorats and thereby a larger majority of Republicans in Congress is needed than would be needed for Democrats to get the same level of percived change.


The Republican party is weak (less monolithic). This failure to pass is a result of Democratic strength and Republican weakness.

You complained that nothing was the Democrats fault because they were in the mionority, and these events go to show they can still have an influence.

If there is a terrorist attack that makes use of the gaps in security the Patriot Act would have covered - people will vote for the party that couldn’t be bothered to do anything about it. I can’t see that and if that is wilfully stupid, so be it.

 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider