 Wills
join:2001-01-03
Port Charlotte, FL | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: Link to who voted how on this bill The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. |
|
| said by Wills:The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. Dueling platitudes:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Consti···ide_pact
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a rhetorical phrase in American political and legal discourse. The phrase expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must give way to urgent practical needs. It is most often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, as a response to charges that he was violating the United States Constitution by suspending habeas corpus during the American Civil War.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
 MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | It's my belief that you can protect America from terrorist, and follow the constitution at the same time. The tactics that Bush & Co. want to use are unnecessary for effectively fighting terrorist. It is currently being argued that his strategies are in effect creating more terrorism than it is stopping.
There will always be threats out there. In extreme situations, such as a civil war, a little leniency is understandable. A long term strategy, that is currently failing, that permanently removes basic rights that our nation is founded upon, using logic that has been outdated by hundreds of years, is not a very good plan.
It astounds me that the leader of a party whose primary basis is small government, wants to increase the size of government exponentially. If Democrats want to make our country a repressive communist state, Bush wants to make this country a repressive dictatorship.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter
»www.cafepress.com/maxolasersquad
»maxolasersquad.com/
»maxolasersquad.com/network/ My DSL Network Guide
»myspace.com/mlsquad |
|
vernalexPremium
join:2000-10-19
Manchester, CT | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by Wills:The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. Dueling platitudes: » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Consti···ide_pact"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a rhetorical phrase in American political and legal discourse. The phrase expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must give way to urgent practical needs. It is most often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, as a response to charges that he was violating the United States Constitution by suspending habeas corpus during the American Civil War. Well, I personally believe President Lincoln waged an illegal war and compounded the problem by suspending the writ of habeas corpus.
I would agree that practical need should override the Constitution, but one attack where a few thousand people died does not give the government a blank checkbook. I do not trust our government, nor any government, and the Constitution is there to protect us from them as well as from THE TERRORISTS. |
|
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Great Works Inte..
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
I have to admit that I'm gravely afraid of somebody coming over from Iraq to bomb me and my apartment out of existence. I have no choice other than to vote for Republicans, because they're the only ones that can protect me and my way of life!! Those insightful folks in the Bush admin are keeping me safe, while I accept at the same time that I need to be aware and constantly concerned about what could happen if I voted for a Democrat. (The most obvious conclusion is that I will likely die in a terrorist attack the day a Congress controlled by Democrats starts a session.)
In addition we need to give Bush the entire toolkit to keep me safe. What good is privacy if I'm dead after a terrorist blows me up? I would love it if the NSA would set up some auditing system software that I could install on my PC. I know that they really need to have access to see that I'm doing nothing wrong. This will allow them to focus on the terrorists who are planning to kill me. In addition I'll send them all of my banking transactions in CSV format so they can see I'm just spending the money on groceries and credit card interest. While I might end up living in a police state, it would be so much better than being dead from a terrorist attack. Police states aren't all that bad anyway if you're not doing anything wrong.
 |
|
| This is the funniest bit of sarcasm I have read in years!!
true comic genius.. |
|
| reply to Maxo
So what would you do differently? I'd really like to know. Everybody who "hates" Bush and talks about how badly he's screwing up simply states this over and over again yet never actually offers any suggestions for how things could be done differently. You obviously seem to have some kind of idea otherwise you would not state otherwise... so what is it? |
|
| reply to vernalex
Yes, because granting terrorists the same rights under our Constitution is the best way for defeating them. |
|
MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | reply to matrix3D
said by matrix3D:So what would you do differently? I'd really like to know. Everybody who "hates" Bush and talks about how badly he's screwing up simply states this over and over again yet never actually offers any suggestions for how things could be done differently. You obviously seem to have some kind of idea otherwise you would not state otherwise... so what is it? Seeings how we are not the president, and we don't have the same amount of time and resources to devote to such things, how can we come up with a real strategy? Bushes strategy is screw everything up and then blame those who are mad at him for messing up for not "staying the course" and not "doing what it takes to win the war on terror." The ironic thing is that despite all efforts, HE is the one who isn't doing what it takes to win the war on terror. We have the best military, the best, minds, and the biggest might, yet we can't seem to make any headway.
If I was president I would start by listening to the veteran army commanders, not ignoring them. I would start by listening to the Iraqi people. I would start by showing a compassionate heart, not a stone heart. Bush has been a screw up all his life. He is not presidential material. We need someone with intelligence, compassion, and with open ears. Even if you support the war in Iraq, and believe that going there was a good idea, you should still be mad at Bush for screwing it all up, for lying, for refusing to admit mistakes. You should be mad at him for what should have been a success story and for constantly making bad decisions and making this a black spot for American ability.
What if we were in a situation where we had to confront North Korea or Iran? Our military is completely drained. How would we confront these issues? Would we have any reason to believe that under Bushes leadership we would have any success? Would he simply ask everyone who knows what they are talking about to step down in favor of those who tell him what he wants to hear?
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter
»www.cafepress.com/maxolasersquad
»maxolasersquad.com/
»maxolasersquad.com/network/ My DSL Network Guide
»myspace.com/mlsquad |
|
