Originally Posted by RMNIXON Why should a communication that leaves the United States be protected? By what authority? I mean if we need to intercept with subs in international water we should do that. How can you extend privacy right all over the planet when the law resides in the ...
08-04-2007, 07:21 PM
| #21 | ||||
| Dirty Liberal  Democrat South Jersey 
| Originally Posted by RMNIXON Because it involves a US citizen on US soil? IF I make a phone call to England I am just as much protected by the 4th ammendment as I am if I call my neighbor. 
| ||||
     |
|
08-04-2007, 07:22 PM
| #22 | ||||
| Dirty Liberal Democrat South Jersey
| Originally Posted by RMNIXON Try the 4th ammendment... it actually applies in this case. A wiretap constitutes a search.
| ||||
| |
|
08-04-2007, 07:26 PM
| #23 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur.  Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by motivez It probably should be, but the courts have upheld it.
__________________ No good decision was ever made in a swivel chair. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid: As we look back in history, the Founding Fathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks. | ||||
| |
|
08-04-2007, 07:42 PM
| #24 | ||||
| George W Bush, God's Tool  Independent ny
| Originally Posted by kinggovernor Seriously? Then I can't see how you can call yourself a libertarian
| ||||
| |
|
08-04-2007, 07:54 PM
| #25 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est  Pragmatist North Carolina
| Originally Posted by JaJae
 | ||||
| |
|
08-04-2007, 08:23 PM
| #26 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by motivez Just going by the fourth amendment which says you're protected from unreasonable search and seizures. I don't think they meant search first find out if it was reasonable later. I think that kind of goes against the entire premise of the Amendment. I'm not saying I disagree with the need for such an Act, just that you could probably make a strong case against its constitutionality. Every attempt has failed though. | ||||
| |
|
08-04-2007, 11:36 PM
| #27 | ||||
| Banned - Self Imposed  Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| House passed it House approves foreign wiretap bill - Yahoo! News Well...it's not like our rights weren't already being grossly violated anyway...have to look on the bright side...and the GOP won't be able to use this against the Democratic Congress in 08 | ||||
| |
|
08-04-2007, 11:58 PM
| #28 | ||||
| I'm your huckleberry!  Independent Ohio
| Originally Posted by kinggovernor
 Did you quote that directly off the RNC website?
__________________
| ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 12:02 AM
| #29 | ||||
| Friend to all.  Socialist Maryland
| This is completely ridiculous. The Republicans come off as bullies and liberty squashers...per usual. The Democrats come off as impotent and pussies...per usual. I don't care what they do to non citizen's rights. They can monitor whatever they want outside of this country however they want...but in this country ...against the US citizens, they should follow what our rights dictate. Waiting 6 months for a review and oversight is just too long. The Democrats had a good bill with the 10 days written in....but as usual, they bow to the pressure of this piece of shit administration. | ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 12:27 AM
| #30 | ||||
| helluo librorum The Lab Moderator  Humanist Chicago Suburbs
| Originally Posted by Thorgrim What a bunch of vaginas.
 It's shit like this that makes me not want to vote Democrat. | ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 12:29 AM
| #31 | ||||
| Banned - Self Imposed Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| Originally Posted by Scrum and watch the GOP come back into power?
It's that kind of "the democrats aren't strong enough...i think ill vote..." that lead to 6 years of GOP iron-fist rule | ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 04:19 AM
| #32 | ||||
| America Fuck Yea Election Moderator  Republican In Name Only
| Originally Posted by David Octavius I put the little l in libertarian when it comes to national security issues
| ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 04:20 AM
| #33 | ||||
| America Fuck Yea Election Moderator Republican In Name Only
| Originally Posted by tbone no I did not, which is why democrats overwhelmingly approve of it
| ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 05:09 AM
| #34 | ||||
| Bush Crime Family = Terrorists  Paleolibertarian
| The Democrats prove once again that they are completely spineless. The Republicans prove once again that they care nothing for individual liberties no matter how much lip service they give to the word 'freedom'. This country needs a revolution. We have a Congress, President, and Supreme Court who know nothing about the very basics of the Constitution. | ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 06:09 AM
| #35 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina
| Originally Posted by Thorgrim There is no bright side to this, it shows why the Democrats can't be trusted in power either.. they're just as willing as Republicans to violate our rights
| ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 06:10 AM
| #36 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina
| Originally Posted by Thorgrim What's the difference if both of them are going to pass this same type of bullshit legislation that allows the government to unconstitutionally monitor our communications without proper oversight?
| ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 12:44 PM
| #37 | ||||
| Banned - Self Imposed Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| Originally Posted by motivez Because the GOP is trying to do this as way that you're going to live the rest of your life in this earth, the Democrats are doing it because they think they can fix it soon and don't want to face another 2002 where they all get booted out after the GOP scares enough people
Once we get a Democratic president, and keep expanding the Democratic majorities, things will change It's funny, the same people going "oh the Dems need to be stronger on this or i'll reconsider my vote" are many of the same ones that say things like "well if Hillary gets nominated...i'd never vote for her" It was the average indepedent, the same people who elected Bush in 2004, who turned to the Dems in 2006, we have to appeal to them, until we get in total power or the american people become a lot more progressive | ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 12:52 PM
| #38 | ||||
| Administrator  libertarian Oklahoma
| Originally Posted by Thorgrim It's those kind of democrats that this country needs. It takes a lot more strength to not vote for you party because they're wrong than simply tow the party line to say "naaaanaaa" to the otherside. Scrum is right these guys need to grow some balls and do what they said they would do.
So far they've proven to be just as bad or worse than the reps. Same ol' same ol' in WashingtonDC. | ||||
| |
|
08-05-2007, 12:55 PM
| #39 | ||||
| Banned - Self Imposed Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 If you look at the list, these are blue dog democrats from basically republican districts, they are voting what their voters wanted them to do...they've taken stances, on the Iraq War, on progressive legislation (6 in 06, plus funding for anti-global warming measures) but to everything there is a limit, and if their republican and independent voters back at home overwhelming want them to temporarily give more powers to what they believe will fight terrorists better, they can't IGNORE the people they are sent to represent
| ||||
| |
