GOP attempts to hijack rEVOLution

[sepe]

Sepe,

Thanks for the reply.
Just to clarify, I didn't say you were willing to waste your vote.

FWIW, bashing someone (suggesting that I'm not aware enough) who is trying to see through it doesn't do much to move your cause forward.

You asked if people are willing to waste their votes. I answered and used a word of yours. I really don't see how anything I said was bashing you in any way.

FWIW, implying that someone not voting for Romney, so Obama doesn't get another 4 years, is wasting their vote is more of a bash than anything I said. I simply stated that I'm sorry more people are willing to vote for an R flavored sandwich over a D flavored one because they aren't willing to see through the BS. If you fall into that category, not saying you do, I'm sorry...not because I might have offended though. If you've been reading this section, you'll see many people saying they'd vote for anyone on the R side of the ballot over Obama even if they didn't agree with the candidate on much because those damn Ds are ruining this country. Last I checked, it is politicians from all parties doing it. I've yet to see anyone clearly explain why they think Romney would be better than Obama or why Newt would have been better or why Cain would have been better. So once again, I'm sorry I'm not buying into the R vs. D. I'm sorry I'd rather "waste" my vote by voting for a much more principled candidate than for a letter by the name.

 

[Jarhead77]

You asked if people are willing to waste their votes. I answered and used a word of yours. I really don't see how anything I said was bashing you in any way.

FWIW, implying that someone not voting for Romney, so Obama doesn't get another 4 years, is wasting their vote is more of a bash than anything I said. I simply stated that I'm sorry more people are willing to vote for an R flavored sandwich over a D flavored one because they aren't willing to see through the BS. If you fall into that category, not saying you do, I'm sorry...not because I might have offended though. If you've been reading this section, you'll see many people saying they'd vote for anyone on the R side of the ballot over Obama even if they didn't agree with the candidate on much because those damn Ds are ruining this country. Last I checked, it is politicians from all parties doing it. I've yet to see anyone clearly explain why they think Romney would be better than Obama or why Newt would have been better or why Cain would have been better. So once again, I'm sorry I'm not buying into the R vs. D. I'm sorry I'd rather "waste" my vote by voting for a much more principled candidate than for a letter by the name.

Got it...Sorry I confused what you said.

As to wasting the vote, I said wasting their "right" to vote because I wrongly thought those who believe as you do were saying that they would not exercise their right to vote at all, possibly missing out on the opportunity to express their option to write in their votes (even if only to send a message of dissatisfaction in the available candidates).

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Zombie,
Thanks for the response. I do appreciate it. What is the source information that you site suggesting that Romney would do the same things that Obama has in relation to the constitution or blowing off laws currently written?
Thanks!

I def remember Romney saying (in a debate not too long ago) that he also would have signed the NDAA and supported Obama doing it. Of course thats just one example but a big one imo, not too mention do you really see Romney overturning the Patriot Act? I dont even have to look to know he either voted for it, or came out in support of it. I'll try to get some more examples to you maybe even with links but im at work now....

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Continuing this logic, sort of restating the quote you quoted: The LP'ers will be voting for the guy that didn't even finish in the top 5 of the group that lost to the guy that lost to the guy that lost to Obama... Smarter.

So we both lose ....

 

[Jarhead77]

I def remember Romney saying (in a debate not too long ago) that he also would have signed the NDAA and supported Obama doing it. Of course thats just one example but a big one imo, not too mention do you really see Romney overturning the Patriot Act? I dont even have to look to know he either voted for it, or came out in support of it. I'll try to get some more examples to you maybe even with links but im at work now....

Thanks...

I am curious about the ability of any one president to overturn the majority of Congress, which all seem to have bought into the NDAA and Patriot Act. They had to approve them, yes?

On the surface, I think I agree with the spirit of the two Acts you cited. The spirit of these were not necessarily a bad thing, were they? It was perhaps the details that were unclear....and I know... the devil is in the details!

The intent was to deal with terrorists, albeit there are clauses/sections that are rightly being hotly debated and, in some cases, have already been overturned by the judicial branch...Following due process and the checks and balances that are in place for just that purpose. In fact, this is one of the very few times I agree with the ACLU! Their (and that of others in the media and many of the states) fight against some of the language in both of these acts lets me know that they are not all insane!

Maybe I am more naive than I thought!

But I do appreciate the debate! It helps me accomplish what I set out to with my initial response to the post...To learn!

 

[rambone]

The spirit of these were not necessarily a bad thing, were they?

The spirit of every fascist legislation is something catchy and appealing. Whether it is to save children, stop criminals, keep banks from failing, provide a safety net for the elderly, hunt terrorists, protect dolphins, etc.

 

[Kagnew]

I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but I can't sit idly by...
How will tolerating 4 more years of Obama provide the change the RP supporters are looking for?
Are you really willing to waste your right to vote and put up with 4 more years of Obama?
What purpose does that serve?
You are willing to give him the opportunity to ignore the constitution that allows us so much?
You are willing to give him the opportunity to appoint new, liberal, justices that can make a mockery of our constitution and the freedoms we so enjoy?
You are willing to give him the opportunity to blow off laws that our representatives have written, again?

I know you are upset, I really do "get" that, but it seems like the bigger picture is not in focus at all.

A voice of realism!

 

[Kagnew]

That seems pretty cynical.

If "cynical" is another way of spelling [BLEEP].

 

[Jarhead77]

The spirit of every fascist legislation is something catchy and appealing. Whether it is to save children, stop criminals, keep banks from failing, provide a safety net for the elderly, hunt terrorists, protect dolphins, etc.

Interesting. Using what definition of facist? My understanding (tho admittedly limited) is that in a fascist state the judiciary would not be able to overturn portions of an act nor would the media be able to condemn the act. So how is this a fascist legislation?

 

[rambone]

Interesting. Using what definition of facist? My understanding (tho admittedly limited) is that in a fascist state the judiciary would not be able to overturn portions of an act nor would the media be able to condemn the act. So how is this a fascist legislation?

The Patriot Act allows the Federal Government the ability to spy on anyone without so much as a warrant. They are allowed to monitor your banking activities, library check-outs, wiretap you, etc. Once someone "suspects you of being a terrorist, the NDAA can be used to indefinitely detain you. Soldiers can be used to pick you up and take you to a military prison, if they choose. According to Senator Graham, they should tell you, "Shut up! You don't get a lawyer!" These laws are authoritarian, nationalist, provide for centralized governance, and circumvent the constitution. Individual rights are obliterated under the banner of security.

 

[Jarhead77]

The Patriot Act allows the Federal Government the ability to spy on anyone without so much as a warrant. They are allowed to monitor your banking activities, library check-outs, wiretap you, etc. Once someone "suspects you of being a terrorist, the NDAA can be used to indefinitely detain you. Soldiers can be used to pick you up and take you to a military prison, if they choose. According to Senator Graham, they should tell you, "Shut up! You don't get a lawyer!" These laws are authoritarian, nationalist, provide for centralized governance, and circumvent the constitution. Individual rights are obliterated under the banner of security.

Rambone,
Yep, I know all of that. Seems like I must be too much of a goody two shoes. Who is "someone" defined as?

If I'm doing nothing wrong I have nothing to worry about. My bank accounts are not that interesting, I don't go to the library anymore (too many reasons to get into) my phone calls and emails are nothing I'm ashamed of or afraid of someone seeing, so why on earth would I care?

Heck, this site is a public site and anyone can read it...are we all that worried that these blogs and rants are being monitored? Doesn't seem so.

But....I was clear in my statement that there are some clauses and sections that are rightly being hotly debated. Contested under due process.

I believe the acts were put in place for the right reasons, but I agree that there are some details that are at odds with some of our constitutional freedoms, those are getting the attention they deserve from the media, a number of states and appellate courts as well as citizens like you and I.

I have not figured out how to walk on water yet, so I cannot expect others to do so either, I give them the benefit of the doubt until such time as we prove the mistake was actually done with malicious intent, then my reaction is swift and blunt.

To sum it up, in my world, when imperfect humans attempt to do the right thing, imperfect things can happen.

These acts were not done in secret and they were not kept out of public sight. When they are, THAT'S when we can cry facism!

Semper Fi

 

[WWIIIDefender]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35OXo9SSj5I&feature=g-all-u

 

[rambone]

If I'm doing nothing wrong I have nothing to worry about. My bank accounts are not that interesting, I don't go to the library anymore (too many reasons to get into) my phone calls and emails are nothing I'm ashamed of or afraid of someone seeing, so why on earth would I care?

If you place any value on the 4th Amendment, you should care. Would you care if the government snooped around in your home? Your wallet? Your trunk? Your cell phone? Your family pictures? Your underwear drawer? Don't mind some recording devices being placed in your private spaces? These places may be uninteresting, but they are supposed to be off-limits to the government, without probable cause or a warrant. The same applies to the things the Patriot Act gives the Feds the power to spy on its own citizens. Its a slippery slope to losing all privacy. It must not be allowed to stand.

Heck, this site is a public site and anyone can read it...are we all that worried that these blogs and rants are being monitored? Doesn't seem so.

I am a bit worried. Did you hearabout Brandon Raub being picked up by the Feds for writing about the government on Facebook? He was a former Marine. This just happened last week. And saying the wrong thing online can get you put on any number of secret watch lists or no-fly lists.

These acts were not done in secret and they were not kept out of public sight. When they are, THAT'S when we can cry facism!

That bill was sitting in someone's drawer, waiting for the right opportunity to grab tons of new powers. Similar attempts for the same powers were tried throughout the 80s and 90s. It was never about 9/11. And it got rammed through from start to finish in mere weeks, from inception to codification.

The USA PATRIOT Act Was Planned Before 9/11