To: tsmith130
It was approved as good law for 4 years.
It is being extended as good law for 6 more months.
If it has been good for 4 years and needed and extended for 6 more months, then why wouldn't it be good law until the war on terror is over?
19 posted on
12/21/2005 6:19:14 PM PST by
adorno
To: adorno
If it has been good for 4 years and needed and extended for 6 more months, then why wouldn't it be good law until the war on terror is over? And when will that be? When the executive branch decides that it's over and it will give its new powers back?
22 posted on
12/21/2005 6:21:04 PM PST by
garbanzo
(Don't Let the Government Win)
To: adorno
Someone better tell Harry Reid that the reports of the Patriots Acts dead were greatly exaggerated.
101 posted on
12/21/2005 6:42:49 PM PST by
mware
(everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL.")
To: adorno
If it has been good for 4 years and needed and extended for 6 more months, then why wouldn't it be good law until the war on terror is over? Fine by me. It should be renewed once a year. It should never be made permanent. Laws that are made permanent are rarely (never) overturned.
188 posted on
12/21/2005 7:12:46 PM PST by
SunStar
(Democrats piss me off!)
To: adorno
If it has been good for 4 years and needed and extended for 6 more months, then why wouldn't it be good law until the war on terror is over? Is it possible that with a bad person at the helm of this country the law could be harmful? I would think so. Having it be subject to periodic renewal allows for it to be killed if the person in power shouldn't be trusted with it.
204 posted on
12/21/2005 7:16:55 PM PST by
supercat
(Sony delinda est.)
To: adorno
If it has been good for 4 years and needed and extended for 6 more months, then why wouldn't it be good law until the war on terror is over?All the more reason to make the damn thing permanent.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson