Conservatives, liberals fear broader anti-terror powers - sides unite to protest Justice's push

The Dallas Morning News ^ | April 13, 2003 | By MICHELLE MITTELSTADT / The Dallas Morning News

[cinFLA]

"or public danger" ........

[Quick1]

Here's a question; what would you be saying right now if Hillary or Al Gor were the ones signing this thing into law? I got $20 that says you would be one of those "Chicken Littles".

[thepitts]

Tell you what; I'll "wake you up" when you finally answer the question of who you are and who knows you personally here on FR. It's the same deal with you and Roscoe and that whole American hating disruptive cabal that runs drooling into these threads.

I find it highly unusual that you've been here as long as you have and nobody knows you. No activism, no fellowship, no pic ...nothing but an oddball aganda on an internet forum. Wake me up when you do something besides just giving everyone your stupid opinions on everything.

Every time I confront you on this you run to the mods and have my post pulled. I don't trust oddball strangers so everything you say is irrelavent.... to me anyway.

It's not just you.

[eno_]

I have a hard time coming to rational discourse with those that want to have heroin, crack, ectasy sold at the corner grocery store. A few, including the Libertarian party, even want the drugs to be available to minors.

You confuse ending ineffective enforcement with "availability." All of those drugs are already available to their target markets. Ecstacy, for example, is a popular club drug because it is easier to get, and conceal the use of, than alcohol. Better to lower the drinking age.

You also make the mistake of thinking that legalizing drugs would lead to an expansion of the market for hard drugs. Heroin and other more dangerous drugs have a self-limiting market. Heroin was not widely used before the Drug War, and it has not become less widely used. Similarly LSD is easy to make, easy to hide, almost impossible to interdict, and yet, ourside of the Phish tour, not widely used. Crank is a biker/redneck drug, impossible to stop, but it doesn't find much use outside that culture.

In general, you are confusing stated intentions with actual effects. Tell me which government program actually does what it says:

EPA?

The Civil Rights Commission?

OSHA?

Dept. of Ed.?

Etc. About the only competent function of the FedGov is the military, and even there you would have to make an exception for domestic projects of the Corps of Engineers, which is one of the biggest blobs of pork fat in the budget.

So when I say end the EPA, I don't mean pollute everything. Who would even accuse me of being anti-education for wanting to end the Dept. of Ed.? However, you find it very easy to call me "pro drug" when I want to get rid of $70B in spending that doesn't do what it says it should do.

The Drug War is just like every other failed government program. And Patriot II will become a dangerous tool in the hands of a less good man than Dubya.

[eno_]

a Justice Department proposal that would permit state and local law enforcement agencies to track down illegal immigrants as a way to fight terrorism.

It SOUNDS good, but look under the covers. If a local cop arrested someone for any other federal violation, the feds would be there in minutes. Except for immigration.

The problem is not local enforcement, it is that INS blows off local enforcement that has illegals in custody.

I am all for stronger border security. If we had good border security we would have much less reason for the governent to ask for generalized warrant-free domestic surveillance.

[MrLeRoy]

So let me ask you again: what exactly would be going too far for you, in terms of the 1st, 2nd, and 5th amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

So let me ask you again.

Forget cinFLA---he doesn't have the backbone to answer a straightforward question.

[MeekOneGOP]

Here's a question; what would you be saying right now if Hillary or Al Gor were the ones signing this thing into law? I got $20 that says you would be one of those "Chicken Littles".

I don't know. Of course, anything coming from either of those 2 should be held suspect (guilty until proven innocent! lol!)

I think my most honest reply would be to repost my #24 from this thread.

To: AAABEST

That MeeknMing must be a terrorist, huh? He should be scared ! . . .Just kidding.

Hey, I'm not an expert on all this stuff, seriously. And I'm not as guarded as I probably should be on stuff I post on the Internet, either. I mean, I post my name sometimes and folks are SHOCKED that I would do that. Anyway . . .

24 posted on 04/13/2003 11:34 AM CDT by MeeknMing (Bu-bye Saddam! / Check out my Freeper site !: http://home.attbi.com/~freeper/wsb/index.html)

[steve-b]

I see that the "mystery meat" tag team

It seems that one of them stumbles on a thread of serious political discussion and then lights up the Bat-Signal to bring in the rest of the gang.

[LibertarianInExile]

I know, I thought I'd give it one last shot before I started resorting to abuse button tactics. I'm sick of seeing people come on here and completely attack, without even discussion about where it is they disagree and why. One of the things I do for a living is show people how to pick out points of contention between debaters. Here, there isn't even that opportunity. It's completely debased into immediate non sequitur.

Witness: YOU people think. From a post that asks a QUESTION. How the HELL do you know what I think if you haven't even read a post on the subject from me--just a question? I don't ascribe personal points of view the way I used to on here, because after experience with this crowd, I can't say that labels are precise enough here in this specific place on the web. There are so many unique conservative views here to classify these folks as one crowd is to completely ignore some major differences. I might disagree but I'd like to know where, exactly, and most important, WHY?

I am so disappointed in today's political culture. There is no logic, there is no debate, it's 100% Carville-ized, even the right now. And once logic is gone, once it's 100% grade-A emotion in politics, it's the end of any possibility of a government of laws, since mob rule is all about who shouts loudest, longest.

The worst part about the whole thing, the thing I most hate, is that I rarely see a rational discussion on this CONSERVATIVE forum of any sort regarding any constitutional issues--it's 'Jackbooted Nazi Statist!' vs. 'Commie Liberal Anarchist!' from the getgo, if it's THAT nice. And I will certainly confess that I've been part of those arguments, to my shame.

I have held opinions from Republican party line to libertarian because I have an open mind, and I'm willing to listen and discuss. If you call me a baby killer or tell me I'm an ally of George Soros or some other lame attack, I'll never come around to your opinion. If you have a different opinion and tell me why, maybe I'll come around to agree with you. At the least I might consider your viewpoint well reasoned, even if I disagree with it.

I don't want to turn us all into Rodney Kings--we don't need to all get along--then we might as well be playing on DU. But to just see attack after attack is so tiresome and unproductive.

[JohnGalt]

Anyone feeling safer?

From CNET News.com, 3/31/2003:

A U.S. Attorney's office has alleged that PayPal violated laws regarding the processing of online gambling payments, and is asking parent company eBay to hand over nine months of PayPal earnings in settlement.

The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri told eBay that its online payment service violated provisions in the USA Patriot Act between October 2001 and July 2002, according to eBay's annual report, filed Monday with securities regulators. Under the act, it is prohibited to transmit funds known to have come from a criminal offense, or that are intended to promote or support unlawful activities.

The agency is seeking to collect any earnings that PayPal received from online gambling merchants during the nine-month period, as well as interest. Last year, PayPal received 6 percent of its revenue from online gambling, according to its filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
eBay, however, takes issue with the U.S. Attorney's allegations.

[gonewt]

traffic tickets equate to a 'constitutional crisis.'

LOL!

[Cultural Jihad]

It does seem ludicrous, but there are a few nuts around who try to advocate that very idea.