It will be the job of John McCain to figure out how to reform the Patriot Act and related legislation.
Nothing too dramatic, just figure out what works, what doesn’t, what is economical and what is cost prohibitive. For example, lots of the loosened restrictions on warrant-less search, wire tapping, etc., while greatly desired by police agencies and spy organizations, have little use against terrorism, and have solely been used against US citizens for totally unrelated reasons.
That is, they may want them, but the constitution doesn’t permit them, so “Tough, guys, but you have to go back to playing by the rules, even if it is harder.”
This will not be hard to do, because a statistical analysis of how the new laws were applied, and how effective they are, will point out the obvious.
At the same time, the Patriot Act has forced America to look at the obvious: elderly blond women in wheelchairs do not need to be searched at the airport, because they do not commit terrorist acts.
However, people from Muslim countries, who carry Korans, travel in groups, act suspiciously, wear beards and turbans, loudly protest being inspected, etc., are highly suspect, EVEN if it amounts to “racial profiling”. As has been noted in Europe, racial profiling works, even if there is some philosophical objection to it.
This does not mean that every black person is a suspect. Far from it, and that nonsense should still be prohibited. But all black people are not equal. A black man who dresses in Muslim garb is just as much a reasonable suspect as is a white man in Muslim garb. The black man should get no special advantage because he is black, even if he insists that it is the color of his skin that is the problem.
In turn, this also points out that the problem is *exclusively* one of Islam, not some fantastic “generic” terrorism. It does not mean that all Muslims are guilty, but it does mean that they are reasonable to suspect by association. This is not prejudice, this is common sense.
Assuming McCain wins, of course.
And even if he does, what about the next president? Would you really want a president Hillary!™ to have that much authority???
NEVER give any government any power over you you wouldn't give your worst enemy!
That is, they may want them, but the constitution doesn’t permit them, so “Tough, guys, but you have to go back to playing by the rules, even if it is harder.”
Yes. I'm certain a guy that suspends political free speech for the month before an election will be a great respecter of constitutional limits on what he wants to do.
In turn, this also points out that the problem is *exclusively* one of Islam, not some fantastic “generic” terrorism. It does not mean that all Muslims are guilty, but it does mean that they are reasonable to suspect by association. This is not prejudice, this is common sense.
Yes. It would have made a great deal of sense after 9/11.
Now that the terrorist have spent the last 5 years recruiting "lilly whites" - a term that oddly enough doesn't reflect race, but the lack of a paper trail, no police record, travel to terror supporting countries, etc. A lilly white rap sheet devoid of any ink. - we have to make sure granny isn't smuggling weapons or God knows what.
I hate these people.