KIT, Good post, well said.
On May 15, 7:00 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > Bush was not a conservative. Many conservatives feel betrayed by not only > this, but his failure to secure the borders, and his last months in office, > when he started the TARP....Hell I have a laundry list too!!! > > The Patriot Act is literally the remnants of the "Prison Litigation Reform > Act of 1996" which was gutted, and then repackaged after 9/11. There are a > number of provisions of the Patriot Act that I am not opposed to, > (especially after 9/11) but the restrictions on Americans' liberties, when > our own President would not secure our borders, is a classic example of how > President Bush was not a conservative!! > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 7:53 PM, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This was one of a laundry list of items I gave which the Dems should > > do when they got control of congress in 2006. However, they only > > barely had control and the Republicans were fighting tooth and nail so > > I can't place much blame on them. I hope they will correct these > > issues now that they have the power to do so. Failure to repeal or > > alter the unPatriot Act will fall squarely on the shoulders of the > > Dems. I want to see them FIX these injustices including warrantless > > searches, illegal wire-tapping, and torture. This country has stood > > too long to see its values fail now. > > > I just can't fight off the urge to remind you it was the idiot Bushies > > who favored taking our liberty away. > > > On May 15, 7:40 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sarge, > > > > Just to correct the "You" part of your missive: Most conservatives were > > > outraged with certain portions of the Patriot Act, as well as the > > > "Responsible Electronic Surveillance Act" of 2007. Most conservatives > > were > > > unhappy that President Bush endorsed this Bill, without specific language > > > that protected American citizens, but our outrage should be at the > > Congress > > > who actually passed this heinous legislation. There was language that > > was > > > omitted that would have protected American citizens, and been congruous > > to > > > the 4th and 5th Amendment to the Constitution, which was specifically > > left > > > out of both pieces of legislation. The result is, that the Justice > > > Department can run roughshod over any American, if they so choose. > > > > I haven't seen the Obama Administration, (who, Obama, Emanuel and Clinton > > > voted for this legislation!!) come to advocate the reversal of this > > > law..... > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 5:49 PM, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > We were telling you cons for years this was going to happen. You let > > > > them get away with wire-tapping just the foreign half (LOL, they never > > > > heard the US half!!) of a conversation and next thing you know they're > > > > sitting in your living room with cameras. But you people said it was > > > > ok if they listen to your phone conversations. So don't complain about > > > > it, this is exactly what you wanted the government to do.- Hide quoted > > text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
