Mar 17, 2006, 02:26 PM
|
#1 of 41
|
Watts, why this fascination with splitting this debate into "Democrats Vs. Republicans" when the issue at hand is about "The Government Vs. The People"? When I'm locked up for suggesting that maybe it'd be nice to call my aunt overseas without the government listening in, it's really not going to matter much to me wiether the people who locked me up were lefties or righties.
Concerning the point at hand, I can understand the administration's desire to accomplish something in this "War on Terror" without being hindered by an overzealous liberal media and a bitchy populace. (Don't argue the overzealous media/bitchy populace point. I'm exaggerating for dramatic effect.) However, I would like to see the government try to accomplish this utilizing... slightly more legal means. Methods that don't curtail my rights. You can say, if you like, that just because they're going to pass this law, it doesn't mean they're actually going to lock me up, but you know what? Fuck that. If they're not nessicarilly going to use it, than they don't need to pass it; no good can come from having it on the books - it's an idealistic view, sure, but you know what? Everyone's idealistic. If you're not working towards some ideal, than maybe you should take a step back and reconsider your life.
Also, the original article claimed that the bill might be passed "as early as next week." This was written last week. Any more news on this?
Jam it back in, in the dark.
|
Moth