US Message Board

Go Back   US Message Board > US Discussion > Education and History
Register FAQ Blogs Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Education and History Past US events and the basis for our future



Login to remove all ads

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 01:18 PM
Beavis
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,686
Rep Power: 12
sealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayor
The Patriot Act is nothing new

Take heart. Democracy has come under assault in America before, we've survived, and the nation actually became stronger for the struggle.

The year 1798, for example, was a crisis year for democracy and those who, like Thomas Jefferson, believed the United States of America was a shining light of liberty, a principled republic in a world of cynical kingdoms, feudal fiefdoms, and theocracies.

That year President John Adams pushed through Congress - by a single vote - the Alien and Sedition Acts, and was aggressively putting into jail newspaper editors who disagreed with him and supported Jefferson. Benjamin Franklin Bache - Ben Franklin's grandson - had been one of the first, as he had just published an editorial referring to the President as, "old, querulous, Bald, blind, crippled, Toothless Adams."

Then-Vice President Jefferson was wretched. He'd left town the day Adams signed the acts, as a symbolic act. He would have nothing to do with their implementation. The abuses were startling, and, as I documented in an earlier article in these pages, "How An Earlier Patriot Act Brought Down A President," Adams was moving America quickly into the direction of an authoritarian, single-party rule. Over Jefferson's angry objections, Adams had even imprisoned a member of the U.S. House of Representatives - Matthew Lyon of Vermont - for speaking out against Adams's Federalists' favoritism of the rich over working people.

Two weeks before the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed, June 1, 1798, as Adams was already rounding up newspaper editors and dissidents in anticipation of his coming legal authority, Jefferson sat down at his desk and, heart heavy but hopeful, put quill pen to paper to share his thoughts with his old friend John Taylor, one of his fellow Democratic Republicans and a man also in Adams cross-hairs. (Two decades later, Taylor would write down his thoughts on the issue of government in a widely-distributed book, "Construction Construed, and Constitutions Vindicated," noting that: "A government is substantially good or bad, in the degree that it produces the happiness or misery of a nation...")

Several states had gone completely over to Adam's side, particularly Massachusetts which was filled with preachers who wanted theocracy established in America, and Connecticut, which had become the epicenter of the wealthy who wanted to control the government's agenda for their own gain. It was red states and blue states, writ large. There was even discussion of Massachusetts seceding from the rest of the nation, which had become too "liberal" (to use George Washington's term) and secular.

"It is true that we are completely under the saddle of Massachusetts and Connecticut," Jefferson wrote to Taylor, his friend and compatriot, "and that they ride us very hard, cruelly insulting our feelings, as well as exhausting our strength and subsistence. Their natural friends, the three other Eastern States join them from a sort of family pride, and they have the art to divide certain other parts of the Union, so as to make use of them to govern the whole.

"This is not new," Jefferson added, "it is the old practice of despots; to use a part of the people to keep the rest in order. And those who have once got an ascendancy and possessed themselves of all the resources of the nation, their revenues and offices, have immense means for retaining their advantage.

"But," he added, "our present situation is not a natural one." Jefferson knew that the theocrats and the rich did not represent the true heart and soul of America, and commented to Taylor about how Adams had been using divide-and-conquer politics, and fear-monger about war with France (the infamous "XYZ Affair") with some success.

"But still I repeat it," he wrote to Taylor, "this is not the natural state."

Our nation's wisest political commentator noted the problem of politics. "Be this as it may, in every free and deliberating society, there must, from the nature of man, be opposite parties, and violent dissensions and discords; and one of these, for the most part, must prevail over the other for a longer or shorter time. Perhaps this party division is necessary to induce each to watch and delate to the people the proceedings of the other."

"But," Jefferson asked rhetorically, "will the evil stop there?"

Apparently he thought so, and his next paragraph to Taylor gives progressives a reminder for these times.

This must be our mantra, even as we work harder every day:

"A little patience," Jefferson wrote, "and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolved, and the people recovering their true sight, restoring their government to its true principles. It is true, that in the meantime, we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war, and long oppressions of enormous public debt. ... If the game runs sometimes against us at home, we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost. For this is a game where principles are the stake."

ThomHartmann.com - This is a Game Where Principles are the Stake
Reply With Quote


Login to remove all ads

  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 01:22 PM
AllieBaba's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,726
Rep Power: 64
AllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddha
No kidding. Pretty much what I've said all along. All the hysteria over the Patriot Act is just hysteria. It has a sunset clause, and if it's no longer needed, it will go away.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 02:56 PM
Paulitics's Avatar
I used to be cool
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,118
Rep Power: 104
Paulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddha
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllieBaba View Post
No kidding. Pretty much what I've said all along. All the hysteria over the Patriot Act is just hysteria. It has a sunset clause, and if it's no longer needed, it will go away.
What exactly is "needed" about it now? Why would you be willing to offer your personal privacy to the government for their version of "security"?

Forget all that bullshit about "well I do nothing wrong, so I have nothing to hide". You have EVERYTHING to hide, when it comes to your inalienable right to be secure in your person, house, papers, and effects.

You're willing to give those rights away to your government for "protection", sunset clause or not?
__________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."

-Ronald Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:00 PM
AllieBaba's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,726
Rep Power: 64
AllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddha
I don't buy into I do nothing wrong, so I have nothing to hide. I just recognize the necessity of a certain lack of freedom in time of war. I'd rather voluntarily sacrifice a little privacy than lose freedom altogether.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:04 PM
Paulitics's Avatar
I used to be cool
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,118
Rep Power: 104
Paulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddha
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllieBaba View Post
I don't buy into I do nothing wrong, so I have nothing to hide. I just recognize the necessity of a certain lack of freedom in time of war. I'd rather voluntarily sacrifice a little privacy than lose freedom altogether.
Lose freedom altogether? How so?

You really think Islamic terrorism poses a threat to this country's ultimate freedom? Come on.

If they were every lucky enough to smuggle one nuke into this country and detonate it, they'd never be able to do it again. No one short of a country with a comparable military to ours is going to ultimately ever threaten our way of life here. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

The founders would be flabbergasted at anyone willingly giving up ANY of the freedoms they fought so hard to provide to us, war or not.

And it's never a LITTLE freedom you're giving up. You give govenrment an inch, and they will take a mile. They have proven it time and time again.
__________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."

-Ronald Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:08 PM
AllieBaba's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,726
Rep Power: 64
AllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddha
I think Islamic terrorism poses a threat to everyone's freedom, and everyone's life.

No, the founders would not be flabbergasted. Remember, they required landowners to maintain militias and arms.

I don't see that the censorship of WWII led us to a great loss of overall freedom. And that's essentially what you're talking about here.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:11 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,509
Rep Power: 79
ReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddha
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllieBaba View Post
I don't see that the censorship of WWII led us to a great loss of overall freedom.
I don't know about censorship, but Japanese internment and confiscation of property certainly seems to be a significant loss of freedom.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:13 PM
AllieBaba's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,726
Rep Power: 64
AllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddha
And they were released when the threat was over. So there was no long-term erosion of freedom.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:26 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,509
Rep Power: 79
ReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddha
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllieBaba View Post
And they were released when the threat was over. So there was no long-term erosion of freedom.
Lincoln ignored the Due Process provisions with respect to US citizens. Roosevelt followed suit 80 years later. Bush again tried it recently. Do you see a pattern? Does a continuing practice of suspending rights during wartime not qualify as an erosion of liberty? Do rights cease to matter when the Executive (or Legislative) branches say so?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:28 PM
Paulitics's Avatar
I used to be cool
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,118
Rep Power: 104
Paulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddhaPaulitics could be the buddha
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReillyT View Post
Lincoln ignored the Due Process provisions with respect to US citizens. Roosevelt followed suit 80 years later. Bush again tried it recently. Do you see a pattern? Does a continuing practice of suspending rights during wartime not qualify as an erosion of liberty? Do rights cease to matter when the Executive (or Legislative) branches say so?
Sounds like socialism to me. Interesting that Baba approves of it.
__________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."

-Ronald Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:29 PM
Beavis
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,686
Rep Power: 12
sealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayor
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllieBaba View Post
I don't buy into I do nothing wrong, so I have nothing to hide. I just recognize the necessity of a certain lack of freedom in time of war. I'd rather voluntarily sacrifice a little privacy than lose freedom altogether.
You didn't volunteer anything. They took it from you. They spied on you and lied about doing it.

So as soon as the terrorists do something new, it's time for you to give up your rights again?

Why did Hose Padilla have to lose Habius Corpus? He was an American Taliban. Why did they have to put him in prison for 3 years without an attorney and due process.

You aren't really free if someone else gets to decide when and where you use your freedoms. What a sheep.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:31 PM
Beavis
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,686
Rep Power: 12
sealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayor
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulitics View Post
Lose freedom altogether? How so?

You really think Islamic terrorism poses a threat to this country's ultimate freedom? Come on.

If they were every lucky enough to smuggle one nuke into this country and detonate it, they'd never be able to do it again. No one short of a country with a comparable military to ours is going to ultimately ever threaten our way of life here. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

The founders would be flabbergasted at anyone willingly giving up ANY of the freedoms they fought so hard to provide to us, war or not.

And it's never a LITTLE freedom you're giving up. You give govenrment an inch, and they will take a mile. They have proven it time and time again.

Amen brother.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:32 PM
AllieBaba's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,726
Rep Power: 64
AllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddhaAllieBaba could be the buddha
No, but as soon as the terrorists figure out a way around security, then it's time to figure out how to ace them.

Yeah, let's talk about all the "freedom" that's getting enjoyed by the masses in France.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:32 PM
Beavis
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,686
Rep Power: 12
sealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayorsealybobo could be city mayor
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReillyT View Post
Lincoln ignored the Due Process provisions with respect to US citizens. Roosevelt followed suit 80 years later. Bush again tried it recently. Do you see a pattern? Does a continuing practice of suspending rights during wartime not qualify as an erosion of liberty? Do rights cease to matter when the Executive (or Legislative) branches say so?
Especially when it's a war on terrorism or drugs. One that can't be won. These wars will go on forever!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2008, 03:36 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,509
Rep Power: 79
ReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddhaReillyT could be the buddha
Quote:
Originally Posted by sealybobo View Post
Especially when it's a war on terrorism or drugs. One that can't be won. These wars will go on forever!
Excellent point.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Usa Patriot Act SolarEnergy1 War on Terrorism 2 09-21-2007 09:17 PM
The Patriot Act Gabriella84 Current Events 59 08-22-2005 06:29 PM
Patriot Act Modu$OperanDi Current Events 26 10-31-2004 11:29 PM
Patriot Act Avatar4321 Current Events 0 09-14-2004 01:55 AM
The Patriot Act 5stringJeff Current Events 32 01-31-2004 09:07 AM

 

Celebrity Gossip, Photography Forum, All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0

Poltical Topsites