- Joined
- Mar 6, 2005
- Messages
- 7,536
- Reaction score
- 429
- Location
- Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
The times sure have changed! Do you think one year ago Republican Senators would have voted with Democrats to defeat a bill strongly backed by Bush? Here's how the vote brokedown:Stace said:I just read this story....good on the Senate!!
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051216/ap_on_go_co/senate_rollvote_patriot_act_1The 52-47 roll call by which the Senate voted to reject reauthorization of several provisions of the USA Patriot Act.
On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to end the filibuster and a "no" vote was a vote to continue a filibuster.
Voting "yes" were 2 Democrats and 50 Republicans.
Voting "no" were 41 Democrats, 5 Republicans and one independent.
Democrats Yes
Johnson, S.D.; Nelson, Neb.
Democrats No
Akaka, Hawaii; Baucus, Mont.; Bayh, Ind.; Biden, Del.; Bingaman, N.M.; Boxer, Calif.; Byrd, W.Va.; Cantwell, Wash.; Carper, Del.; Clinton, N.Y.; Conrad, N.D.; Corzine, N.J.; Dayton, Minn.; Dorgan, N.D.; Durbin, Ill.; Feingold, Wis.; Feinstein, Calif.; Harkin, Iowa; Inouye, Hawaii; Kennedy, Mass.; Kerry, Mass.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Lieberman, Conn.; Lincoln, Ark.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Obama, Ill.; Pryor, Ark.; Reed, R.I.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.; Sarbanes, Md.; Schumer, N.Y.; Stabenow, Mich.; Wyden, Ore.
Democrats Not Voting
Dodd, Conn.
Republicans Yes
Alexander, Tenn.; Allard, Colo.; Allen, Va.; Bennett, Utah; Bond, Mo.; Brownback, Kan.; Bunning, Ky.; Burns, Mont.; Burr, N.C.; Chafee, R.I.; Chambliss, Ga.; Coburn, Okla.; Cochran, Miss.; Coleman, Minn.; Collins, Maine; Cornyn, Texas; Crapo, Idaho; DeMint, S.C.; DeWine, Ohio; Dole, N.C.; Domenici, N.M.; Ensign, Nev.; Enzi, Wyo.; Graham, S.C.; Grassley, Iowa; Gregg, N.H.; Hatch, Utah; Hutchison, Texas; Inhofe, Okla.; Isakson, Ga.; Kyl, Ariz.; Lott, Miss.; Lugar, Ind.; Martinez, Fla.; McCain, Ariz.; McConnell, Ky.; Roberts, Kan.; Santorum, Pa.; Sessions, Ala.; Shelby, Ala.; Smith, Ore.; Snowe, Maine; Specter, Pa.; Stevens, Alaska; Talent, Mo.; Thomas, Wyo.; Thune, S.D.; Vitter, La.; Voinovich, Ohio; Warner, Va.
Republicans No
Craig, Idaho; Frist, Tenn.; Hagel, Neb.; Murkowski, Alaska; Sununu, N.H.
Others No
Jeffords, Vt.
Who knows?Can you point to where I said YOU were a Democrat? You DID support thier not wanting to make it permanent, but if it is SO BAD why have it for another minute, hence my question if it is as bad as Democrats, or yourself, say it is why not end it right now, every provision.
What reportsWhy so touchy? And why get rid of it if it has, as all reports show, prevented further terrorist attacks?
I haven't. . .or at least as far I know I haven't. I don't know about you, but I don't the idea that its in my gov'ts legal right to spy on me. What about you?How have you personally had your rights infringed upon by the Patriot Act?
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Three questions have you had your civil rights violated by the patriot act, do you know anyone who has had their rights violated by the patriot act, and have you heard anywhere of peoples rights being violated by the patriot act?
Oh..so are these people Democrats too? They voted for the filibuster:Stinger said:Can you point to where I said YOU were a Democrat? You DID support thier not wanting to make it permanent, but if it is SO BAD why have it for another minute, hence my question if it is as bad as Democrats, or yourself, say it is why not end it right now, every provision.
Stinger said:This applies equally to domestic search warrants signed by local courts. Should we get rid of them too. The search warrants issued under the Patriot Act are issued under the FISC and reviewed by the congress after the fact. We have no evidence, not a shred, that it has been abused.
There is quite a bit of judical oversite. And everytime it has been reviewed by the courts it has been found to be constitutional.
And your plan to stop terrorist from acting here is exactly what? What is your specific object to the patriot act and can you show where it has been abused?
Excellent job, well done! Too often people who "defend" the destruction of our Constitutional rights write blustery untrue posts. I think they believe if they lie often enough people will believe that what they write is the truth when in fact it's pure fiction, a manipulation to distort the truth to serve their purpose.Pacridge said:That's certainly sounds good, too bad it's not true. In Doe v. Ashcroft and Humanitarian Law Project v. Ashcroft the PA was found to be unconstitutional by the courts. I believe one was in violation of the 4th amendment and the other due process. Can't remember which one violated which.
Exactly! The oh so typical scare tactic employed to justify the dismembering ouf our Constitution is a typical Republican tactic. Scare people into allowing their freedoms to be taken away.ashurbanipal said:Conversely, can you show how the Patriot Act might have prevented 9/11, or any of a number of other realistic terrorist scenarios? The fact is, it wouldn't. So why do we need it?
26 X World Champs said:Exactly! The oh so typical scare tactic employed to justify the dismembering ouf our Constitution is a typical Republican tactic. Scare people into allowing their freedoms to be taken away.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Three questions have you had your civil rights violated by the patriot act, do you know anyone who has had their rights violated by the patriot act, and have you heard anywhere of peoples rights being violated by the patriot act?
ashurbanipal said:Conversely, can you show how the Patriot Act might have prevented 9/11, or any of a number of other realistic terrorist scenarios? The fact is, it wouldn't. So why do we need it?
THere are just as many legislation that does exact identical thing. All the patriot act does is allow for easier tapping and aquisition of any citizen who is "suspected" of terrorist acts. I was recently put on the TSA watch list because I purchase one way travel tickets on southwest and paid in full. Very very annoying and completely baseless. Who knows what other forms of information has thus been collected on me that is a complete infringment on my private rights. I don't like to have my personal information looked upon through a magnifying glass by anyone I don't know or anyone I haven't given permission to.Trajan Octavian Titus said:Yes I can the terrorists who perpetrated the 9-11 attacks had many contacts here in the U.S. who were known to be terrorist sympathisers yet we didn't have anything on them to get a warrant for a phone tap if the patriot act had been in place we would have been able to know what was going on; furthermore, there are provisions in the patriot act for keeping tags on the money trail, if you find the money coming in from overseas areas known to be hostile to America then you find out who their contacts are here in the U.S..
Stace said:You'd be surprised at what's in my medical records...
cnredd said:fingering through Stace's medical records...
Holy crap!...:shock:
:2wave:
jfuh said:THere are just as many legislation that does exact identical thing. All the patriot act does is allow for easier tapping and aquisition of any citizen who is "suspected" of terrorist acts. I was recently put on the TSA watch list because I purchase one way travel tickets on southwest and paid in full. Very very annoying and completely baseless. Who knows what other forms of information has thus been collected on me that is a complete infringment on my private rights. I don't like to have my personal information looked upon through a magnifying glass by anyone I don't know or anyone I haven't given permission to.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:If you've got nothing to hide then you've got nothing to worry about; furthermore, imagine if the same measures had been taken against the perpetrators of 9-11 they purchased one way tickets too I believe, it's a red flag and besides flying on a plane isn't a right it's a privlige just like having a drivers license. That and do you really think your annoyance level trumps the safety of the rest of us?
jfuh said:Perhaps you've forgotten the bill of rights and the constitution all together. Here's a refresher course, my private matters are constitutionally protected. I have no beef with the law when it works the way it's meant to. It's when it's abused to serve the interest of creating a totalitarian government that does not respect the rights of it's people, that's when people should be concerened. If you have no problem with having your back ground under constant supervision, good for you. For the rest of us, thanks but no thanks, I like my privacy exactly that, private.
Perhaps when you grow up and mature some you will understand the importance of government respecting the privacy of its citizens.
Hoot said:There is no evidence that our previous civil liberties, before the Patriot Act, posed a barrier to the tracking of potential terrorists.
Instead of throwing the problem back in our face, and asking us whether we've personally experienced discrimination, why don't those of you on the right tell us why we need this act?
Hoot said:There is no evidence that our previous civil liberties, before the Patriot Act, posed a barrier to the tracking of potential terrorists.
Instead of throwing the problem back in our face, and asking us whether we've personally experienced discrimination, why don't those of you on the right tell us why we need this act?
Hoot said:There is no evidence that our previous civil liberties, before the Patriot Act, posed a barrier to the tracking of potential terrorists.
Instead of throwing the problem back in our face, and asking us whether we've personally experienced discrimination, why don't those of you on the right tell us why we need this act?
Hoot said:There is no evidence that our previous civil liberties, before the Patriot Act, posed a barrier to the tracking of potential terrorists.
Instead of throwing the problem back in our face, and asking us whether we've personally experienced discrimination, why don't those of you on the right tell us why we need this act?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?