Quote:
Originally posted by seretogis
Given the circumstances under which the act was presented, it would have passed even if Clinton was in office. It is not a bill which is represenative of the Republican platform at all. It's intrusive and extreme, but time-limited in order to deal with immediate threats against the US.
|
You're right about the time limit - it feels like the 2005 sunset clause is the only thing protecting society from the Patriot Act at the moment.
It's worth noting that last month, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and other Republicans led an effort to repeal the 2005 sunset clause altogether. Whilst he was unsuccessful, his efforts demonstrate that there are many Republicans who believe that a permanent Patriot Act SHOULD be part of the GOP platform.
Importantly, there were also a number of Republicans who vocally opposed the removal of the time limit. I would love to see true conservatives loudly applaud those guys for their efforts.
Here are the links:
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/04/09/articlejj.htm
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/051103I.shtml
(wishing I still had Lexis-Nexis to post the bloody pay-per-view New York Times source articles).
(I haven't even answered the thread here) While it is certainly very um *interesting* being a liberal in the era of W - I choose Clinton and I'm VERY interested to see who the Democrats come up with for next year.