(no subject)
paal made a post about michels, and i was going to reply to his post with this, but then i figured it would be better to put it here, because it's just me saying how much michels pisses me off.
anybody who says the patriot act is a benevolent piece of legislature that saves this country from almost certain destruction pisses me off beyond reason. (note: beyond reason) he actually mentions in a press release that he thinks roving wiretaps are great, and only affect terrorists.
"it allows agencies to do what they couldn't in the past, and that's access information on people to stop terrorist attacks.”
there's a reason they couldn't do that in the past you moron. people didn't want them to. the very same people they are protecting decided they didn't want them spying on them night and day. it's not like they never had the idea of massive privacy invasion before and it just magically came to them after the attacks.
"America is fighting a war in Iraq and a global war on terrorism, and as a veteran Michels is the only candidate in this race with the first-hand experience dealing with issues on national defense and homeland security."
12 years as an airborne ranger topping out at rank of major makes you an expert on national security? feingold might be a pussy, and darrow might be a slimy car salesman, but being a goddamn ranger and time on the white house honor guard doesn't make you j. edgar hoover.
michels challenged feingold to give an example of how patriot destroys american civil liberties. that's going to be hard to do because there hasn't been a case where patriot was used as sole defense of an action. besides, how does one prove that the nsa is violating your privacy by wiretapping you, or watching you from a satellite? do you just ask 'em? you can try but, oops! patriot says we can't divulge that information because you might be a terrorist. how do you prove that echelon archives every bit of your personal information and monitors all your data traffic 24/7? you can't, because the nsa refuses to admit that echelon exists. AUS and NZ admitted it, but maybe they're just tattletales. i don't hate patriot because it's evil right now, i hate it because i unequivocally believe it will be turned against american dissenters sometime in the not so distant future, and that pisses me off, just like mr. michels' utopian view of unquestionably noble and honorable monolithic security agencies defending the world from evil with their god-like powers pisses me off.
i really wish i could make another candidate, taking the issues that i support from michels (pro-life, corporate responsibility), darrow (judicial process), and feingold (civil liberties, gov. reform, campaign finance) to make one super senator. since that won't happen, i'm faced with a difficult decision.
anybody who says the patriot act is a benevolent piece of legislature that saves this country from almost certain destruction pisses me off beyond reason. (note: beyond reason) he actually mentions in a press release that he thinks roving wiretaps are great, and only affect terrorists.
"it allows agencies to do what they couldn't in the past, and that's access information on people to stop terrorist attacks.”
there's a reason they couldn't do that in the past you moron. people didn't want them to. the very same people they are protecting decided they didn't want them spying on them night and day. it's not like they never had the idea of massive privacy invasion before and it just magically came to them after the attacks.
"America is fighting a war in Iraq and a global war on terrorism, and as a veteran Michels is the only candidate in this race with the first-hand experience dealing with issues on national defense and homeland security."
12 years as an airborne ranger topping out at rank of major makes you an expert on national security? feingold might be a pussy, and darrow might be a slimy car salesman, but being a goddamn ranger and time on the white house honor guard doesn't make you j. edgar hoover.
michels challenged feingold to give an example of how patriot destroys american civil liberties. that's going to be hard to do because there hasn't been a case where patriot was used as sole defense of an action. besides, how does one prove that the nsa is violating your privacy by wiretapping you, or watching you from a satellite? do you just ask 'em? you can try but, oops! patriot says we can't divulge that information because you might be a terrorist. how do you prove that echelon archives every bit of your personal information and monitors all your data traffic 24/7? you can't, because the nsa refuses to admit that echelon exists. AUS and NZ admitted it, but maybe they're just tattletales. i don't hate patriot because it's evil right now, i hate it because i unequivocally believe it will be turned against american dissenters sometime in the not so distant future, and that pisses me off, just like mr. michels' utopian view of unquestionably noble and honorable monolithic security agencies defending the world from evil with their god-like powers pisses me off.
i really wish i could make another candidate, taking the issues that i support from michels (pro-life, corporate responsibility), darrow (judicial process), and feingold (civil liberties, gov. reform, campaign finance) to make one super senator. since that won't happen, i'm faced with a difficult decision.