Conservatives determined to destroy Liberty

[evanrick]

10 years go, America was attacked by Islamic extremists, terrorists. Ever since then US government has been using that incident to trample on personal liberties, from the patriot act to torture. Even President Obama is using the cloak of war to shield Bush Administration officials, refusing to prosecute the likes of Cheney.

Shortly after the 2006 elections, then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld resigned his position. This move was purely political as it highlighted Americans dissatisfaction with the Bush regimes decision to invade Iraq.

The first thing Bush did when Democrats seized control of DC was to play nice with the newly elected Democrats.

This is the reason we are at war and will be at war for a long, long time.

Government inherits power in a time of war, and President Obama was not about to give up the powers Bush gave him. The Patriot act, which was "auto-penned" by Obama, seeking to avoid an embarrassing photograph, was arguably the darkest point in his Presidency.

The war In Afghanistan particularly has precipitated a new brand of President, whose actions with our military is rarely if ever questioned.

How does this new conservative/nationalistic view of war powers and conservative-minded government policies protect Americans by taking away their freedoms?

Is this conservative stripe in American politics too reckless to tame? Or are we destined to continue fighting for our liberties until conservatives can no longer make enemies out of friends?

Who are the real enemies of the state when you accuse the opposition of being "unpatriotic" when its YOUR OWN politics that seek to destroy what America stands for.

How can we consider our actions, rationalizing, and reasoning for justice be valid if conservatives seek to return us to the Monarchy we successfully abandoned?

 

[maxpowr9]

Is this just some rant, because without any "facts" (i.e your opinion) it needs to be labeled thus.

 

[justapixel]

I guess evanrick doesnt know who the President is.

 

[jackoroe]

The ill conceived "Patriot Act" was passed in 2001 without anybody having read it. Both sides voted for it, with few exceptions. After all, who could oppose anything patriotic?

Later some actually read the document and were aghast at what it contained. Very clear violations of the 1st and 4th Amendments of the Constitution. Democrats even made a campaign issue of it. Then they took over Congress and what happened? Nothing, nada, zip, zero zilch! In fact they renewed it pretty much as written. Then Obama was elected everything would be fine, right? Nope, it was renewed yet again without significant change.

The fact is, both parties only use issues of war and civil liberties to get themselves elected. Neither has any real intent of abiding by the Constitution and we let them.

Ultimately, we get the government we deserve.

 

[NineOfClubs]

I guess evanrick doesnt know who the President is.

This.

Really what year does he think this is?

 

[frankfrank]

Is this just some rant, because without any "facts" (i.e your opinion) it needs to be labeled thus.

I guess he could have prefixed the thread title with "Op-Ed," but prefixes are under-used, and I often don't remember to use them myself.

iNTERESTING how it's ofter those **very same** conservatives, who profess to want no government intervention whatsoever in our lives, are proposing some of the most massive regulatory bureaucracies ever built by humans:

1. Absolute regulation of everything that might ever possibly happen in a woman's womb
2. Tennessee's new law where somebody can do jail time because they dared to publish something (I think even as simple as an internet post) which somebody else finds OFFENSIVE
3. Legislators in Georgia trying to pass laws which require in-depth inquiries any time a woman has a miscarriage, because they have to make sure it wasn't related to an abortion, and many years in prison can result
4. Arizona's law, definitely passed by REPUBLICANS, which gives 10 years in prison for every picture of child porn which a person possesses...or even just LOOKS AT.

Arizona’s laws for child pornography are some of the most archaic in the world. A person is facing a prison sentence of 10 years for each image found in their possession, or on their computer. The law in Arizona for child pornography punishes the person that looks at a picture on the internet the same as the person that put the image on the internet.

http://www.arizonastriallawyers.com/childpornography.aspx

 

[frankfrank]

^ In re #4: That hapless person would get a more lenient prison sentence if he simply **MURDERED** that kid, rather than looking at three naked pictures. I wonder if parents (or relatives) have been sent to prison for the rest of their lives because of having a few "cute" pictures of the nephew playing in the backyard plastic swimming pool?

I could go on and on with the repressive laws that Republicans are passing, OR WANTING TO PASS, if they had absolute power. I believe that every one of the mainstream Republican Presidential candidates would try their best to reinstate Don't Ask Don't Tell immediately upon getting into office because, oh, that is SO much more important than jobs.

If Republicans have their way, prisons will be by far the fastest growth industry in the entire history of this nation, and they would love to have 50 to 75 million people in prison. Certainly they would like to have everybody, who has ever had as much as a gay inclination, shut away in prison for life. Perhaps as a cost-saving measure, because it costs a lot to warehouse people for years, they'd just fire up the ovens and gas chambers...