Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/20/2005 9:16:33 AM EDT


FLASHBACK: DEM LEADER HARRY REID ALL SMILES AT PATRIOT ACT SIGNING

THE DRUDGE REPORT has uncovered a photograph of President Bush signing the Patriot Act in the East Room of the White House on October 26, 2001.

And standing over the President’s shoulder with a smile on his face is Democratic Senate Minority Harry Reid (D-NV)!

Reid is currently leading efforts in the Senate to block the renewal of the Patriot Act.

After Reid successfully prevented the Patriot Act’s renewal late last week the Senator attended a Democrat political rally and proudly declared, “We killed the Patriot Act.”

One Republican strategist familiar with the photo said, “Democrats think they can regain the majority? Not a chance if they continue to put politics above what’s best for the country. Harry Reid is making a colossal miscalculation, but it's not the first time and thankfully for us, probably not the last.”

Developing...

http://www.drudgereport.com/pa.htm

Eric The(WhatChutzpah!)Hun
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:19:58 AM EDT
Whats that word?
It starts with an H...

Ah, yes.

HYPOCRITE
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:22:53 AM EDT
Are you implying that you SUPPORT the patriot act?





Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:24:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 9:26:55 AM EDT by Leisure_Shoot]

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
Whats that word?
It starts with an H...



"Cum-Dumpster-Monkey-Fucker" ? ... Oh... never mind, that doesn't start with "H".
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:24:25 AM EDT
Not suprised one bit.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:24:29 AM EDT
The Patriot Act is a dangerous law. While I, for some UNEXPLAINABLE REASON, feel that Bush will not use it for ill gotten gains -- future leaders may suffer from a lack of morality. Even worse, some future Presidents may use it for outright criminal purposes.

Can you imagine what Slick Willy could have gained if it had been in place during his Presidency?
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:24:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 9:25:55 AM EDT by NewbHunter]

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
Whats that word?
It starts with an H...

Ah, yes.

HYPOCRITE



No, I clearly heard Reid yell "DO-OVER!!!," so it doesn't count.

Bush is still "it" and it's still all Bush's fault.

(not that I support the Patriot Act, I just hate the dog wagging that goes on in this country)
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:25:46 AM EDT
What do you all think will be the likely outcome of the Senate version of the Patriot Act?
Will it eventually get renewed? Or at least most of it?
Or is it voer and done?
Victory for the Democrats.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:27:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 9:29:15 AM EDT by NimmerMehr]
So, it is a photo op .. lots probably do that. typical politician/not suprising.

Besides, he might being smiling cause he thinks Bush has funny handwritting, or maybe someone told a joke just prior.



Edit: Or maybe he is the antichrist and he is thinking "yes, one more step toward world dominiation!"
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:28:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By arowneragain:
Are you implying that you SUPPORT the patriot act?








Me? No.
I am implying he is a fucking hypocrite that was all smiles
that the PA was passed, then he turns around and says We killed it.
That is the definiton of hypocrite.
He could have the balls to take a position on it.
But he doesn't.
Much like most of Congress.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:31:59 AM EDT
The next time we're attacked, he'll be the one calling for an immediate investigation into why our intelligence infrastructure failed to stop it. A-holes!!!
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:32:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
Whats that word?
It starts with an H...

Ah, yes.

HYPOCRITE



No man, Bush lied and tricked him! Again!
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:39:33 AM EDT
That is because, as you can see, Sen Leahey's hand is in his pocket giving him a reach around.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:40:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ar15bubba:
That is because, as you can see, Sen Leahey's hand is in his pocket giving him a reach around.



Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:45:19 AM EDT
Clinton did it.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:55:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:
Can you imagine what Slick Willy could have gained if it had been in place during his Presidency?



I'm sure he was doing it without the patriot act anyway.

Look at all the bodies in the clinton's wake!!!
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:57:13 AM EDT
Harry Reid is a total ass, thief, liar and cheat. I've met him personally a few times while living in Nevada. He is the worst public servant I've ever met. I think I'd trust Clinton before old Harry. At least you know Clinton's gonna screw you and he's up front about it. Harry will lie to your face while screwing you from behind.

He's a POS. I hope he tastes his own blood before meeting his maker. Not that I have anything against him....
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:00:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:
The Patriot Act is a dangerous law. While I, for some UNEXPLAINABLE REASON, feel that Bush will not use it for ill gotten gains -- future leaders may suffer from a lack of morality. Even worse, some future Presidents may use it for outright criminal purposes.

Can you imagine what Slick Willy could have gained if it had been in place during his Presidency?



My feelings exactly.

I could not imagine what America would be like if Hillary Clinton were in the White House and had the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:06:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
Clinton did it.


He certainly did, didn't he?

No law was able to slow down the Boy Wonder President.

And, BTW, the law that the DEMOS are ignoring while accusing President Bush of violating the law, was passed in 1977 during the Carter Administration...and Clinton did use the law with regards to supposed economic espionage.

Eric The(Informative)Hun
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:06:36 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:07:56 AM EDT
FWIW, I don't think this government spying on Americas BS is legitimate, I think it's a ploy.

Appears, to me that is, the statists and power elite intend that the Patriot Act go down in flames this time around.

That way they (our government) can moan and complain that they do not have the Patriot Act to "protect" us.

(as if those assholes are there to protect our interests anyway, granted that's supposed to be their jobs, but as anyone can see the reality is far from it, it's a "power" thing don'tcha know)

Then when some other manufactured terroist organization (probably similar to Atta and others who just so happened to have direct ties to our own CIA) happens to create another 9/11 situation they (our government) can say see!, See what happens when we don't have the Patriot Act and the sheeple will be dis-inclined to kick up any more fuss over the current administration violating their constitutional authority.....

For those not quite so informed the New World Order, power elite, statists, the whatever ya want to call them crowd is almost set, but yet here at last pahses, when they are so close to having us all by the short hairs, the sheeple have been less impressed with the staged terror and condition YELLOW, no ORANGE, wait-a-minute RED, sorry YELLOW type bs scare tactics which worked so famously years ago.

Appears "they" are changing tactics.


My suggestion: "IF" the Patriot Act goes down, watch-out! We will have another "terroist-incident" before long.


Mike

ps - that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

It's not nice to fuck with those trying to control our future, for they don't care how many sheeple they have to kill to further their sick PNAC/NWO agenda.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:08:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 10:09:35 AM EDT by raven]

Originally Posted By DLoken:
www.grackles.us/images/rumsfeld_saddam.gif









SO WHAT?
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:08:21 AM EDT

And, BTW, the law that the DEMOS are ignoring while accusing President Bush of violating the law, was passed in 1977 during the Carter Administration...and Clinton did use the law with regards to supposed economic espionage.


No, Bush authorised the NSA to spy without a court order or warrant which is quite illegal. They may wiretap for up to 72 hours in emergancy cases but must obtain a court order or destroy the evidence collected after that point.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:08:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DLoken:
www.grackles.us/images/rumsfeld_saddam.gif




444 days.

Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:08:36 AM EDT
The Dems are hypocrites.

I voted for before I voted against the Patriot Act.

I do and do not support the Patriot Act.

Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:11:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By raven:

Originally Posted By DLoken:
www.grackles.us/images/rumsfeld_saddam.gif



img.thefreedictionary.com/wiki/e/e5/Great_Leader_Comrade_Kim_Jong_Il_(122).jpg



SO WHAT?



No shortage of hypocrites on either side. All I'm pointing out here.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:28:21 AM EDT
at least he voted against it this time around. He does look like an idiot in the picture. But made a good decision this time around
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:31:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DLoken:

And, BTW, the law that the DEMOS are ignoring while accusing President Bush of violating the law, was passed in 1977 during the Carter Administration...and Clinton did use the law with regards to supposed economic espionage.


No, Bush authorised the NSA to spy without a court order or warrant which is quite illegal. They may wiretap for up to 72 hours in emergancy cases but must obtain a court order or destroy the evidence collected after that point.



Says who? The NYT?
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 12:48:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 12:50:52 PM EDT by EricTheHun]

Originally Posted By DLoken:


Shiite!

You think that is bad, check out this shot:



Damn! The leaders of the Free World sitting down with that bloodthirsty bastage Stalin!



Times change. Alliances change. But 'useful idiots', it appears, never do.

Eric The(Masterful)Hun
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 12:49:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:
The Patriot Act is a dangerous law. While I, for some UNEXPLAINABLE REASON, feel that Bush will not use it for ill gotten gains -- future leaders may suffer from a lack of morality. Even worse, some future Presidents may use it for outright criminal purposes.

Can you imagine what Slick Willy could have gained if it had been in place during his Presidency?



Exactly.
What happens when gun owners become the terrorists?
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:01:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 1:03:07 PM EDT by EricTheHun]
Originally Posted By DLoken:

Originally posted by Eric The Hun:
And, BTW, the law that the DEMOS are ignoring while accusing President Bush of violating the law, was passed in 1977 during the Carter Administration...and Clinton did use the law with regards to supposed economic espionage.



No, Bush authorised the NSA to spy without a court order or warrant which is quite illegal. They may wiretap for up to 72 hours in emergancy cases but must obtain a court order or destroy the evidence collected after that point.

Sorry, my little useful idiot type friend.

You're wrong, as usual....

Read the pertinent parts of the Foreign Espionage Surveillance Act (FISA) that was passed in 1977, and dispenses with the requirement of a warrant under specific circumstances.

It's spelled out in this thread....See Dick? Run Spot Run, and other childrens' favorites

If you'd like, maybe we can find a remedial reading version of this Act for you...and Carl Levin, and Nancy Pelosi, and dear Harry Reid.

Eric The(Sassier'nNecessary)Hun
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:04:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DLoken:

Originally Posted By raven:

Originally Posted By DLoken:
www.grackles.us/images/rumsfeld_saddam.gif



img.thefreedictionary.com/wiki/e/e5/Great_Leader_Comrade_Kim_Jong_Il_(122).jpg



SO WHAT?



No shortage of hypocrites on either side. All I'm pointing out here.





Actually, there is a huge difference between a picture taken of two people meeting, with neither of them knowing what the future holds & a picture of someone agreeing with something that they have read, knowing exactly what it means & it's future implications. In other words Rumsfeld did not know what Saddam would be capable of 20 years later, but you can bet your ass that Reid knew what the patriot act entailed, & if he didn't shame on him for signing a bill without properly reading it.


Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:05:48 PM EDT
I bet the bad guys are real afraid of the Patriot Act....
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:10:44 PM EDT
I didn't know Leaky Leahy was Japanese....

(notice Japanese tourist camera)

Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:18:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cobra-ak:
I bet the bad guys are real afraid of the Patriot Act....


I would bet they are, as well.

Who knows how many terrorist acts have been prevented upon American soil?

Well done.

Eric The(Rare)Hun
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:33:30 PM EDT
The Patriot Act is one of the most terrible pieces of legislation ever to be put on the American public. It serves no useful purpose and recent events with the NSA spying on Americans show that the government will do whatever it wants whenever it wants. There are hundreds of laws that cover almost every concievable event that can be utilized when needed. Our constitutional rights are being removed one by one. It's like a new tax, once they put one in place it never goes away and only gets bigger. Which one of our rights will we give up next, will the NSA be spying on ar15.com next, will the FBI be knocking on your door?

I contacted both of my congressmen on the Patriot Act. One democrat, Max Baucus and one republican, Conrad Burns. Burns is all for it and in his response says he will vote for it again to protect me. I would like to tell him I have all the protection I need, stop by and have a look.

I don't need the Patriot Act... Just my opinion...
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:42:11 PM EDT
Harry Reid et al is also, in essence, betting that another significant terrorist act will not hit the USA before the next election........if they do, he will be labelled by the Republicans as helpful to the terrorists.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 1:45:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By s3dcor:
I don't need the Patriot Act... Just my opinion...



its not meant to catch you.



Link Posted: 12/20/2005 2:08:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By s3dcor:
The Patriot Act is one of the most terrible pieces of legislation ever to be put on the American public. It serves no useful purpose and recent events with the NSA spying on Americans show that the government will do whatever it wants whenever it wants. There are hundreds of laws that cover almost every concievable event that can be utilized when needed. Our constitutional rights are being removed one by one. It's like a new tax, once they put one in place it never goes away and only gets bigger. Which one of our rights will we give up next, will the NSA be spying on ar15.com next, will the FBI be knocking on your door?

I contacted both of my congressmen on the Patriot Act. One democrat, Max Baucus and one republican, Conrad Burns. Burns is all for it and in his response says he will vote for it again to protect me. I would like to tell him I have all the protection I need, stop by and have a look.

I don't need the Patriot Act... Just my opinion...



Good grief, people have just taken the NYT story on blind faith. Damn!

Have you read the PA? Do you have any clue what is in it?
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 2:18:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
Whats that word?
It starts with an H...

Ah, yes.

HYPOCRITE



+1
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 3:03:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
Clinton did it.


He certainly did, didn't he?

No law was able to slow down the Boy Wonder President.

And, BTW, the law that the DEMOS are ignoring while accusing President Bush of violating the law, was passed in 1977 during the Carter Administration...and Clinton did use the law with regards to supposed economic espionage.

Eric The(Informative)Hun



Thanks for that informative bit of info but what I meant was "Clinton does everything".
He kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, he killed and buried Judge Crater in an unmarked grave and he knows where Hoffa is.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 3:14:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
Clinton did it.


He certainly did, didn't he?

No law was able to slow down the Boy Wonder President.

And, BTW, the law that the DEMOS are ignoring while accusing President Bush of violating the law, was passed in 1977 during the Carter Administration...and Clinton did use the law with regards to supposed economic espionage.

Eric The(Informative)Hun



Thanks for that informative bit of info but what I meant was "Clinton does everything".
He kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, he killed and buried Judge Crater in an unmarked grave and he knows where Hoffa is.



But, he got the info from Bush. As you well know, it's ALL Bush's fault.

Link Posted: 12/20/2005 4:19:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2005 4:33:44 PM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
Whats that word?
It starts with an H...

Ah, yes.

HYPOCRITE



+1



Actually I think the word is "peesaschitt."

Link Posted: 12/20/2005 4:30:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DLoken:

Originally Posted By raven:

Originally Posted By DLoken:
www.grackles.us/images/rumsfeld_saddam.gif



img.thefreedictionary.com/wiki/e/e5/Great_Leader_Comrade_Kim_Jong_Il_(122).jpg



SO WHAT?



No shortage of hypocrites on either side. All I'm pointing out here.



Albright and FDR aren't hypocrites either (for that). How old are you?

Rumsfeld, Albright, and FDR are not hypocrites for meeting with unsavory foreign leaders. That stupid photo of Rumsfeld pops up when liberals want to say "Saddam's so bad? Then why did we put him in power and arm him? Here's the guy saying we've got to take him out shaking his hand!"

First off, we didn't put Saddam in power, and our support of him was almost nothing, especially compared to the USSR and France. In the grown up world of real international politics, sometimes the enemy of my enemy is friend, and at that time, Iran was a bigger enemy for seizing our embassy, overthrowing our ally in Iran, and taking hostages and blowing up Marine barracks in Lebanon. Saddam was waging an all-out war against a hostile regime, so we weren't exactly unpleased about that.

Should we have just kept on befriending Saddam and Stalin for the sake of consistency? So smartass liberals can't hold up a PR photo in our face? Or should we just stop the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend business? Would that have been smart in WWII?

Grow up.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 4:42:17 PM EDT
How soon they forget when it's convenient for them.

What a joke.

HH
Top Top