onegoodmove

er, bill? last i checked libs WERE, and still ARE bitching about their loss of civil liberties. everyone is. head check?

er miss.lynds, Bill's rant is against both Bush and Democracts.

A real conservative is not troubled if Bush gets impeached because he's never one in the first place.

Come to think of it, most of the right wing aren't conservatives only.

They are talk only.

i wish maher would be a bit more specific. its nice that he puts the 4th ammendment in there as something sacred that weve lost, but does he really believe that? hes said explicitly many times that the nsa should be able to spy on americans with no warrants so that we can be safe. that not only violates the 4th ammendment, but also the seperation of powers (it violates FISA, an act of congress). its essentially a declaration that he doesnt care about tyranny. and apart from that it violates common sense, as it doesnt keep us any safer (unless the fisa court has been infiltrated by al qaeda), but thats besides the point. so its nice to hear hes come around, but id like to hear it more explicitly. maybe hes said it more explicitly and i just havent seen it, but im skeptical.

as for sacrifice, this reminds me of something i read shortly after 911. i dont remember who said it, but it was basically that americans should be willing to die to protect freedom. that is what we demand of our soldiers, and it should be no different for our citizens. our sacrifice was on 911, our sacrifice was our sense of untouchable security. and there will be future sacrifices. we spit on their graves though, when we give up our freedom. thats whats worth fighting and dying for.

terrorists have no chance of destroying our nation, we do that ourselves, or let our leaders do it. all terrorists can do is kill a small fraction of us, that is the extent of their power. i think this should be obvious, and any american would agree with it if they actually stopped to think for a few minutes.

miss lynds, i wish that were true. the sad fact is that bill is right, at least when it comes to our elected dems. 12 democratic senators voted for the military commissions act which repealed habeas corpus, as well as other horrible things. only about 10 democratic senators voted against re-authorizing the patriot act (and this was after theyd had a couple years to actually read the thing). they have many opportunities to prove themself now that they have taken congress back, but i dont think they have yet. they will be judged by their actions not their rhetoric.

Can you put up the fake "Are You Smarter Than Alberto Gonzales?" commercial? It was hilarious.

It all starts with the Police State Act. That was the point at which the Democrats announced to the world that they were gutless cowards who had absolutely no problem shitting all over the Bill of Rights and letting Bush trash everything in sight. Every Democrat in the Senate, except for Feingold, voted for it in 2001. Last year, there was slightly more opposition, but still nearly every Senate Democrat voted for it (including all the big names: Clinton, Obama, Kerry, Kennedy, Reid, etc. etc. etc.). Try going to the Clinton, Edwards, and Obama campaign websites and see what they have to say about restoring and protecting civil liberties. Good luck finding anything.

slahglixc, perhaps you are referring to this quote:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." BENJAMIN FRANKLIN.

"its essentially a declaration that he doesnt care about tyranny"

Next you'll say he agreed with Hitler somehow. He clearly cares about tyranny because he's commenting on it -in this video-.

By the way, interesting, isn't it, how quickly Bush had the Police State Act out of his pocket and on the table immediately after 9-11, almost as though it had already been written. And the anthrax delivered to key Democrats, just in case they had any hesitancy about voting for it.

Amazing how random events just seemed to come together for the Decider. Dumb luck, no doubt . . .