Filibuster of extension of controversial measure successful
Friday, December 16, 2005; Posted: 12:36 p.m. EST (17:36 GMT) WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. Senate on Friday rejected attempts to reauthorize several provisions of the nation's top anti-terror law as infringing too much on Americans' privacy, dealing a major defeat to President George W. Bush and Republican leaders.
In a crucial vote Friday morning as Congress raced toward adjournment, the bill's Senate supporters were not able to garner the 60 votes necessary to overcome a threatened filibuster, a technique used to delay debate. The final vote was 52-47. - CNN.com -------- I wonder how much of the rejection was due to finding out that Bush authorized illegal domestic spying on Americans. Possibly the story of his calling the US Constitution "just a ******* piece of paper" hurt his cause, too.
Posts: 17475 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Coldfuse, If it's "Just a piece of paper" Than that was one powerful post-it-note!
I'm glad that the senate is finally growing a spine. But the only reason they are growing a spine is because of polling results. They are looking at 2006.
So I have to ask. What has occurred to make the Patriot Act so objectionable??? I don't think its due to Bush admitting that he authorized spying on Americans after 9-11. He was certainly within his rights as President to do so, with or without the Patriot Act.
I see this as pure politics coming into play. We need to remember we are at war. We need to remember 9-11-01 we were attacked on our own soil. This vote simply ties the President's hands. The Patriot Act should by all means, be renewed. I suspect this issue is not dead yet.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
"He was certainly within his rights as President to do so, with or without the Patriot Act."
Apparently, it is not so clear that he can spy on Americans without a court order. If fact, it is almost certain he can't. Regardless of which Senators and Representatives knew about it, and regardless of any law the Senate and House may pass, it is unconstitutional to wiretap without a warrant. This has been made very clear by numerous Supreme Court decisions.
Posts: 17475 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
I am almost certain this sort of thing (Presidents of the United States authorizing spying on American citizens) has been going on long before the current president was even born. Maybe even before you were born too, you know prior to the telegraph
Posts: 3712 | Location: Long Island, New York USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Of course it has, Koz, that is why there were specific laws passed in the late 1970s about domestic spying. Bush got caught. When you get caught committing a crime, you may have to fact the punishment. Where are all the Law and Order people? Somehow, they got quiet about a violation of the Constitution.
Posts: 17475 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by Lighteningrodd: What has occurred to make the Patriot Act so objectionable???
I see this as pure politics coming into play.
The patriot act has always been objectionable. It's growing public awareness over its flaws that brought it into the spotlight.
You are rite, the reason it failed now is entirely political. The Republican senators are thinking about their reelection in 2006 and they are trying to save their asses. That’s all there is to it, they want to be reelected…
Interesting interview yesterday with Larry Craig, one of four Republican Senators who voted to prevent reauthorization of The Patriot Act, on Rush Limbaugh's show.
