XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   From: dead@gone.com   
      
   On Thu, 23 May 2013 00:44:49 -0700, Jason wrote:   
      
   > In article , Jeanne   
   > Douglas  wrote:   
   >   
   >> In article   
   >> ,   
   >>  Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > In article , "Scout"   
   >> >  wrote:   
   >> >   
   >> > > "Jeanne Douglas"  wrote in message   
   >> > > news:hlwdjsd2-F24A0E.23010721052013@news.giganews.com...   
   >> > > > In article , Zepp    
   >> > > > wrote:   
   >> > > >   
   >> > > >> On Tue, 21 May 2013 22:11:13 -0700, Jason wrote:   
   >> > > >>   
   >> > > >> > In article , Zepp    
   >> > > >> > wrote:   
   >> > > >> >   
   >> > > >> >> On Tue, 21 May 2013 21:22:42 -0700, Jason wrote:   
   >> > > >> >>   
   >> > > >> >> > In article , Tom McDonald   
   >> > > >> >> >  wrote:   
   >> > > >> >> >   
   >> > > >> >> >> On 5/21/2013 9:41 PM, RD Sandman wrote:   
   >> > > >> >> >> > Tom McDonald  wrote in   
   >> > > >> >> >> > news:reUmt.11860$v46.8618@newsfe13.iad:   
   >> > > >> >> >> >   
   >> > > >> >> >> >> On 5/21/2013 7:17 PM, Jason wrote:   
   >> > > >> >> >>   
   >> > > >> >> >>    
   >> > > >> >> >>   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> Good point. I hope they have a congressional   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> investigation about the AP scandal. It's just as   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> serious as the IRS scandal.   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>>   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> Someone should write letters to Holder and Obama and   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> remind them that the constitution mentions freedom of   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> the press. Perhaps they have forgotten about what they   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>> learned about the constitution.   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>>   
   >> > > >> >> >> >>>   
   >> > > >> >> >> >> Your problem there is that your guy, Bush2, pushed   
   >> > > >> >> >> >> through the laws that make what happened to the AP   
   >> > > >> >> >> >> entirely legal.   
   > You knew   
   >> > > >> >> >> >> that it was legal, right?   
   >> > > >> >> >> >   
   >> > > >> >> >> > So I assume your take is that since Bush did it, it   
   >> > > >> >> >> > makes it alright for Obama to do it?   No chance that   
   >> > > >> >> >> > both of them are wrong?   
   >> > > >> >> >> >   
   >> > > >> >> >> No, my take is that just about all of the laws passed in   
   >> > > >> >> >> the hysteria about terrorism, especially those that   
   >> > > >> >> >> restrict constitutional rights,   
   >> > > >> >> >> are wrong, cowardly and un-American. This is an example of   
   >> > > >> >> >> how we gave up freedom for almost-certainly-illusory   
   >> > > >> >> >> security.   
   >> > > >> >> >>   
   >> > > >> >> >> Whether it's a Democratic or a Republican administration   
   > doing it,   
   >> > > >> >> >> I   
   >> > > >> >> >> think it's wrong. Period.   
   >> > > >> >> >   
   >> > > >> >> > Do you agree that Holder violated the constitution when he   
   >> > > >> >> > forced the AP to give the federal government their phone   
   >> > > >> >> > records? yes or no   
   >> > > >> >>   
   >> > > >> >> He didn't force AP to do anything.  He just simply took the   
   >> > > >> >> records without subpoena or AP's knowledge.   
   >> > > >> >>   
   >> > > >> >> And yes, I think he violated the Constitution.   
   >> > > >> >   
   >> > > >> > Thanks--we are in total agreement. It was a violation of the   
   >> > > >> > constitution.   
   >> > > >> > I suggest that people write letters to Holder and Obama and   
   > advise them   
   >> > > >> > that the constitution grants freedom of the press.   
   >> > > >>   
   >> > > >> Agreed.  There's also the little matter of the Fourth Amendment,   
   > which is   
   >> > > >> supposed to protect the rest of us from this sort of crap.   
   >> > > >   
   >> > > >   
   >> > > > Patriot Act trumps everything else. All the government has to do   
   >> > > > is invoke the word "terrorism" and they can do anything they   
   >> > > > want. Where have you been?   
   >> > >   
   >> > > So you're saying the 4th Amendment no longer applies because the   
   > government   
   >> > > says so?   
   >> > >   
   >> > >   
   >> > It's my guess that Holder would answer that question by saying that   
   >> > the 4th Amendment no longer apples.   
   >> >   
   >> > Holder totally ignored the 4th Amendment when he tapped the phone   
   >> > lines of the AP reporters.   
   >>   
   >> Since the provisions of the Patriot Act that break the 4th Amendment   
   >> have never been found unconstitutional, they are the law of the land.   
   >>   
   >> So no law was broken.   
   >>   
   >> If you want us to think you actually care about the Constitution you   
   >> would have been protesting the 4th Amendment for the last 10 years. You   
   >> would be DEMANDING that the Act be repealed.   
   >>   
   >> I'm not seeing those protests and that demand, so your complaints are   
   >> nothing but hypocrisy.   
   >>   
   >> > Obama should fire Holder but it's my guess that Obama will not fire   
   >> > Holder since Holder is Obama's lap dog.   
   >>   
   >> Holder is nobody's lap dog. Why would you say such a vile and   
   >> disgusting thing?   
   >   
   > Because it's true. Otherwise, Obama would fire him for violating the 4th   
   > Amendment which is far more important than the Patriot Act.   
      
   The strutting clowns of the far right have been telling us the exact   
   opposite for the past ten years. What changed?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)