BLOG VIEW  |  HEADLINE VIEW
SUBMIT NEWS  |  RSS FEED  |  SEARCH

Democrats: Worst Party Ever

TUESDAY JUNE 24 2008 6:00 AM

Submitted by FearTheReaper. Edited By FearTheReaper.

TAGS: Democrats, FISA, Republicans

The current Democrats are the weakest, most spineless fucks ever to grace the halls of Congress. After months of attempting destroy the 4th amendment, it seems they have finally succeeded – and their reasoning is more disgusting than the Republicans. Democrats are destroying the Constitution to gain a few votes in swing states. At least the Republicans stand for something, as vile and sickening as it may be.

In case you hadn’t heard, the House passed a FISA bill last week. Headlines could have easily read, “George Bush Wet Dream Turns Out To Be True.” The bill gives immunity to telecom companies who broke the law and expands warrantless wiretapping. That’s exactly why Americans gave Congress back to the Dems in 2006 – so they could help Bush use the Constitution as toilet paper.

Think I’m exaggerating? Here’s what Republicans said about the bill:


“The lawsuits will be dismissed,” Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 2 Republican in the House, predicted with confidence.


“I think the White House got a better deal than they even they had hoped to get,” said Senator Christopher Bond, the Missouri Republican who led the negotiations.


Holy fucking shit. “Better deal than they even had hoped to get.” Why not just say,


They raped themselves! All we had to do was look at ‘em funny!


Even I am shocked at how the Democrats appear to be totally spineless, completely fearful and entirely lacking principles. They embody everything the Founding Fathers were opposed to. A party like the Republicans was expected, which is why the framers created a system that would put a stop to their insane power grab. What was not expected was that the opposing party would go along to gain a few votes and to pad the bank accounts of corporations.

So, what did the Dems give up? Well, the President broke the law – apparently committing these things called “felonies.” Bush spied on our phone calls and emails without warrants because he believes he is above the law. The House voted to protect the President from prosecution, permanently block lawsuits that would have revealed what he did and at the same time, legalized the illegal spying in the past and in the future. House Democrats called it a “compromise.”

This is the kind of compromise where you don’t want to have sex with someone, so you let them fuck you in the ass. The Democratic version of “compromise” always means the Republicans get what they want. In this case, only one Republican voted against the bill. One the other hand, 105 Democrats “compromised.” They were totally bipartisan! Yeah, Washington!

Senator Russ Feingold said it best…


The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation.

I do think this is a total farce with regard to the immunity. It basically guarantees the immunity. It doesn’t simply have the impact of potentially allowing telephone companies to break the law. It may prevent us from ever getting to the core issue … which is the president ran an illegal program that could’ve been an impeachable offense.


Well, don’t worry about that, because the Dems got their buddy telecom companies a "get out of jail free" card.



Hey, no worries. I’m sure the Founding Fathers would have been totally cool with the President opening and copying every piece of mail they received from overseas. Why would they have a problem with that? When has that kind of power ever been abused?

Here’s how this is going to work from now on: Our courts can no longer determine if the government was actually after a terrorist or innocent Americans - or opposing political parties. (You fucking retards.) Judges will actually be barred from examining the actual reasons for the spying. Judges will only be allowed to dismiss lawsuits based on spying – the Attorney General will have all the power to say whether or not the spying was "designed to prevent or detect a terrorist attack." This would be the same Attorney General who can’t figure out if waterboarding is torture – or whether or not members of the Bush White House are in contempt for refusing to testify in front of Congress. Yeah, that guy. The Dems just gave that guy all the power.

Once the Attorney General utters the secret words, judges cannot look into the issue any further. It’s pure lawlessness – like the Wild West, without those oppressive Sheriffs. Judges don’t get to actually decide whether or not the Attorney General is making a valid claim. Once he says the secret words, it’s over.

And bestest of all, the Dems did it to pick up a few seats. Right now they have a 35 seat majority in the House and they want to build that shit up to 50. So, fuck the Constitution, let’s get some Dems up in that bitch!


"For any Republican-leaning district this would have been a huge issue," says a top Pelosi aide, who estimates that as many as 10 competitive races could have been affected by it.


Phew! Thank God you made those districts competitive!

This is a fantastically moronic view of where the country is at this time. Dems made massive, nearly unparalleled pick ups in 2006 – because Americans want the Bush White House to be held in check, yet the Democratic answer is to give him everything he wants, so they won’t lose seats in the next election. They are so cowardly and stupid it is shocking. Karl Roves entire election strategy in 2006 was built upon FISA and national security, attempting to brand the Dems as weak on terrorism. And yet, the Democrats cleaned the GOPs clock. Republicans were obliterated. And apparently the Democrats learned nothing. Zip. Zero. Nada.

Democrats believe the way to show how awesome they are, is to trample on the Constitution. Trampling isn’t even the right word. This is obliteration.

And just to add a little icing on the coward cake, they took a page out of the Patriot Act handbook. House members were only given 24 hours to read the bill and decide on whether or not they should shit all over our rights. Just seems like a few years ago Democrats were complaining loudly they were only given 24 hours to read the Patriot Act before voting on it. And now they are doing it to themselves on a bill that also destroys our civil rights. Well done.

Our neo-con morons will say this bill was necessary, because we need to prevent another 9/11 before it occurs. They argue that if the telecoms aren’t given immunity, they won’t want to help us catch terrorists. Everyone seems to forget that the warrantless wiretapping program started BEFORE 9/11. I’m going to write that again, for the idiots. The warrantless wiretapping program started before 9/11. Got it, you fucking dipshit? (Not you, the idiot who believes the Bush bullshit. The coward who is willing to throw out everything this country stands for, so they can feel save in a place that will never be attacked, like Alaska.)

By the sounds of it, Dems have enough votes to overcome a Dodd/Feingold filibuster. Obama is coming in soft on this one. Previously he vowed to do all he could to stop the bill, now he is basically saying we need the bill, although he has said he will try to get the amnesty removed. Either way, if the bill passes and Obama votes for it, I will not vote for him for President. Sorry, can’t support someone who tosses away the 4th Amendment. Hello Jesse Johnson!

In the future, you will turn on the news and hear a court dismissed all the lawsuits against telecoms. You won’t know why. You won’t know what the government said to have the cases tossed. The plaintiff’s lawyers won’t know either. The judge won’t be able to say a word. No one will know. Just Bush and his boys. Ah, sweet democracy – given to you by the Democrats.

Feel free to take a look at this video of George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley (far from a liberal) as he describes what this bill does to our Constitution.



“It’s what any criminal would love to do.”


“Evisceration of the 4th Amendment.”


Way to go Democrats. Don’t forget to donate to the Dems this elections cycle. They know you will, because they know you fear the other side more. Too bad there really isn’t much of a difference. Oh, wait, there is. One party is full of complete and total cowards who have no principles. The other stands for what they believe in.

You can still call or email your Senator to put a stop to this bill. If you don't know what to say or write, check this shit out.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Senator ******,

I am writing to urge you to vote against the warrantless wiretapping law that just passed the House. (H.R. 6304, THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008).

This law is not necessary for protecting our country. As you are well aware, FISA already allows the government to tap any person's calls for 72 hours so long as it can retroactively prove to the highly permissive FISA court that there was probable cause. Amending FISA will not make us safer. It will only send a message to the Bush Administration that ignoring Congress, violating criminal law, and violating our rights as American citizens are acceptable. It will also reinforce the idea that voting for Democrats is useless because, even with majorities in both houses, they continue to get steamrolled by the Republican minority.

I am also against giving immunity to lawbreakers, regardless of the who told them to do what. If the president told me to break the law, I wouldn't. Would you?

I urge you to vote against this law in any form, and to use the power of the filibuster to prevent it from coming to a vote if necessary.

Thanks.
********

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 13

Next

Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

West Vancouver, BC
May 2005

JUN 25, 2008 06:49 AM

Subrosa said:

Louis_XIV said:

Subrosa said:

Subrosa said:

Louis_XIV said:
Your "democracy" still confuses me. This bill legalizes something that happened back in 2001. Isn't this a ex post facto law ? And aren't ex post facto laws explicitely prohibited in federal law by Article I, section 9 of the U.S. Constitution ?


No. An ex post facto law is something that makes something that happened in the past illegal. ...



^^^
See, Bush isn't the only head of state to not understand the law. wink



Please consider the fact that I don't have access on your centuries juridical literature, I have to inform myself on your electrical network. In this case I relied on Wikipedia which may be wrong when it claims that an ex post facto law may crominalize or decriminalize a past action :

Wikipedia article on "Ex post facto law":
An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "After The Fact") or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts committed or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. In reference to criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; or it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in at the time it was committed; or it may change or increase the punishment prescribed for a crime, such as by adding new penalties or extending terms; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime more likely than it would have been at the time of the action for which a defendant is prosecuted. Conversely, a form of ex post facto law commonly known as an amnesty law may decriminalize certain acts or alleviate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with life-long imprisonment) retroactively.





Sure. Those might technically be a form of ex post facto laws, but they're not the type of laws that were contemplated by the Framers when they inserted those prohibitions in the Constitution.



It isn't possible that they might have recognized the possibility of exactly this type of situation and intended provision for it as well?

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

JUN 25, 2008 07:20 AM

No. "Amnesty laws" happen and do not run afoul of the Constitution. Something was a crime, it becomes not a crime, and charges are dropped. The Framers were primarily concerned at this time with the unrestrained power of Congress to throw people in jail unfairly, not with the ability of Congress to let people walk.

There's also the fact that these suits, as they are proceeding, are civil not criminal in nature. The prohibition against ex post facto laws does not touch changes in civil law by the legislature.

Lily

Lily

SUICIDEGIRL

Quebec, Canada

JUN 25, 2008 07:49 AM

Bill_the_Cat said:
Not entirely. Obama hasn't voted yet, but congress has.





CodyW said:
Obama votes for this, he's not getting my vote.



Newsflash Obama Supports Fisa Legislation, Angering the left

I guess he just lost your vote.

personally I find the whole thing despicable, to say the least.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

JUN 25, 2008 10:48 AM

OneWithAll

OneWithAll

Charlton City, MA
October 2005

JUN 25, 2008 11:01 AM



*applauds*

fuck me, makes me think twice about my view on politicians surreal

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

JUN 25, 2008 11:05 AM

that man needs to have more babies. i don't care how many kids he already has--it's not enough.

OneWithAll

OneWithAll

Charlton City, MA
October 2005

JUN 25, 2008 11:13 AM

Lily said:

Bill_the_Cat said:
Not entirely. Obama hasn't voted yet, but congress has.





CodyW said:
Obama votes for this, he's not getting my vote.



Newsflash Obama Supports Fisa Legislation, Angering the left

I guess he just lost your vote.

personally I find the whole thing despicable, to say the least.



that's...

disappointing frown

let's see how he explains this, in a video email i assume

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

JUN 25, 2008 11:16 AM

Banana Fanna Obama said:
"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program."


basically, he said "it sucks, but we need the good parts, and i'll do my best to make sure the bad parts aren't abused."

while that sounds reasonable, i think if you look at what's actually at stake, it's like being reasonable about the Darfur genocide. "well, it's bad, but let's be honest--it's just brown people."

Coyotemike

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE
May 2006

JUN 25, 2008 11:17 AM



I hope he wasn't speaking to an empty chamber.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

JUN 25, 2008 11:44 AM

motorfirebox said:

Banana Fanna Obama said:
"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program."


basically, he said "it sucks, but we need the good parts, and i'll do my best to make sure the bad parts aren't abused."

while that sounds reasonable, i think if you look at what's actually at stake, it's like being reasonable about the Darfur genocide. "well, it's bad, but let's be honest--it's just brown people."



Keep in mind that that statement was made last week before a mountain of public feedback swept into Obama's office via phone, fax, and email. There are a couple politicians whose positions have softened in that time. I'm not making any judgments until the votes are cast.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

JUN 25, 2008 11:47 AM

it's more in my nature to condemn now and apologize later. i don't mind eating crow when people turn out to be better than i expected them to be.

AntiChristPunk

AntiChristPunk

East Brunswick, NJ
August 2007

JUN 25, 2008 12:06 PM

I just emailed the Newjersey Senators too..and also i think i threw up in the back of my throat when i fucking read this shit. these spineless scumbag talking heads just took a shit on everything my generation is out fighting in a war for. bullshit mad puke

Munke

Munke

Chula Vista, CA
May 2004

JUN 25, 2008 12:27 PM

I just called Feinstein and Boxer.

Boxer's office told me she was strongly against the bill and would be voting against it.
Feinstein's office just asked me what zipcode I reside in.

whatever

Towelly

Towelly

I'm lost
January 2007

JUN 25, 2008 12:27 PM

Just e-mailed my representative (Sen. Reid). Futile I know; Dodd wouldn't even have to invoke a filibuster if Reid were really against the bill. But it felt good to remind my representative that Bush's oath of office was to protect and defend the Constitution, that his violation of FISA broke that oath, and that it was his responsibility to hold Pres. Bush to his word.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

JUN 25, 2008 12:30 PM

Munke said:
I just called Feinstein and Boxer.

Boxer's office told me she was strongly against the bill and would be voting against it.
Feinstein's office just asked me what zipcode I reside in.

whatever


Boxer is one of the bill's most vocal opponents, Feinstein is a shill for the telcos. That doesn't surprise me at all.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 13

Next

Now Hear This

Last Comment 4 HR by orbro

Now Hear This

Last Comment 4 HR

There's like a half-hour of video here. You should do a vlog. More ...

Asshole Fuckface Roundup #74

Last Comment 5 HR

Parents who are accustomed to carrying guns around may not think anything of going into child-related... More ...

An Encounter With Jonathan Shaw's Narcisa

Last Comment 6 HR

thanx gurlz... u rrrrrule!! xx jonathan shaw and narcisa More ...

SuicideGirl: Bob

Bob

Terrible Woman's MySpace Alias Leads to Teen's Suicide.

Last Comment 21 HR

But, it's delivered poorly...really poorly. Unless, it's not a joke, in which case, it's a good place... More ...

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08 by Shalome

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08

Oh my fucking god. More ...

Filtering the Truth: Religion - Friend or Foe?

Last Comment 11/30/08

I'm just going to skip over the mass orgy that's going on and say my piece: I don't think religion is... More ...

SuicideGirls Interview: Al Jourgensen of Ministry
SuicideGirls Interview: Bootsy Collins
SuicideGirls Interview: Exene Cervenka