NEOGNOSTIKOS

Sunday, 22 May 2005

Grate
I'm listening to the CNBC replay of this morning's edition of Meet the Press with Howard Dean and the only thing he's said that I can agree with ---and I'm paraphrasing here--- is that the Schiavo Case will prove to be a turning point in how the public regards the Republican Party as a party of individual rights and small government. And that's true. Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum and the other hardline Republicans have gravely harmed the GOP with these flashes of evangelical madness. It still appalls.

As for Howard Dean, he's still an angry little twitch of a man. I wouldn't trust him with a sack of shit.

Posted by Toby Petzold at 9:52 PM CDT | Post Comment | View Comments (8) | Permalink

Comments Page

Sunday, 22 May 2005 - 10:26 PM CDT

Name: Johnny Feelgood

These are not flashes of evangelical madness, my friend. The Republicans' avarice for power simply cannot be sated. Now they want the FBI to have its own "administrative subpoena" power-- i.e., no court, no judge, no checks on the agency's power to enter your home and take your stuff merely on reasonable suspicion. (See http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0505190285may19,1,3030717.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true)

How's that for limited federal government? I thought Republicans were supposed to be conservatives. Oy.

Reply to this Comment

Sunday, 22 May 2005 - 10:39 PM CDT

Name: Toby Petzold

So long as they only use that power on violent Submitters, I don't care.

Reply to this Comment

Monday, 23 May 2005 - 8:05 PM CDT

Name: sluggo

You're joking, right? These mohammedans keep streaming into our country unchecked and the FBI is supposed to police themselves and do the right thing?

It's not the violent submitters that they will be going after.

Reply to this Comment

Tuesday, 24 May 2005 - 12:50 PM CDT

Name: Johnny Feelgood

Aren't those guarantees of individual liberties the basis of our system of government and the reason it came into being? Protection against unreasonable search and seizure was heavy on the minds of this country's founders although that protection had to wait for the passage of the Fourth Amendment.

Allowing the FBI in a criminal investigation to seize the papers and records of a suspect without any check implicates the Fourth's admonition, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, . . .." Are your "violent Submitters" an exception to this protection? What's the basis for such an exception?

As to the Supreme Court's historical interpretation of the Fourth Amendment and its implications on the current debate, I recommend: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/01.html#3

Reply to this Comment

Tuesday, 24 May 2005 - 7:10 PM CDT

Name: Toby Petzold

Feelgood:

What's the basis for such an exception?

My certainty that the Islamofascist menace is a greater threat to my country than any temporary ---and only potential--- suspension of civil liberties for real Americans.

Reply to this Comment

Tuesday, 24 May 2005 - 7:48 PM CDT

Name: sluggo

Leave it to the so-called conservatives to increase the size of the government and intrude on everybody's personal space.
Leave it to the neo-con freaks to trample on everybody's rights and try to define right and wrong in their own terms.
What happened to the conservatives who thought government should be as small as possible.

Reply to this Comment

Tuesday, 24 May 2005 - 9:12 PM CDT

Name: Johnny Feelgood

With the federal executive branch of government as the sole arbiter of who constitutes that threat? I know you better. You know better too.

Reply to this Comment

Tuesday, 24 May 2005 - 11:48 PM CDT

Name: Toby Petzold

You know me? Interesting. I don't know any Feelgoods. What ethnicity is that, anyway?

Reply to this Comment

Comments Page

View Latest Entries