Narrow minded? I fail to see how my post qualifies me under 'narrow-minded'.

That means nothing. It was a decade before 9/11 when the last terrorists attack hit. And CIA/FBA have always been preventing attacks, before and after 9/11. My point was the admin has done nothing exceptional...

...EXCEPT the things DVP brought up. Bush has created a few programs that actively hunt down terrorists. Unfortuntley, these programs have also shit on the constitution and our freedom. Patriot Act, wire tapping, etc...all of these give the government more power at the price of my freedom and rights and in the name of security. I will not debate the effectiveness of these program, as that is irrelevent. What is relevent is that this admin has slowly eroded our rights, and people agree with it!

I will NEVER give up my rights and freedom, not even for security. I would willingly die in a terrorist plot, knowing that I am dying free. It is the thing I hold most sacred, the thing I live for.

 

Mellow,

While I agree in principle with what you are saying it is a sad reality today that there will need to be certain measures taken that limit our freedoms. Today there are many things that are limited that we take for granted everyday. Speed limits, not smoking in public buildings, not being able to go topless at the beach are just some of the more ordinary ones. When it comes to safety we need to go through elaborate metal detectors with our shoes off to get onto a plane. Sure it is a hassle but it is a way to protect everyone. Even today my wife and son flew to Buffalo and they almost did not let her on with milk (our son is 2) even though formula was ok. the eventually let her through with it but he still had to take his shoes off.

I view the listening of phone conversations or the monitoring of back transactions to/from known terrorists part of that policy. This is something that will never affect me and is not something I am going to get upset over...atleast any more than having to take my shoes off at the airport to go through security.

 

exactly what freedoms have you lost since bush came into office? what can't you do today that you could do before him?

 

I understand that we will never have some freedoms (like you said, speed limit, et cetra). The question is where the line is drawn. I clearly draw the line before you do. There is nothing wrong with that and it is just a difference of opinion. I am just hoping you understand why I oppose such measures, even if we disagree.

Where this line is drawn is obviously one of the biggest issues in politics today. As you know, there are two extremes (for lack of better terms, we will just call them liberal and conservative). They pull each other into moderation. Because of this, even though I disagree with conservatives, I would never wish them gone. That is the beauty of our government. Changes come slow and in moderation. The disagreement and strife in politics today just shows how healthy it is. Disagreement is when democracy shines. It has kept our system going for 200 years now, and it will continue to work in the future.

That is why I participate in these discussions. They just make me supremely happy that people CARE enough to argue. That and I can not vote yet...

 

I understand where you come from and in the perfect world absence any terrorism I would tend to agree with you more.

One of the things that bothers me about 2-party politics is that you have to choose one side or the other. Even moreson now that the two parties are moving more toward their respective extremes. As a moderate, small government republican I tend to agree with the Republican party most of the time and Democrats a little, but I am always forced to vote Republican because to me their candidate is the lesser of two evils...neither party puts forth good candidates.

 

There will never be a perfect canidate. However, more and more people are starting to move in your direction. I even tend to agree with you when debates turn to economics. Eventually a canidate is going to realize the pool of potential votes who are getting pissed, and will use it.

There are many pros to a two party system. One, things can get done faster. Politicians do not need to worry about forming alliances and blocs to get things past. Two, it prevents politcs from becoming regionalized. Look at Iraq, where there are three regions who all want different things, so they form different blocs. In the US, this will never happen because the demographics and a two party system will not allow it. Can you imagine if politics was regionalized in the US? It happened once, and there was a civil war over it. I pray it never happens again.

I like the two party system. It is not perfect, but what is?

 

I'll give you one preventetive measure that was over looked...and just more reasons why this administration has failed in securing our nation...More reasons for me to trust those that want to secure us and not create intimidation that results in the recruitment of anti-western "terrorists".

Take our most recent scare for instance. The potential bombers in this "Liquid Explosive" issue that was a plot to take down US planes. How the hell are these individuals getting ahold of hydrogen peroxide? And I'm not talking about the stuff you soak your earings in or dab on wounds. That stuff is 97% water. The stuff that these individuals had on them is industrial strength hydrogen peroxide. The only place you can get pure hydrogen peroxide is through a chemical supply house. This is dangerous stuff. And WE KNOW it's affect when it's mixed with Acetone if we go back 10 years to a successfull plane bomb in the philippians! We KNEW this was a threat and could be used again to take down a plane. You would THINK the Bush administration would put 2 and 2 together and say," you know, maybe we should put together a registry for people that are buying 100% pure hydrogen peroxide! But no, now we have 3, maybe 4 hour long lines at the airport, scared people that don't want to fly, more money wasted in security.

 

And thanks to the Brady Bill, everyone who ever commits a gun crime is put in jail because we know who bought it and where they live! Oh, wait...

 

How did the administration fail when the terrorists were caught in London, Italy, and Pakistan?

 

:rofl:

Hilarity.