...but Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) doesn't (she voted for reauthorization). Murkowski (who has announced that she believes it is now a "stronger, better piece of legislation") and Stevens, of course, are not opposed to the Act. California just became the eighth state to pass a resolution urging protection of civil liberties and expressing serious reservations about the misnamed USA PATRIOT Act. Alaska was the second state: Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, Colorado, and Vermont are the others that have decided freedom from a nosy and possibly dangerous government is a good enough thing to try to protect.
Perhaps a few other states will get on this freedom bandwagon now.
Pentagon Sees “Increased Potential” for Nuclear Conflict
-
The possibility that nuclear weapons could be used in regional or global
conflicts is growing, said a newly disclosed Pentagon doctrinal
publication on nuc...
2 comments:
I think you will see other states get on the bandwagon. New Hampshire comes to mind with its libertarian streak and all that's good. It's troubling though that individiual states have to do this. We're suppossed to be one country and now we're going to have some states more free than others? It makes one think of the 19th century when we had slave states and free states. But given what the national Republican Party is doing and the cowardly opposition of Washingtion Democrats, I suppose there is little choice.
Opposition? what opposition? With the exception of Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, West Virginia's Robert Byrd, and Independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont, there is no opposition. That's been the problem all along—the Democrats are not an opposition party. They are colluding in the erosion of the protection of our rights and the Constitution.
Post a Comment