Bush's State of the Union Address

[kallahar]

The problem with the patriot act is not that it lets the government get info on, it's that it removes judicial oversight. In the past, the FBI (etc) would have to go to a judge and get the judge's approval to do, for example, a wire tap. With the patriot act, any lone agent can tap whoever he wants without even telling anyone.

Even though some judges will allow wiretaps with very little evidence of a crime, at least we have *a* step of oversight by someone not directly involved in the crime.

[yankee]

I'm not the biggest GW Bush supporter in the world--not even close, but I still can't help but make a few comments.

The gay marriage thing, even tho the word was not spoken, he seemed to say that marrage was an act of god or something and if I read it right something similar to god is against gay people, which is just plain stupid....this also started the religious undertones of the speech, "god is on our side"

IF he would have said that God was against gay people, that would be stupid. But I can't figure out where he said anything even close. Certainly not when he said:

"The outcome of this debate is important -- and so is the way we conduct it. The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God's sight."

also, i noticed the iraq president was seated right next to laura bush for a very nice propaganda shot of him, this brings me to another point, what happened to us having elections over there?

Adnan Pachachi is the President of the Iraqi Governing Council--not President of Iraq. So that the US couldn't be accused of empire building, the Coalition was prompt in turning over all possible governance to an interim body of Iraqi citizens.

See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3062897.stm

oh...just watching a rerun....the drug testing in schools, why spend money on that? wasnt bush jr. a coke head? He seems a little weak to be talking to me about drugs. Oh he was an alcholic to...

What do the allegations (innocent until proven guilty anyone?) of his drug use have to do with testing in schools? If it's a good/bad idea, then it's a good/bad idea whether he's done coke or not (though personally I'm against this one).

[bascule]

What do the allegations (innocent until proven guilty anyone?) of his drug use have to do with testing in schools? If it's a good/bad idea, then it's a good/bad idea whether he's done coke or not (though personally I'm against this one).

I'm angrier at our cokehead president for Operation Pipe Dreams. FREE TOMMY CHONG!

[ch0l0man]

The other notable amendment, which would allow "naturalized" foreign-born citizens to run for president
i missed that in the speach but i dont agree with it at all even when i heard it in demolition man

giving us the ability to take half(i believe) of our SS tax and place it in a private account
this i like very much


as for schools testing for drugs, if the parents in the community wish to have their school test their children then its on them. besides do children even have rights? i mean if they had full rights wouldnt they be responsible for their actions and not their parents.

[blauman]

The problem with the patriot act is not that it lets the government get info on, it's that it removes judicial oversight. In the past, the FBI (etc) would have to go to a judge and get the judge's approval to do, for example, a wire tap. With the patriot act, any lone agent can tap whoever he wants without even telling anyone.

Even though some judges will allow wiretaps with very little evidence of a crime, at least we have *a* step of oversight by someone not directly involved in the crime.

Even those lone agents had a field supervisor, the patriot act make easy to get a warrant, but still there is a procedure to be follow.
Legislation had been tipically folling way behind technology, and this act perhasp is the first serious attent to close that gap.
Another issue worry me more about privacy that the Patriot act, that is the copyright laws, under those, today almost any given criminal can walk into a court house claimming to be John Doe victim of a copyright violation, and get a subopina that will allow him to see your records from your ISP. This is not a goverment issue as much as a profit oriented scheme from companies who may abuse of this law at any time. and the law itself pretty much allow anyone access to private information, all what the law request other than state who you are, is claim to be acting in good faith.
The patriot Act will be amended as the technology develops, and I personally woul very much like to see with in the definitions, not only the "prevent dead, and lose of limbs" but also "major emotional damage" that will perhaps be wide enogh to include pedophiles too. As a right now, a pedophile phisically molest over 100 childrens over his life, and thousands get contacted by him/her... while the lawenforcement are not fast enoght nor have the right tools to fight those criminals, and in most cases fail to prosecute because the criminal privacy laws, and the definition of some graphic material as "Art"... yeaph... Art... wow... we were not born yesterday! but anyway, it happens all the time.

[highwizard]

Legislation had been tipically folling way behind technology, and this act perhasp is the first serious attent to close that gap.
Another issue worry me more about privacy that the Patriot act, that is the copyright laws, under those, today almost any given criminal can walk into a court house claimming to be John Doe victim of a copyright violation, and get a subopina that will allow him to see your records from your ISP. This is not a goverment issue as much as a profit oriented scheme from companies who may abuse of this law at any time. and the law itself pretty much allow anyone access to private information, all what the law request other than state who you are, is claim to be acting in good faith.
The patriot Act will be amended as the technology develops, and I personally woul very much like to see with in the definitions, not only the "prevent dead, and lose of limbs" but also "major emotional damage" that will perhaps be wide enogh to include pedophiles too. As a right now, a pedophile phisically molest over 100 childrens over his life, and thousands get contacted by him/her... while the lawenforcement are not fast enoght nor have the right tools to fight those criminals, and in most cases fail to prosecute because the criminal privacy laws, and the definition of some graphic material as "Art"... yeaph... Art... wow... we were not born yesterday! but anyway, it happens all the time.

From a liberterian stand point, even what your describing is a slippery slope.

[bascule]

Another issue worry me more about privacy that the Patriot act, that is the copyright laws, under those, today almost any given criminal can walk into a court house claimming to be John Doe victim of a copyright violation, and get a subopina that will allow him to see your records from your ISP.

Copyright subpoenias were created in 1998, not by the Patriot act. You're also overstating your case. Conversely I could say "Any fuckhead cop can walk into a courthouse and get a warrant to go through your house and search through all your things" Clearly a courthouse is not a vending machine... they're going to want to know what copyright is being violated and what evidence you have that it's occuring. In the case of the RIAA they had logs linking the sharing of particular songs to particular IP addresses, and needed the assistance of ISPs to trace IP addresses back to account owners.

This is not a goverment issue as much as a profit oriented scheme from companies who may abuse of this law at any time.

Beyond the RIAA, can you name one? The Washington DC District Court of Appeals has at least ruled that copyright subpoenias may not be used to track individuals on file sharing networks, so even that isn't much of a problem anymore.

As a right now, a pedophile phisically molest over 100 childrens over his life, and thousands get contacted by him/her... while the lawenforcement are not fast enoght nor have the right tools to fight those criminals, and in most cases fail to prosecute because the criminal privacy laws, and the definition of some graphic material as "Art"... yeaph... Art... wow... we were not born yesterday! but anyway, it happens all the time.

Can you provide evidence of any statistics as to how rampant a problem pedophilia is?

Contrarily I could say that we know smoking kills over 400,000 Americans each year... so why can't we stop this killer by banning cigarettes? Perhaps it's because there are individuals who would prefer to continue to smoke aware the increased health risk than lose their liberty to do so.

Is pedophilia such a rampant problem as to warrant the invasion of privacy of millions of others?

[DISINGENUOUS]

I like to call that face George made the, "Oh Shit, They aren't buying it like I thought they would" face.
The look on some of the audience members when he mentioned weapons of mass destruction was great. It was obvious some people could tell he was grossly exaggerating some of the facts.
The whole idea of drug testing in schools is ridiculous. Its not the government's place to keep kids from doing drugs. All that will cause is increased spending to punish kids that smoke pot like nearly every other kid has. I'm not promoting drug use in high school, but its not the governments place to fund random drug testing in freaking schools. Its a violation of rights and a huge waste of money that could be spent better.

I'm curious to see what the commentators say about that little Patriot Act bit here in a few minutes when they come on.

Lemme play evil Politician for a moment.

You're missing much of the point, that it IS teh gov't job to keep kids off drugs in public schools.

The schools are funded by public money: tax money if you will. The tax payers are paying for the education that the kids are getting. It's the gov't job to insure that public funds are well spent. They would be remiss in their duty if they knowingly allowed kids to be high on drugs while in school, wasting the publics tax dollars.

Now if the gov't was drug testing in PRIVATE schools, that would be a violation of rights, but not in a public setting.

[bascule]

The schools are funded by public money: tax money if you will. The tax payers are paying for the education that the kids are getting. It's the gov't job to insure that public funds are well spent. They would be remiss in their duty if they knowingly allowed kids to be high on drugs while in school, wasting the publics tax dollars.

Don't you see mandatory drug testing in public schools as an invasion of the students' civil rights?

[ch0l0man]

just because you attend a public school does not give the government a right to test you, that is absurd.
'cause if that was the case they could test you for living in the nation.
it has never been or should ever be the governments job to keep kids or adults off drugs within a public setting.

the right for a school to test should be left to the community the school belongs too and it should be the parents within that community that decides.

being in a private school does not give you anymore rights then being in public.
there is only once place i know that no one has rights and that is when entering any federal building.

[renderman]

just because you attend a public school does not give the government a right to test you, that is absurd.
'cause if that was the case they could test you for living in the nation.

Guilty till proven innocent. It's the new way of things.

[ch0l0man]

Guilty till proven innocent. It's the new way of things.

the new way?
its always been that way, nothing has changed.

[Xodia]

Don't you see mandatory drug testing in public schools as an invasion of the students' civil rights?

While it is a massive violation of rights, I think of it much more as a massive waste of money. Shatter has a good perspective on it though.

I think about it like this, What is going to cost more? Tons of kids getting help with drug problems through government programs, or kids being out of it in school, like it's been for the last 30 years?

[astcell]

We have drug testing in the schools because the parents are not being parents. e have sex ed, and now in CA we have after school activities at school. Parents are happy to sign these parental tasks over to the schools (i.e. government) so they have more time for yoga and lattes.

Remember that school video of kids being put on floors while cops went through the school on a drug search? So sad. Schools today are built like jails, bars and all. So why not just treat them all like prisoners?

Someone has to be the parents and get the kid off drugs, if it is not going to be the parent, it is going to be someone. I feel bad for the kids who are good kids who have good parents.

And Kallahr, we need to seriously overhaul our judicial system. 80% of the state votes for a proposition and one judge throws it out. At that rate, judicial oversight is something we need less of.