From: "Mark" 

Cmon Rich I said, now three times, that this particular loophole can be
closed for all I care. They can do it tomorrow if they like, no skin off my
teeth.

I don't adore the Patriot Act, rather, I appreciate its necessity in
today's world -- first you have to kill them so you can live, if you can't
find them, you can't kill them.

Going back to a tied-isolated-hands 9/10 world is not an option. As much as
many pine for that false reality, they cannot have it and remain among the
living. 


"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in
message news:45ee32a3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Your adoration of the Patriot Act belies your faith in the overall
> goodness of people in the USA.
>
> If you were indeed old fashioned you would take umbrage over all these
> incursions on our liberties.
>
> Mark wrote:
>> It boils down to this then Rich, I have faith in the overall goodness of
>> people in general, those charged with forwarding the goodness of the USA
>> in particular. > the way it is for me>
>>
>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote
in message
>> news:45ee2e0c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> or it's used to coerce and 'sicken' Federal prosecutors as per the
>>> Senate testimony
>>>
>>> Mark wrote:
>>>> Look, as I've already said, I have no problem with the
loophole being
>>>> closed, but it's still just not that big a deal >>> from self-serving speeches littered with faux questions by Levin,
>>>> Specter et.al. just before they can't find any reason not
to confirm>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>> news:45ee2a35$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>> It's not the hiring and firing that is the problem.
It's the bypassing
>>>>> of Senate confirmation in the process due to the Bush
sponsored change
>>>>> to the Patriot Act that is the problem - Going from 120 days to
>>>>> indefinite. It should not be a partisan issue. I
wouldn't give the
>>>>> Dems that power either
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark wrote:
>>>>>> I'm still nonplussed about this whole thing. The
president is
>>>>>> empowered to fire and hire them at will, he doesn't need any
>>>>>> well-vetted reasons for it. You're saying he
should have not fired
>>>>>> them because some Dems would complain about it? Why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look, don't get me wrong, it's fine with me if
that loophole is

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5