Comments on: Patriot Act Used Almost Always Against Non-Terrorists Last Year

By: J. Clifford

J. Clifford — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:39:55 +0000

Okay, so I think we see what happens when a Democratic cheerleader runs up against reality. It isn’t pretty, and it sure isn’t constructive.

Could you respond to some of the facts here, rather than being defensive?

Oh, and did you make a call?

By: ReMarker

ReMarker — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:12:17 +0000

Whatever, guys.

It has been interesting talking to you.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:41:51 +0000

Look, in that thread you linked to you yourself advocated “being patient and supporting him,” as he is “doing a job that requires millions of people’s support.” You yourself said that criticizing Barack Obama’s policy actions is “Beating up on Obama, means falling into a conserva-trap, then,,, no more Obama. I choose to support Obama, and beat up on those that don’t.”

I can listen to your criticism, which really isn’t constructive, considering that its main point has been to ask us to shut up and support the President. I listen to your criticism. I hear it. I don’t AGREE with it.

By: J. Clifford

J. Clifford — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:37:10 +0000

What does that phrase really mean, “constructive criticism”? The way it’s often used in political circles means to ask a politician to please change something negative that they’re doing, but not to make a big fuss, or demand accountability, or to name consequences, because that’s all too harsh.

We’ve written plenty here about what should be done: Pass Feingold’s stronger bill, the Justice Act. That’s our constructive advice.

Our criticism is that the majority of Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee are standing with George W. Bush and the Republican Party, against the Constitution.

Am I going to ridicule Democrats who talked on and on last year about defending the Constitution, and ending the politics of fear, and now are defending the worst aspects of the Patriot Act? You bet I am. They deserve ridicule.

By: ReMarker

ReMarker — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:19:58 +0000

“What you ask for is that we not criticize Barack Obama, or that we not make our criticisms public.”

Thanks for telling me what I am asking. Again, you are mistaken. I am asking that I.T. consider constructive criticism as a better way of making the points on the merits than RIDICULE. Tom articulates RIDICULE’S shortcomings, well.

Can you tell I think I.T. can’t take constructive criticism? (Rhetorical).

For sure, be as you will, np for me.

I’m just saying….

By: randy ray haugen

randy ray haugen — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:00:14 +0000

sorry to say, remarker, but, j.clifford and jim have some very valid points. i support obama and his efforts, everyone says he’s taking on too much, but, he really is backing away and giving in far to often.
and this “patriot act” is really just a new arm in the long lost and totally wrong-minded drug war.
fiengold is a “we can” guy, but, the lack of support among his own party is disgusting. same for those who should be with obama. blue dog democrats are worse than the republicans, at least you know where they’re coming from.
how long does it take for a public official to be bought or scared off? about ten months or less, i guess.
obama is first and foremost a politician. if he wants to see any accomplishments in his administation the first thing he has to do is stay in power. that means thinking about the next election cycle.that, apparently, means compromise, compromise, compromise. i agree with I.T.and thinks thats wrong. i would rather see him go down in defeat, staying with the people who elected him, and showing the world how petty and fraudulent the right wing has become.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:05:23 +0000

ReMarker, it was not the Democrats who achieved the release of information about warrantless spying and other government abuses. It was non-partisan actors who accomplished that: journalists (mainly at the Washington Post and New York Times) and organizations such as the EFF and ACLU.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:00:51 +0000

It strikes me that

A) J. Clifford’s article here is making factual statements
B) you’re the one making things personal rather than policy-related on this thread
C) In the “movie” you link to, what you characterize as “ridicule” is criticism of Barack Obama. What you ask for is that we not criticize Barack Obama, or that we not make our criticisms public.
D) Nobody’s forcing you to visit and read this web page.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion. But we are who we are. We are blunt. We are impolitic. We do not have courtly manners. We are not interested, as the “big boys” you mention are, in cultivating reciprocal personal relations with politicians. That’s not going to change. If you want it to change, you’re going to find yourself continually disappointed.

By: ReMarker

ReMarker — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 12:48:47 +0000

Tom thanks for the reasonable words.

J. Clifford the only thing I am insisting on is I.T., often times, uses RIDICULE (one of the right wingnut’s favorite techniques) instead of constructive criticism to make its points about things with which they disagree. Consequently that’s a wide brush approach and paints “unresponsibles” into its (I.T.) ridicule, as Tom pointed out.

The “movie” to which I refer is the “ridicule vs. disagreement” banter between Jim and I.

When I found I.T., I had high hopes I had found a progressive blog grounded in “non-right wingnut techniques” that makes their points on the merits in a “constructive critism” way, as many of the progressive big boys do. Examples: Fire Dog Lake, Alternet, McClatchy, Media Matters, Daily Beast, Daily Kos, Think Progress, etc.

I am dissapointed.

By: J.Clifford

J.Clifford — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:47:03 +0000

You know, Tom, the best way to guarantee that your voice won’t be heard is to give up and not say anything. The best way to guarantee that voting doesn’t help to make things better is to go around telling people that their vote doesn’t count. The best way to get people to tune out is to tell them there’s nothing we can do because we’re already doomed.

It’s also not very helpful for people like ReMarker to keep on insisting that the Democrats are going to solve all our problems, even when it’s the Democrats who are making the problems.