Just Watched the Democratic Presidential Debate

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
It should have never have been in the first place.

I think it should have been in place years ago.

I think this thing will be used to the degree that many think it will.

I doubt that. The Act was pushed for by Ashcroft and Bush and should anything go wrong with it their heads will roll. I think they understand this and as such will place much scrutiny on how the "new powers" are used. I also think that with the level of oversight that applies to the Patriot Act law enforcement will be very careful before using the Act at all. I really think fear of being ripped apart by the media and cogress will keep them in line.

I read the article and I found it funny how the right likes to blame everything on the Clinton's. Is it possible that Clinton is supporting Clark, yes, and I hope he is. I hope Clarks VP is either Hillary or Bill, or Clark is the VP for Hillary. Either one would suit fine for me and be a great step towards toppling the dictator (since the right likes to make unfound statements I will throw one in too) that we have now.

Hold on, he didn't blame anything on the Clinton's. He supposes, as I do, that they are very bright, very controlling, and very ambitious people that use their intelligence and their savvy to advance themselves. I think he's right. I think that anyone that thinks the Clintons' interest in the welfare of the democratic party are deluding themselves. They care about themselves. I hadn't really thought of Clark as a staking horse before, but he makes a compelling case. And Bill Clinton has been dropping hints of a Hillary run for the past week (I think he just wants to keep us talking, I don't think she really plans to run in 04). One thing is clear though, they do not want a Democrat in office in 04. Anybody should be able to see Hillary's ambition to be president is unrivaled and they're not going to let Wesley Clark get in the way of that.

I also doubt she'll ever be vice President. I just don't think that she would play second chair to someone when she could be running the show.

[Collegeboy]

He said behind the scheming Clinton's. Which is strong enough of a word to grab what I grabbed out of it.

And towards then others I think it will be used alot, which is sad.

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
He said behind the scheming Clinton's. Which is strong enough of a word to grab what I grabbed out of it.

The Clintons scheme more often then I breathe. It is hardly an unfair criticism.

And towards then others I think it will be used alot, which is sad.

On what basis?

Since it hasn't been employed once in almost 2 years.

[Collegeboy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Albinonewt

Originally posted by Collegeboy
He said behind the scheming Clinton's. Which is strong enough of a word to grab what I grabbed out of it.

The Clintons scheme more often then I breathe. It is hardly an unfair criticism.

And towards then others I think it will be used alot, which is sad.

On what basis?

Since it hasn't been employed once in almost 2 years.

to the first one

And it has not been two years, how old is the Patriot Act?

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


to the first one

And it has not been two years, how old is the Patriot Act?

It was passed in Oct 2001 and went into effect on 26 October 2002. So it has been around for almost 2 years!

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


It was passed in Oct 2001 and went into effect on 26 October 2002. So it has been around for almost 2 years!

Indeed.

But to be fair it has only been in practice for a year (I forgot it was two different dates).

But still, 0 cases devided by 12 months makes an average of zero a month

And if we extrolpate that over the course of 10 years we get a total of Zero.

Honestly though, it'll probably be used at some point, but maybe not even in a library. Checking a terrorist's library reading habits seems of limited use. But, what do I know, I'm not in charge of protecting America from terrorists.

[1stdeadeye]

Please...
The USA PATRIOTS Act is good for the economy! Do you know how many new signs, brochures, Statements, docs, etc. where created to ensure compliance?

Holy compliance spending Batman!

[Albinonewt]

Bill Clinton said over the weekend he thinks Hillary should run in 04'

I find that very strange. It's a much better idea for her to run in 08 for an open white house. In 04 she has to runb against a popular president that won 2 wars and the economy looks to be on track for the next election cycle. On the other hand in 08 she would have an much easier time against a brand new Republican candidate.

I wonder, does Bill want her to try and fail so he's the only Clinton in the White House? Or is he just reading the situation in 04 differently then I am?

[aaron_mag]

Just got back from Fallout so haven't been involved in the discussion.

If what you say is true my bet is that Bill and Hillary are just trying to get the public used to the idea of her running (if what you say is true). The field is cluttered with democrats at the moment. For Hillary to enter would not be smart. I definetely don't think she could win in 2004. She is not well liked.

Besides she won't get the chance to run until 2012 anyway since as I have told you many times Bush is going down.She'll have to patiently wait in the wings to make her grab for glory and power (like she is not used to doing that)

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by aaron_mag
If what you say is true my bet is that Bill and Hillary are just trying to get the public used to the idea of her running (if what you say is true). The field is cluttered with democrats at the moment. For Hillary to enter would not be smart. I definetely don't think she could win in 2004. She is not well liked.

But she leads the other primary candidates by so much if she entered the race she would crush them all, handily.

Besides she won't get the chance to run until 2012 anyway since as I have told you many times Bush is going down.She'll have to patiently wait in the wings to make her grab for glory and power (like she is not used to doing that)

If they think Bush is going down then the best thing for Hillary is to do is to run now.

But the sings are all pointed towards a Bush Blowout in 04

[aaron_mag]

Please don't patronize us with your belief of Hillary's power in the democratic primaries....we all know your real motive.

You just want Hillary against Bush because that would SURELY be a blowout for Bush

Not that we at automags.org decide who will be the prime candidates anyway. I'm sure you will agree, however, that the world would be a much better place if we were given such power (although it seems like there would be alot of infighting).

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by aaron_mag
Please don't patronize us with your belief of Hillary's power in the democratic primaries....we all know your real motive.

Check the polls. The last poll I saw showed her getting more then 45% of the primary vote and nobody else coming close to her. Granted, Clark wasn't in that poll but I don't think he changes the dynamic that much.

You just want Hillary against Bush because that would SURELY be a blowout for Bush

I'll tell ya what. I'm only worried about Hillary if she runs. I know that sounds stupid, but unlike the other candidates she's not willing to spend a year scratching and clawing for a long shot. If she runs that's because she has strong reason to believe she can win, and that I most definitly do not want.

Which brings me back to my original point. Bill thinks she should run AND the current conditions do not show a groundswell of support for ousting Bush, which makes me wonder if he knows something I don't know or if his ego just wants Hillary to fail.

Not that we at automags.org decide who will be the prime candidates anyway. I'm sure you will agree, however, that the world would be a much better place if we were given such power (although it seems like there would be alot of infighting).

I get the sense that the bulk of us on this forum would not have the Democrat's best interest in mind when we voted for our candidates.

I'd vote for Braun, nobody else is.

[Lohman446]

The problems for the democrats is two fold at this point.

Six months ago (maybe even shorter) Bush looked unbeatable (this may be debated, but I think it is actual) to the leaders of the democratic party. As such none of their "winning" candidates were promoted by the party, or by themselves (like it or not the primaries (at that point) were who would have the distinction of being run over by Bush). Now Bush looks beatable, but not by any in the already bloated democratic primary (nine candidates is a mistake by the leaders of the democratic party, or shows no leadership in the party). So the democrats need to find a convincing candidate (after Hillary has repeatedly said she would not run in '04 so she could serve out her term to the people of NY). Hillary is their ideal candidate (I think). I personally do not beleive that Hillary can win... I beleive that if she ran Cheney (who has taken a lot of heat) would bow out, Powell would be VP candidate and either win in '04 with Bush or set himself up to run in '08.

So now the democratic party is trying to come up with a candidate who can have a shot against Bush. I beleive this is Clark (though many have said I'm wrong). Clinton's supporting Clark in '04 (with Hillary as possible VP candidate... not sure). Win or lose this sets up Hillary, loose she runs in '08, win she runs in '12. Clinton support of Clark will bring along the party faithful - Clark's military record will get him looked at by moderates. I beleive you will find that this whole primary thing is a miscalculation of the democratic party that Bush could not be beaten, and now they are realising that a GOOD candidate stands a chance. There problem is, none of the candidates now stand a good chance against Bush. ((EDIT - I have wrongly not considered Clark a current candidate, even though I suppose he now officially is))

PS - politics are ever changing, I may be very wrong, but these are my opinions bases on observation, not necessarily supported by a great degree of knowledge.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Lohman446
I beleive that if she ran Cheney (who has taken a lot of heat) would bow out, Powell would be VP candidate and either win in '04 with Bush or set himself up to run in '08.

I still don't think Clark is a very good candidate at all as I've said, but time will tell.

I do not think that Powell has shot at being on the ticket in 04. He does nothing but but heads with the administration, Republicans on the hill, and has been too pro-UN for most conservatives liking.

Rice would be my choice for VP. And she would be a tough act for Hillary to beat in 08.

[Rooster]

"Besides she won't get the chance to run until 2012 anyway since as I have told you many times Bush is going down."

Only if he gets hit by a rogue pretzel nuke. The Dems are too split, once again. If the party had any sense they would come running to bow at Clark's feet. He's their only chance. But being that common sense and liberalism don't ever go hand in hand, they won't.