Dems kill john doe legislation and side with terrorists
- Thread starter sputdr
- Start date
They had to protect their trial lawyer and muslim activist base.
This is the kind of issue that will come back during the next election. I can picture the ad...swarthy men dressed in islamic garb moving furtively through an airport, then whispering on a plane...cut to picture of plane crash...woman's voice: "Congressman Dirtbag voted against protecting ordinary citizens who alert the authorities to terrorist threats. " Close with picture of clean cut looking man," I'm Joe Goodguy, and if you elect me, I will never vote to protect terrorists."
This is the kind of issue that will come back during the next election. I can picture the ad...swarthy men dressed in islamic garb moving furtively through an airport, then whispering on a plane...cut to picture of plane crash...woman's voice: "Congressman Dirtbag voted against protecting ordinary citizens who alert the authorities to terrorist threats. " Close with picture of clean cut looking man," I'm Joe Goodguy, and if you elect me, I will never vote to protect terrorists."
actually, we need a third party that has things more well thought out than the DemPub thingy...
I want : 1) consumption tax to replace the invasive, inefficient, income tax, and forget "progressive" taxation, it's a weapon aimed at prosperous Jews and Protestants that destroys the middle class 2) Informed jury ideas, if a jury unanimously decides to throw out a law it overrides the court 3) Full constitutional protections 4) much, much smaller government that is aware that it is there to protect the borders and deliver the mail
I'm thankful the Democrats at least are refusing to cave in to fear run amok. This is the sort of legislation that 10, 20 years from now we would look back on with shame. It is thinly veiled racism. Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves for supporting it, and I'm sure that sooner or later you will.
Martin
Martin
Why is it racist? A black, asian or middle easterner could just as easily be sued for reporting suspicious behavior as anyone else, unless you think only white people are civic-minded.
I can't see how you could describe this legislation as "fear run amok" either. It's not like the congressmen invented this incident where poeople have been sued for reporting clearly suspicious conduct. This "Flying Imam" incident had all the hallmarks of a staged event, designed to create reasonable fear among other fliers. Some have concluded that it was a terrorist probe. By filing lawsuits against people who were doing their civic duty, these activists are clearly trying to intimidate others who might report questionable behavior in the future.
The potential consequences from allowing a group of activists to chill people's willingness to come forward could be devastating. Those consequences far outweigh the minor threat that a few travelers might be inconvenienced by erroneous reports. If you want to avoid trouble, follow a simple rule. Don't act in a threatening or suspicious manner. That applies double for groups of arab men traveling together. That may be unfair, but it seems a small price for them to pay in a world where all of us are hugely inconvenienced as a result of arab muslim terrorism.
Hey, I'll take my chances.
I love the way all these tough guy red state Republicans, the kind of guys who eat steak for breakfast, wave the flag and send our boys to die in Iraq, still get their panties in a bunch about dying on an airplane. You're much more likely to die crashing your ridiculous dualie into a bridge piling than from some poor Muslim's suspicious behavior on an airplane.
In the grand scheme of things, terrorism is a minor risk. I'm much more worried about the Republicans who are using the Constitution to wipe their pants after they crap themselves.
Martin