Even the Washington Post is getting tired of all the lies about it: In Baltimore, Mr. Edwards decried "the notion that they are going to libraries to find out what books people are checking out." But this authority existed prior to passage of the Patriot Act; the law extends it to national security investigations, which isn't unreasonable, and requires court approval... Tuesday night Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry -- who at least has the good grace to acknowledge his vote in favor of the Patriot Act -- noted, as he surveyed the debate audience, that there were "people from every background, every creed, every color, every belief, every religion. This is, indeed, John Ashcroft's worst nightmare here." Mr. Kerry got his laugh, but he sullied himself in the process. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57924-2003Sep10.html
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Executive Branch already have the authority to suspend the writ of habeus corpus beofre the PA anyway?
Well, it's been done before. I have no idea what the law specifically says, but Lincoln and, I believe, Roosevelt did it in times of emergency. My feeling is this: Honest men can legitimately debate this issue, and reasonably disagree. Those whose job it is to ferret out bad guys alsways want more power to do so. And some other people feel that the freedoms they may give up aren't worth it. Fair enough. But between the absolute lies the opponents tell, and the knee-jerk "Bush and Ashcroft are leading a facist takeover" crowd, honest debate and reflection are impossible. The left doesn't really want to solve problems - they want clubs to beat somebody over the head with so they can get back in power. It's all they seem to care about.