A sizable number of Congressional Democrats sided with the GOP and Bush last week, to broaden the government's ability to spy on us.
They want to increase their surveillance capability in order to prevent another terrorist attack.
(You can argue that that's all bullshit, that what they really want is the ability to spy on political opponents, like Nixon did - but for the sake of argument I'm gonna take their word. And the word of the Democrats who voted with them).
Today Digby raised a point that needs to be discussed:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/
"How much risk are Americans prepared to live with? After 9/11, the leaders of this country used a fleeting sense of panic to inculcate in the nation's collective mind that the government has a responsibility --- and the ability --- to literally do everything they conceivably could to prevent another terrorist attack, including usurping some of our most basic freedoms...With yet another assault on the constitution dutifully passed, this time with a Democratic majority, I have to say that it's clear from where the existential threat really comes and it's a lot closer to home than al-Qaeda. It's coming from within, from a governing class of both parties who are creating a national security apparatus that is going to end up squeezing the lifeblood of liberty right out of this country --- all in the name of keeping us safe...."
Well, how about this? I'd rather be free than safe.
Today's politicians - Jim Webb, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the rest MUST be included, because they allowed it - are creating a police state.
Its an inescapable conclusion. That's what they're doing. They're whittling away freedoms in order to provide more security.
It's debatable whether that bargain pays off. Russia is not secure, and they have less freedom. England is a surveillance state, but all those cameras never stopped the IRA.
Saudia Arabia has a draconian secret police system, as does Egypt - and those countries are not secure.
My question is this: who says these politicians get to make that trade for me?
I was born a US citizen. I was born into a country where my unalienable rights are spelled out. The REASON the USA was formed was to protect those rights.
Who is Harry Reid to give that away? Who is Jim Webb to give that away?
How much security do I need? Well, how about you let ME decide that? How about we use the Constitution as a bedrock set of principles that you won't fuck with?
Freedom means a lot of things - but one thing it means is taking responsibility for yourself. I want to be free to decide how I live, and free to decide what risks I face.
I don't want a nanny state. If I wanted to be perfectly safe I would move into a jail cell.
What the Democrats are doing is building me a nice, safe cell, bit by bit.
Screw that. I'll face some risk.
...O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
The answer to that question is "No, it doesn't."
We are less free, because we are less brave. The biggest wimps among us are calling the shots.