Sure... 

A passage from Wikipedia:

"The act also expanded the definition of terrorism to include “domestic terrorism,” thus enlarging the number of activities to which the Patriot Act’s expanded law enforcement powers can be applied."

Now the only problem with this is that their definition of domestic terrorism is so broad that it can include pretty much anyone and any group the government wants.  For example the Department of Homeland Security pulled a page from it's website that listed gay rights, animal rights, anti-war groups, environmentalists, and environmental groups falling under "domestic terrorism" because in their opinion they could spawn domestic terrorists.  So the government has the ability to do searches without their permission, read their financial, medical, email, and phone records and can detain them without charge or court order and not be required to tell friends or family where they have been taken.  A member of a gay rights group that was mentioned was shocked because the group has always been peaceful and it's members are all upstanding citizens in society including lawyers, doctors, etc.

I feel the Patriot Act is *extremely dangerous* because if an administration got in that was even more to the religious right than the Bush Administration (yes I know that seems unbelievable now but you never know what the future holds) they could use the Act to persecute groups they're opposed to such as gays, etc.

Sources: http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid45479.asp http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid45479.asp

Thanks for example Legend11. I agree with you that the Patriot Act is dangerous. However, many of the provisions you mentioned are being challenged as unconstitutional. American citizens and law makers have to power to make changes to this act or remove it altogether. That's my point, soon Chavez will have a stranglehold of Venezuelan goverment where people will no longer have a voice. So what would your choice be Bush or Chavez? 

Neither because they both have the same major flaw that really annoys me, they appoint people to important positions that don't merit it.

You mean like hotdog vendors.

Yes and former FEMA director Michael Brown for example.

Of course, as many people are wont to do, you take me as a Bush supporter because I don't decry his administration as the "worst ever" or brand him a "terrorist" or use similar rhetoric.  We see your opinion clearly here, but I can't respect anyone who buys into that line of thinking.  It's like the Republicans branding the Democrats "traitors" for having a different opinion on Iraq.

BTW, are you really saying that the U.S. is trying to tell other countries the way they should be run?  Do you know what the word "democracy" means?  If the U.S. supports democracy (your point about being friends with Saudi Arabia is well taken, but let's leave that aside for now - I don't agree with our current policy in any case), how is that telling others how to run their country?  They are the ones who vote and choose their own way.

As for capitalism versus other economic systems, please tell me any non-capitalist society existing in the world today that is prosperous.  I think I'll be waiting quite a while since there are none.

Americans don't like communism because we have seen what affect it had on the world from 1917-1991 and continuing in smaller pockets.  Americans aren't fans of brutal, repressive regimes that attempt to dominate other countries, threaten the world with nuclear weapons, kill millions of their own people, etc.

Oh, and one more thing:  if you think terrorism is a "bogeyman," you haven't been paying much attention to the news in the last few years. 

To be fair, before becoming FEMA director he was a horse show judge. ;) 

I sure wish this country could be neutral and and an isolationist like it once was. Every President, from Truman to Bush, has soiled on Washington's Farewell Address. That man surely knew how the world turned.

Chavez is probably going to be the next third world leader to get ousted by a CIA backed coup, mostly due to his left-leaning politics, and more importantly nationalizing his county's oil reserves.

As much as I sympathize with him for being a democratically elected leftist trying to stand up to America, he's pretty much a populist asshole running a program with holes the size of small rainforests in it, and bullying his opponents out of politics.

Competently handled left wing economic policies?
Very good, just look as Scandinavia.

Incompetently handled left wing economic policies?
Very bad, just look at the Soviet Union.