Posted on 05/26/2011 6:54:12 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
Tonight, I cast an affirmative vote in the House to continue three measures which uphold our national security and are in place to protect American citizens against those seeking to do us harm. I urge you to click on the link and read about the Constitutionality of these provisions compiled by my friend and colleague, Rep. Steve King (IA-05), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Like I said before. Most of that has little to do with the Patriot Act. What’s left is kinda small potatoes. I’m pretty sensitive about my constitutional rights too... but that stuff just doesn’t set off my spidey sense.
Then your “spidey sense” is broken.
No, I’m not wrong. There is no 4th amendment at the border. Customs may search anything they like without a warrant. A phone call that crosses the border may also be tapped without warning. There’s nothing new, or alarming, about that. Frankly, I’d be angrier if they ~weren’t~ doing it.
I support the Patriot Act. So great vote. I don’t get what Rand Paul is up to. Understand concerns though, but I support Michele.
With Obama at the helm everything is to be suspicious. But if this is the Patriot Act that Bush created, it more than help bring down terrorists. I’m split only on the issue of what they Obama administration might do with it or has done with it. But, I support the law as passed following 9/11.
She blew it. The patriot act is way too broad an infringement on what our forefathers dies to protect. And remember, they fought for our liberty, not so that the government can snoop on us.
This “Act” is just a short jump to a full police state. What people don’t realize is that these laws can be turned on everyone posting here! Plus the Orwellian naming of it to be the “Patriot” act to fool us all into thinking it’s patriotic - they really think we are all idiots. I’m all for hunting down muslim lunatics, but the patriot act powers are just so sweeping it’s ridiculous. And I’ve read enough of it to be truly worried. The thing is as thick as the healthcare bill and filled with crazy provisions making almost anything interpretable to an act of terrorism.
Sorry Michelle - you should have stood for liberty. We true Americans are brave enough to handle the dangers that come with liberty.
I’ll agree with you on her vote with the Food Bills as being bad. I agree with Her voting for the Patriot Act. But if Rand has better ideas, I have no problem listen to him. But with his senate, rand’s ideas won’t pass. So looks like I’m up a creek without a paddle because with Obama every solution is a bad one. Michele would have been attacked for not voting for the Patriot Act eventually by conservatives when another terrorist attack is thwarted or happens.
Right now, as I said in another thread, unsure of who to trust that includes Palin, Bachmann, Rand. I like them a lot and support them 95% of the time. but now it is getting to where sometimes I get confused, confounded and unsure of where I stand because they sometimes surprise me.
Palin supported McCain in 2010 over J.D. Hayworth and Carly Fiorina when it should have been Chuck DeVore.
Bachmann attacked the 2010 census and voted for the Food bills now seems to be opposing Rand and Col. West on the Patriot Act.
Rubio supports Amnesty.
West voted not to de-fund Health Care by piece meal, when that better than nothing.
Christie supports Global Warming, banning all Guns, and collective bargaining.
Rand is all over the place on foreign policy and skipped Netanyahu’s Congress speech.
Cain doesn’t support auditing the Fed, as he used to work with the Fed, and supported not releasing Osama pictures of his death.
and Paul Ryan voted for tarp and auto bailouts among other thing he did under Bush. Plus nobody looking at Pat Toomey’s budget plan. Just Paul Ryan’s. Like Toomey doesn’t exist.
It’s a pickle, isn’t it?
Who out there will get this monstrously huge federal behemoth off our backs? I really think I will vote for anyone who will break up the status quo. This lockstep Federal entity is out of control. States need to re assert themselves. The power needs to be de-centralized again.
I think that is really it - it’s what Jefferson believed in, de-centralization.
I also think term limits could far into breaking up the entrenched power base - get some actual real people in office again.
I have been of the opinion for some time that it will only happen with the collapse of the welfare-nanny state. Your guess is as good as mine as to when it happens. I personally think we're in the early stages of it now.
States need to re assert themselves. The power needs to be de-centralized again.
Agree, and we may see some culling here when states have to get along without as much help from fedgov. States that have run their affairs in a half-way decent manner may do reasonably well. States like California, Illinois and Michigan will probably go down the toilet.
Who knows? Hoosiers may someday demand that the Indiana-Illinois border be sealed:)
I, for one, would never have attacked any politician for voting against the Patriot Act. Remember: Protectionism is the first step in Socialism followed by Communism. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and when the federal government is granted, BY THE VOTERS, the authority to wiretap ANYONE they suspect as being a terrorist, or threat; when our federal government is granted cart blanche power to detain ANYONE they “believe” to be a suspect, and when our own government believe that torture is the same as interrogation, we are well on our way to a Communist society.
Have you read 1984? Have you read about the rise of Nazi, Germany, and Lenin’s utopia, Communist China, Fidel Castro? Well, if you failed to recognize the similarities between these regimes and our current American socio-political landscape, you must pay closer attention.
As the saying goes, “Politics makes strange bedfellows”. You said:
“...but now it is getting to where sometimes I get confused, confounded and unsure of where I stand because they sometimes surprise me.”
I understand your position, but politics is not so cut and dry. I can only share with you the way in which I look at a candidate.
There are certain issues that are non-negotiables: abortion, our 2nd amendment rights, military defense, marriage, our relationship to Israel, our Constitutional rights, which include our free of religion. If a candidate supports legislation which violates any of these issues, I examine their record and search for any patterns which are contrary to a conservative platform.
I realize that there are in which a candidate must with break from the general political stance, but if I see a pattern which contradicts their conservative principles consistently, I think twice about support that individual.
Bachmann has supported key legislation which flies in the face of a truly Conservative platform. I can’t, in good conscience, support her.
I’m withholding any support for one candidate. I am watching Sarah Palin and especially Herman Cain closely. We’ll see how the race shapes up in the months to come.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.