Replies

BTW - At the event mentioned in the article where Norquist shared a stage and supported the position of Alec Baldwin regarding the PA, the stage was also shared by the Chairman of the American Conservative Union, David Keene, who also voiced support.

Where is the outcry against Mr. Keene and the ACU?

"BTW - At the event mentioned in the article where Norquist shared a stage and supported the position of Alec Baldwin regarding the PA, the stage was also shared by the Chairman of the American Conservative Union, David Keene, who also voiced support.

Where is the outcry against Mr. Keene and the ACU?"

ANS: Keene does not do so on behalf of and with money from the muj and their supporters. IN fact he is clearly on record as opposed to them, the Islamists, and is not at all supportive of Grover pushing them. Keene speaks on the Act on what he thinks are solid libertarian grounds. Actually, as those who have read the Act know, in the main it extends to law enforcement tools already available for a range of other federal crimes, notably drug dealing and RICO. (see the excellent essay on the Act in the Manhattan Institute's City Journal). Why would you not want the Govt. to have the same intelligence sharing, surveillance or even penalty range for terror cases as they have for these others? There is much more heat than light surrounding this debate. Grover is only laying down the smoke. He can't explain the Act any more than he can explain M1 and M2 to a midlevel econ class. He's a spinmeister and gadfly for a living, the question is why is he spinning for the muj.