Posted on 02/16/2008 7:49:09 AM PST by no nau
Presidential hopeful Ron Paul opposes the extension of the Protect America Act of 2007 as the legislation violates the US Constitution.
"The misnamed Protect America Act allows the US government to monitor telephone calls and other electronic communications of American citizens without a warrant, which violates the Fourth Amendment," Paul said.
Speaking before the US House of Representatives on Wednesday, he said the Protect America Act sidelines the FISA Court system and places authority over foreign surveillance in the director of national intelligence and the attorney general with little if any oversight.
The 10-term congressman added that it does not provide for the Fourth Amendment protection of American citizens if they happen to be on the other end of an electronic communication where the subject of surveillance is a non-citizen overseas.
"We must remember that the original Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed in 1978 as a result of the US Senate investigations into the federal government's illegal spying on American citizens," said Paul.
The libertarian-leaning Texan noted that the only legitimate 'upgrade' to the original FISA legislation would be to allow surveillance of conversations that begin and end outside the United States between non-US citizens where the telephone call is routed through the United States.
"Congress should not use this opportunity to chip away at even more of our constitutional protections and civil liberties. I urge my colleagues to oppose this and any legislation that violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution," Paul concluded.
Constitutionalist Ron Paul is an outspoken critic of current US fiscal and monetary policies. He advocates a full troop withdrawal from Iraq and the abolishment of income taxes.
From the minority came our freedom as a nation. The majority was content in their positions {business or political under the crown} that they were quite comfy with the crowns yoke. History shows us in many places where the outrage of tyranny triggered responses from minorities. This was true in the early 1900 coal wars where miners faced down the Tennessee Militia and it was true in the early 1960's to bring about racial equality as well. While some involved may have had less than honorable intent as does about any group as a whole they produced good results.
I can find common ground with groups like the ACLU or even senator Byrd as they are actually right on an issue once or twice a year :>} The ACLU may have a higher average due to volume of isues. Dissent or rather the right to dissent is a time honored tradition in this nation which is quickly being snuffed out by Political Correctness. Bill Lind and Brad Keena used to have a show called "The Next Revolution" where they addressed such issues. Lind can by no means be considered a kook as he is highly intelligent. Linds lecture on "The origins of Political Correctness" is a classic in itself and highly relevant to todays times.
Ah, finally, some people get it!! Thank you.
Thanks. I found the text of Lind’s speech online.
Ironic isn't it? They're winning the war they started in the 20's and 30's without a shot fired. Marxism, Socialism, or Communism, are all patient predators who will take years of slow infiltration into a political system to destroy it. It comes about so slow few ever realize it for what it truly is. Yet if a person who is say 50 years old takes the time to look at what has happened the change can indeed be seen. This is not the United States of my youth.
The Russians had no intention of starting a nuclear Armageddon any more than we did throughout the Cold War. They were evil communist tyrants, but at heart reasonable people who knew Russia would cease to exist as we would in any such general exchange of nukes.
These terror-sponsoring despots, religious zealots, and nihilistic looney-tunes we now face have no such compunction about releasing the nuclear, (or bacteriological/chemical), genie from the bottle.
Times changed a little after 10:30 AM on September 11, 2001. Its high time we recognize that fact. The savages are still at war with us. In the words of Air Vice-Marshall Keith Park in September of 1940 during the first heavy Luftwaffe attack, “This is only the beginning, they won’t stop now.”
Since you mentioned ordering pizza, you made me think of THIS.
It seems like quite a few "conservatives" are just fine with big intrusive government so long as "their guys" are in charge.
Too bad that when that time comes you will get no pleasure from being right and being able to say "we told you so". It will be too late.
heh heh heh = D
Can I get an Amen? AMEN!
Alas! Regardless of their doom,
The little victims play;
No sense have they of ills to come,
Nor care beyond today:
Yet see how all around ‘em wait
The ministers of human fate
And black Misfortune’s baleful train!
Ah, show them where in ambush stand,
To size their prey, the murderous band!
Ah, tell them they are men!
To each his sufferings: all are men,
Condemn’d alike to groan—
The tender for another’s pain,
Th’ unfeeling for his own.
Yet, ah! Why should they know their fate,
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies?
Thought would destroy their Paradise.
No more;--where ignorance is bliss,
‘Tis folly to be wise.
From hence, ye Beauties, undeceiv’d,
Know, one false step is ne’er retriev’d,
And be with caution bold.
Not all that tempts your wand’ring eyes
And heedless hearts is lawful prize,
Nor all, that glitters, gold.
GRAY
Instead of recognizing the State as "the common enemy of all well-disposed, industrious and decent men," the run of mankind, with rare exceptions, regards it not only as a final and indispensable entity, but also as, in the main, beneficent.
The mass-man, ignorant of its history, regards its character and intentions as social rather than anti-social; and in that faith he is willing to put at its disposal an indefinite credit of knavery, mendacity and chicane, upon which its administrators may draw at will. Instead of looking upon the State's progressive absorption of social power with the repugnance and resentment that he would naturally feel towards the activities of a professional-criminal organization, he tends rather to encourage and glorify it, in the belief that he is somehow identified with the State, and that therefore, in consenting to its indefinite aggrandizement, he consents to something in which he has a share - he is, pro tanto, aggrandizing himself.
The unquestioning, determined, even truculent maintenance of the attitude which Professor Ortega y Gasset so admirably describes, is obviously the life and strength of the State; and obviously too, it is now so inveterate and so widespread - one may freely call it universal - that no direct effort could overcome its inveteracy or modify it, and least of all hope to enlighten it.
This attitude can only be sapped and mined by uncountable generations of experience, in a course marked by recurrent calamity of a most appalling character. When once the predominance of this attitude in any given civilization has become inveterate, as so plainly it has become in the civilization of America, all that can be done is to leave it to work its own way out to its appointed end. The philosophic historian may content himself with pointing out and clearly elucidating its consequences, as Professor Ortega y Gasset has done, aware that after this there is no more that one can do.
Yep, I believe Republicans are going to lose in a landslide in congressional and senatorial seats this year and will probably lose the main election by 5-10%. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Hmmm...socialists can easily redefine “terrorist” and “enabler/sympathizer” to mean “gun owner”, “constutionalist”, “conservative”, “pro-lifer”. We need to be VERY careful about labelling people before they are given due process.
A popular communist tactic is to label anyone who disagrees with you as “insane”.
Your faith in the good intentions of the federal government is curious (especially here at FR), and quite inconsistent with anything I’ve ever studied from the Founders.
Yes.
My wife was visiting with a friend the other day who is involved in Southern Baptist ministry. Her friend told her that many of the 20-something “conservative” southern Baptists are planning on voting for Obama.
The communist government schools, and the feckless seeker churches have been very successful at instilling secular humanism in the minds of even the conservative Christian youth. Unfortunately, so-called “mainstream” establishment conservatism is also infected with moral relativism on so many issues. This CANNOT be blamed on the Dimocrats alone - we need to look in the mirror!
Nothing like a supreme leader who is willing do “do something”/sarc
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin
America is perhaps 20-40 years behind Western Europe in de-Christianization. Evangelicals have failed to stem the tide for a number of reasons, which you have pointed out. The conservative political establishment has failed as well. We will suffer the same fate as Western Europe: socialism, some suppression of conservative Christianity (Catholicism included), and increasing moral degeneracy. The fact that the American people, for all practical purposes, have nothing but dreadful choices for President is telling. So is the Obama phenomenon, where he is sweeping the primaries while offering only rhetoric about "change".
I wish I could be more optimistic. No one wants to be a Jeremiah, but I see no reason to delude ourselves.
You really are a complete friggin' moron, you know that?
No, the Constitution doesn't have a thing to do with any of our laws, or so you fascist bastards would like everyone to believe.
You disgust me.
I’ve seen the surveys where something like 80% of Christian children who attend the commie gov’t schools graduate with the socialist (ie. secular humanist) worldview and basically repudiate any sort of orthodox Christian faith.
The country is going in the wrong direction because there is no discussion of foundational beliefs (let alone consensus!) or how they should be applied to the family, the individual, civil government and the church. The American view of government is regularly cast aside and those of us who stand by them are ridiculed.
We get the government that we deserve...and that probably means Hillary or Barak Hussein...
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.