GOP should lead fight against the Patriot Act


GOP should lead fight against the Patriot Act

And to think they told us the War on Terror was over.
With newsthat the National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of us through one of America’s largest telecoms providers, Republicans have a chance to dramatically recast themselves in the debate over state surveillance and privacy.
An orderrequires Verizon on an “ongoing, daily basis” to hand over information on all telephone calls in its systems to the NSA — both domestically and between the United States and other nations. A White House official has already defended the actions: “On its face, the order reprinted in the article does not allow the government to listen in on anyone’s telephone calls. The information acquired does not include the content of any communications or the name of any subscriber. It relates exclusively to metadata, such as a telephone number or the length of a call.”
Though Americans are usually evenly split over the Patriot Act, I suspect that the brazenness and widespread nature of this particular brand of snooping probably won’t go over well. It’s important to remember that during the Bush years the NSA had, as this USA Today storycharacterizes it, a “massive database of Americans’ phone calls,” so this isn’t exactly new territory. The GOP will undoubtedly be branded a bunch of hypocrites (and in some instances it will be well deserved). What is new in Washington, however, is a gaggle of libertarian-minded GOP politicians that weren’t part of the 99-1 affirmative vote on the Patriot Act and they weren’t here for a decade defending the expansion of FISA courts.

**READ MORE: GOP should lead fight against the Patriot Act | Human Events

From the Patriot Act to N.D.A.A. provisions, to executive orders to C.I.S.P.A. and now this! Where does the infringement on civil liberties and the Fourth Amendment stop? Yes, the G.O.P. should lead this fight, but with the likes of McCain, Graham, and more Republicans leaning toward cyber intelligence to “keep us safe” I doubt it will happen.**


Articulated brilliantly by Judge Napolitano.

Obama White House spying on half of America | Fox News


I may go listen to Napolitano, but I want to say that I, amongst others, were thrashed to pieces on conservative boards when Bush came out with the “Patriot Act” for speaking against it.
I LOVE the man. I have a framed, personally signed autograph of him hanging on my wall!
But rule #1; “One darenst express displeasure with anything Bush.”

Well gee, I wonder how that Patriot Act is working out for them now.


This may happen sooner rather than later. There are still some entrenched neocons like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Mike Rogers, and the newly elected Tom Cotton.


Just the same as it always has. The right question is, “How is the NSA surveillance working out for the Obama administration?”


Republicans are not in the right political situation to lead the charge against the Patriot Act. Many Republicans supported the Patriot Act. However, many democrats are not in the right political situation to oppose the Patriot Act because President Obama signed an extension to the Patriot Act in 2011. In essence the Patriot Act is here to stay unless a future Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional. If I was a campaign manager for a Republican congressman, I would suggest to blame the Obama administration for abusing section 215 of the Patriot Act.


Those aren’t “Neocons”; they’re RINOs.


It’s pretty well accepted that they are neocons, as well as RINOs.

Neocons are generally characterized by rabid interventionism, support for international organizations, and dismissal of civil liberties.


Only by Libertarians.


[quote=“Susanna, post:9, topic:39734”]
Only by Libertarians.


Not at all. Libertarians are their biggest critics, but the term is widely used in academia. It is a term used by liberals and traditional consrvatives. Even by neoconservatives themselves; just try reading FP magazine from the CFR.

The dictionaries and encyclopedias back up what I am saying.


Come on, I’ve educated you on this issue numerous times and you show up with a “Bingo”?

I’m guessing the term wouldn’t have anything to do with people like Irving Kristol, who wrote books like…

Reflections of a Neoconservative: Looking Back, Looking Ahead
Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea
The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays

I’m guessing those evil libertarians should call these people something they don’t call themselves?


I would like to remind people that the republicans have no power to do much since any bills coming out of the House by republicans are systematically ignored by the Senate or played with to the point they are rejected so the democrats can gloat.


No, hypocrites shouldn’t lead the fight on something we all loved in 2002.


I think the more we treat this as a political blame-game, the further we get away from asking the most critical question - what do we expect of our government? Do we expect our government to keep us safe from terror? Or are we willing to admit that our privacy is more important, and the government’s role must therefore be confined to the apprehension of suspects after terrorist acts have occurred. If the latter is the purpose of law enforcement, then we don’t need the Patriot Act. But we need to be honest with ourselves and concede that the restoration of our electronic privacy will make it impractical for the government to prevent terrorism.


Someone should lead the fight against the Patriot Act, if the GOP decides to do so I won’t complain…though I would be (pleasantly) surprised.


I’m a Neoconservative, but when even I turned against it I think there are issues that need to be addressed. However, I just don’t want people to scream “Only democrats did this” hypocrisy is worse then supporting it.


[quote=“Susanna, post:9, topic:39734”]
Only by Libertarians.
[/quote]Libertarians are the real neocons:banana:


One of the few legitimate roles of the government is to protect citizens from foreign enemies; however, there should be a balance of privacy and protection.