Discussion in 'Congress' started by Kevin_Kennedy, May 20, 2015.
"The fourth amendment isn't just idle words"
This is the reason I've been watching it at every possible moment. I had to blasting from laptop-to-radio through audio jack while putting my new gutters up today.
This guy from Utah is knocking them outta the park!!
MSM Liberals networks: "But But --- terrorists! Rand Paul is dangerous! He's a right-wing nut. Scary Tea baggers!"
Fox (the only conservative MSM option lol) : "But But --- terrorists! Rand Paul is unpatriotic! He's just another liberal! Scary Liberals!"
You know that neither MSM will mention other Senators from either party in the filibuster (perhaps except Wyden, since they'll need to explain how Rand took a few breaks lol).
Honestly, I didn't even know why they call them MSM, they aren't main stream, no one watches them haha. Alex Jone's three hour radio show alone has more viewers than all of Fox, CNN and MSNBC combined in any three consecutive timeslots. HAHAHAHA
So, Cruz, Paul, Wyden, Lee, Blumenthal (and a Democrat woman earlier) all agreeing that the NSA is acting under General Search Warrants (the ultimate reason the fourth amendment was written and ratified, Writs of Assistance), which assume everyone is a criminal until proven guilty? Does that make these three Democrat Senators racist teabaggers?
Voiced another way, does this single issue make him presidential?
TBH, I actually found myself nodding - I didn't like the Patriot Act when it was signed particularly for the power it gave to a president, and I like it even less now. But I can't seem to get behind a candidate who tells us only what we want to hear and then blames US for not hearing what he said no matter how many times we play the loop back. How can he, with a straight face, look at a video of himself and still insist that what he said was NOT what he said? I can't stand with Rand because I just can't stand Rand.
Voiced another way: Does this single issue make Bush and Clinton unpresdiential? Yes, their support of Writs of Assistance make them Oathbreaking Tyrants rivaling only King George himself.
Then again, I don't know what Hillary supports these days since she's running a campaign of silence in the age of information. At least Bush admits he's a treacherous Oathbreaker. I can only go by Hillary's past in the Senate and Sec of State to guess her current NSA spying stance.
He managed to delay the vote by another day. !!!
Bush anyway... the Patriot Act was his puppy, right? And please give me a link to Bush ever admitting he was a treacherous oathbreaker - I'll run that in a continuous loop. Bush also suspended habeus corpus for people who were deemed as terrorists. I can't think of a situation where Clinton actively supported general search warrants - maybe you can refresh my memory (unless you're referring to the Aldrich Ames thing - where Clinton, after the fact, changed the way counter-intelligence was conducted and was castigated by his Congressional opponents for being too weak...)
You can do better than supposition to guess Hillary's stance on the NSA. She voted for the Patriot Act (as did 96 other Senators), but as early as 2006 she began to question whether FISA was lawful. Unfortunately, she began to waffle in February of this year. Hard to say whether she was trying to duck a conservative 9-11 Jihadi terrorist fear-ball just as she about to announce.
Separate names with a comma.