Posted on 05/19/2015 7:15:41 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
PHILADELPHIA — Republicans clashed over the future of government surveillance programs on Monday, highlighting a deep divide among the GOP’s 2016 presidential class over whether the National Security Agency should be collecting American citizens’ phone records in the name of preventing terrorism.
Republican White House hopeful Rand Paul decried the phone data program and other post-9-11 domestic surveillance as unconstitutional at a Monday event outside Philadelphia’s Independence Hall.
“We will do everything possible – including filibustering the Patriot Act – to stop them,” the Kentucky senator charged in front of the building where the Declaration of Independence was signed.
Three hundred miles to the north, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie offered an unapologetic defense of NSA phone records collection as he faced voters in the first-in-the-nation primary state of New Hampshire. Christie, who said he used the Patriot Act as a federal prosecutor, argued that government surveillance powers should be strengthened, not weakened.
. . . . .
During an interview with The Associated Press, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker three times declined to say whether he supported reauthorizing the program. He said it was “important to be able to collect information like that,” as long as there were unspecified privacy safeguards. After the interview, a spokesman emailed to say that Walker supported continuing the program as it exists, with the NSA storing American phone records.
(Excerpt) Read more at aikenstandard.com ...
|
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, strikes a middle ground, supporting a Senate version of the House bill that preserves the program while ending NSA bulk collection and storage.
Is Cruz’s stance a good thing or bad thing? I can’t decide he’s not known for being a middle of the road person, and this is what it looks like to me ...
Personally, I’m OK with his position.
The Patriot Act was an attempt to keep us safe yet let the invasion of the US continue. It's cost us our freedoms and hasn't kept us safe.
I thought Cruz is pro-Constitution. Why is he taking a middle-of-the-road position on this?
There are, I repeat, there are NO TERRORISTS! Obama hath spoken. Whatever doers-of-violence there are, it is the work of home grown, right wing, self-styled patriot nut jobs.
If there are no more terrorists and terrorism, and Al Qaeda is defeated and on the run, and ISIL (he won’t say ISIS) is “somebody we can work with if we just stop oppressing them,” then it is insanely stupid to support a Patriot Act that serves only to bow to the will of the evil administration.
NSA surveillance of private citizens’ electronic communications are a violation of the US Constitution, period. For a Republican candidate to support this act and NSA’s implementation of it is reprehensible, and THAT candidate won’t get my vote, ever.
I would be for it if it hadn’t been abused over and over. I’m certain that Obama is using the information to compromise his political opponents. General Petraeus is the first name to come to mind.
Name one government department or program that has ended by itself or has NOT become a political plaything? The Dept of Education, EPA, Dept of Energy, Federal Reserve - all started with lofty goals of "helping" Americans in one way or another. They have instead become expensive organs to promote and protect the left/progressive state.
One thing is absolutely certain DHS and domestic spying - what was started with the intent to protect Americans will soon become a tool of one group in power to control another. Rand Paul is absolutely correct - this beast must be killed.
Some of your thoughts were running through my head-——
I hate the Patriot Act and I would like to get rid of the whole dang thing but the bulk collection is the worst of it. Ted Cruz is trying walk the fine line to the GOP nomination right now so I’ll give him a pass for at least wanting to get rid of the bulk collection.
Mitt Walker as I have suspected all along is nothing more than another GW Bush type GOPe go along. I am sick of having him jammed down our throats like he’s the inevitable conservative candidate. The guy will not take a position unless you pin him to the ground and he won’t even announce his candidacy.
Ted Cruz or Donald Trump are the only two people right now with the force of personality to make any significant changes to this damaged country. Although Trump may be right when he says “the politicians are not going to get you to the promised land”.
Walker is dead to me.
“The guy will not take a position unless you pin him to the ground ...”
That bothers me, a lot. We’ve been stabbed in the back so often by pretend conservatives that I am skeptical of any politician. but when they won’t even tell us their stance on issues or flip 3 times, as Walker has done on amnesty, the latest being recently perhaps because it was politically expedient, my BS meter gets pegged.
I saw a picture of Mitt Walker with his brothers. Mitt, Jeb, George and Walker. All the same! Flip-flop I don’t know were I’m at.
Welp...Scratch ol Walker.
Without probable cause, a citizen is protected by that lil ol document crafted many moons ago.
Give up on the constitution....you get government’s thumb pressing down on top of the citizens.
No thanx...preserve and protect the constitution and the bill of rights.
First step....all of the 911 maniacs were Saudis who were no longer in the US illegally. How about we identify Saudi Arabia as a sponsor of terror and make some better friends?
The problem is the MSM will back him - or Jeb or Rubio. And the conservatives that don’t really follow politics though the year will believe that they are conservatives. And the MSM, including Fox, will ignore Cruz as if he’s not even running.
Makes me feel like I am in the USSR, with government-controlled media brainwashing the masses. The real problem is that our masses are indeed being brainwashed, while the Soviet people knew they were being lied to.
Crap.
I would support Walker over Bush or Rubio, but lukewarm support at best, because of this.
Cruz still wins.
Texas senator Ted Cruz, a rival to Paul for the libertarian voting bloc, is an original co-sponsor of the Senates version of the USA Freedom Act and said he was urging GOP leadership to bring the bill up for a vote and allow it to pass. Asked by the Guardian on Tuesday if he agreed with Pauls assessment that the bill did not go far enough, Cruz said the legislation strikes the appropriate balance and, critically, ends the governments bulk collection of phone metadata from law-abiding citizens.
He added: It respects the Fourth Amendment privacy rights of Americans, and at the same time it ensures that law enforcement has the tools to target radical Islamic terrorists. If there is probable cause to suspect an individual of working with terrorists, seeking to injure or murder other Americans, we need to have the tools to prevent those attacks before they occur.
Available here: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/13/bill-banning-nsa-from-bulk-collecting-phone-calls-goes-to-voteI've seen other commentators that would dispute this interpretation by Cruz of the Freedom Act's constitutional issues. Judge Napolitano, for example, thinks it is still goes over the 4th Amendment line and in fact does not rely on probable cause.
Thanks for that in-depth analysis SR.
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.