USD College Republicans
- All
- Climate Change/Global Warming
- Affirmative Action
- Freedom
- Medicare
- No Child Left Behind
- Economics
- Media
- Taxes
- Ridiculous!
- Trade
- Democrats
- Telecom
- The Courts
- Neo-conservatism
- Presidential Race 2008
- Libertarianism
- Earmarks
- Student Government Association
- Congress
- University of South Dakota
- State and Local Politics
- General
- Republicans
- Grassroots conservatism
- Iraq
- Education
- USD Political Science League
- Afghanistan
- SCHIP
- Subsidies
- Spending
- Health Care
- Social Security
- Africa
- Labor unions
- Political Philosophy
- Hyperion Oil Refinery at Elk Point
- Foreign Policy
- War on Terror
House Democrats clueless
The Democrat-controlled House passed the Democratic terror surveillance bill
The bill does not contain immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated with the government in spying on suspected terrorists. Republican Lamar Smith made a good point:
"We cannot conduct foreign surveillance without them. But if we continue to subject them to billion-dollar lawsuits, we risk losing their cooperation in the future."
Of course, that doesn’t upset the Democrats. What’s worse, they’re clueless about the real world implications of warrantless wiretapping. For instance, Rep. Shelia Jackson-Lee of Texas said:
"We couldn't have gone more of an extra mile to make sure we're doing the best for national security," she said.
Really? You tie the Intelligence Community’s hands, and then pat yourself on the back so your constituents think you’re doing good? Shameful.
The libertarian in me hates government intervention. However, that same libertarian also doesn’t want to be blown up in a terrorist attack that could’ve been prevented. The Democrats should stand down and let the Intelligence Community do its job.
Luckily, it’s getting vetoed anyway.
-Matt Hittle
Posted at 04:04PM Mar 14, 2008 by College Republicans in War on Terror | Comments[4]
I wish we could ask one of the founding fathers what they would think about this. Oh here is one from Benjamin Franklin, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
All joking aside that has a point. There should be no shame in making sure that the president gets a warrant before wiretapping. It is a matter of privacy and our rights. Scare mongering never helped freedom.
Posted by Dan Smart on March 15, 2008 at 09:39 AM CDT #
It's easy to apply well-worn quotes to situations. It's harder to analyze them in light of the true fact.
I think that it's unfair to call what I said or what the President said "scare mongering." As far as I know, and as far as anyone else knows, no American citizens have been wiretapped.
You see, America is the telecommunications center of the world. Many foreign countries' communications go through the US, like a call from Saudi Arabia to Germany may go through a terminal in the US. THESE are what the Intelligence Community wants to wiretap, not your telephone.
Posted by Matt Hittle on March 15, 2008 at 12:10 PM CDT #
You don't think that the quote "The libertarian in me hates government intervention. However, that same libertarian also doesn’t want to be blown up in a terrorist attack that could’ve been prevented." is alarmist and fear mongering? Basically you are saying that we should give up this particular right to privacy cause if we don't we may get blown up. I don't know what else that sentence could mean, and I don't know how that isn't fear mongering.
All that should be required of the executive branch is what has been required of the executive branch. 72 hours of wiretapping and you get a warrant, to not follow those rules is too break the law.
As far as my personal rights go. It is not an issue of whether or not my phone is being tapped. It is an issue of whether or not they can. FISA regulations were set up for protection of the American people while being able to still be able to gather intelligence.
Posted by Dan Smart on March 16, 2008 at 07:43 PM CDT #
No, I don't think that the quote "The libertarian in me hates government intervention. However, that same libertarian also doesn’t want to be blown up in a terrorist attack that could’ve been prevented." is alarmist and fear mongering."
Rather, it is my own personal opinion. If I were to have said "You are going to be blown up in a terrorist attack," that would fit the bill as fear mongering.
I'm fine with the original FISA rules being used. That's cool with me. However, I want the government to be able to wiretap within the borders of the US. That's critical. The Democrats want to alter the FISA rules, and they should be blocked from doing that.
Posted by Matt Hittle on March 17, 2008 at 02:33 PM CDT #