“As I see it, the problem with the [act] is that it expands police powers generally, beyond the implicit limits of the Bill of Rights, and does not limit itself to nor require any measurable success against terrorism.” (source)
“This continuous evasion of judicial review by the administration is much more serious and disturbing than has been discussed and realized… The attribute which most singularly defines this administration is its insistence that our Government is based on unilateral and unreviewed Presidential Decree.” (source)
To me these sound like direct attacks on Team Obama. Expanding presidential powers without checks and balances, evading judicial review, and so on. Doing so is in direct conflict with our constitution and bill of rights. Sounds like the shoe fits, right?
Well, only if you are a liberal. The two quotes above are actually criticisms of the Bush Administration and the Patriot Act. They were screaming about the warrantless wiretapping of potential terrorists after the worst attack on our country ever. Now, as the Great Uniter continues to lie and to mislead Americans every day the left is suddenly eerily quiet about warrantless activities.
Back in January, during the drunken stupor following the election of the Messiah’s historic inauguration, Representative Bob Filner (D-CA) proposed H.R. 675. What is it’s goal?
To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.
Furthermore,
Allows the Secretary of Defense to authorize a Department of Defense (DOD) law enforcement officer to:
(1) execute and serve a warrant or other process;
(2) make an arrest without a warrant for any offense committed in the presence of the officer, or for any felony if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person arrested has committed or is committing the felony; and
(3) carry firearms.“Sec. 1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms… for any offense against the United States.”
Hm. Are those “offenses against the United States” defined anywhere? Nope. Is it possible that police could use their subjective discretion to determine what is an offense against the United States? What about civilians?
Wake up America! This bill gives a variety of law enforcement officials the ability to generate a search warrant ON THE SPOT and then execute that search warrant. No judicial review. No checks and balances. For crying out loud, under George Bush we were not allowed to profile at airports for Muslim terrorists that want to kill us. Now, under the Great Communicator we are willing to give law enforcement officers the right to generate their own warrants? Yeah, that sounds like a great idea. There’s no chance that this power will be abused whatsoever, right?
Why isn’t the press talking about this? Why did they cover ad nauseum all of the strife and angst from the Left over warrantless wiretaps used to protect America from terrorists? Where is the ACLU on this obvious infringement of our privacy? My guess is that they are busy trying to find the next great scoop on our evil CIA and its varied interrogation techniques. Or maybe they are busy drooling over the new cast of “Dancing With The Stars.”
Hat tip to One Penny Sheet.
Yes, Barack Obama was very vocal about rushing legislation. Specifically, he said:
“When you rush these budgets that are a foot high, and nobody has any idea what’s in them and nobody has read them…it gets rushed through without any clear deliberations or debate…”
Unfortunately, he said this on the Randi Rhodes show 11/4/04 while complaining about President GW Bush. Here is the complete quote:
“When you rush these budgets that are a foot high, and nobody gas any idea what’s in them and nobody has read them… it gets rushed through without any clear deliberations or debate and these kind of things happen, and I think that this is in some ways what happened to the Patriot Act.
I mean you remember there was no real debate about that. It was so quick after 9/11 that it was introduced that people felt very intimidated by the administration.”
Now he’s trying to do the very same thing that he was so critical of five years ago? Sounds like a flip-flop to me. Sort of like this, this, this, this, this and this. And this, this and this. And also this and this. (if you want a longer list, go here.) Rushing legislation is always a bad thing. I can understand The Patriot Act given the fact that we were being attacked. What justification does Obama have to offer? None, other than his blatant need to appease his base at the expense of America.
Here’s the audio:
I hate hypocrites. I hate lying liberals. I hate false rage. I hate the New York Times. They buried this story on page A-18. If Bush did it it would be front page news. Oh wait. He did. It was.
New York Times: Human rights advocates are growing deeply uneasy with Mr. Obama’s stance on these issues, especially his recent move to block the release of photographs showing abuse of detainees, and his announcement that he is willing to try terrorism suspects in military commissions — a concept he criticized bitterly as a presidential candidate.
I love when the passionate, tolerant left is wrong. It is even better when their chosen messiah adopts policies that said messiah campaigned against so energetically.
[I originally wrote this June 19, 2007 and am updating it to reflect Lott's upcoming stepping down. Let's hope the folks in Mississippi replace him with a voice of the people.]
“Trent Lott is a member of the old guard if ever there was one. Lott is apparently less-than-pleased that the president’s amnesty bill didn’t exactly slide unnoticed through the Senate on its way to eventual approval by the House. In fact, perhaps it can be said that Lott is furious, and he seems to be placing the blame for the trouble the amnesty bill is facing directly on talk radio! “
Read the entire article here: http://boortz.com/nuze/200706/06182007.html
If I remember correctly talk radio defended Mr. Lott when he put his big foot in his mouth at Senator Strom Thurmon’s 100th birthday party. His quote: “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either.” I don’t remember Lott complaining much when Talk Radio came to his side:
- Rush Limbaugh: “You remember when he got into trouble with the Strom Thurmond comment? We’re out there defending the guy. The White House threw him overboard. All kinds of Republicans were throwing him overboard. Talk radio came to his defense.”
- Glenn Beck interviews Al Sharpton after the Lott comment. Beck disagreed with what Lott said, but also said that the black community gets away with racist statements all of the time. He then said to Al Sharpton “I just hope that you`re with me when Republicans say something very similar and very stupid.”
Hey Senator… it’s WE THE PEOPLE, not We the Elected.
