A Repub's Point of View:Domestic Surveillance and the Patriot Act

Domestic Surveillance and the Patriot Act

by Ron Paul
Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

Of course most governments, including our own, cannot resist the temptation to spy on their citizens when it suits government purposes. But America is supposed to be different. We have a mechanism called the Constitution that is supposed to place limits on the power of the federal government. Why does the Constitution have an enumerated powers clause, if the government can do things wildly beyond those powers – such as establish a domestic spying program? Why have a 4th Amendment, if it does not prohibit government from eavesdropping on phone calls without telling anyone?


We're told that September 11th changed everything, that new government powers like the Patriot Act are necessary to thwart terrorism. But these are not the most dangerous times in American history, despite the self-flattery of our politicians and media. This is a nation that expelled the British, saw the White House burned to the ground in 1814, fought two world wars, and faced down the Soviet Union. September 11th does not justify ignoring the Constitution by creating broad new federal police powers. The rule of law is worthless if we ignore it whenever crises occur.


The administration assures us that domestic surveillance is done to protect us. But the crucial point is this: Government assurances are not good enough in a free society. The overwhelming burden must always be placed on government to justify any new encroachment on our liberty. Now that the emotions of September 11th have cooled, the American people are less willing to blindly accept terrorism as an excuse for expanding federal surveillance powers. Conservatives who support the Bush administration should remember that powers we give government today will not go away when future administrations take office.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul295.html
via:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/12/27/144255/03

That's some of my ancestors' best work!

Not a massive difference but Should be accurate

Welcome to DU!

:toast:

There are a muffled few (Freedom Fries Jones is another) that have been outpsoken critics of this regime. Paul is a Liberatarian wrecking havoc in Congress as a Repugnican. He's their James Trafficant...a loose cannon who doesn't drink the kool-aid and won't play nice with other Repugnicans.

The Repugnican mantra still maintains that there is some "wartime" that is happening now or whenever that warrants this illegal activity. Of course there isn't a declaration of war...just s vague resolution that was breeched the moment the phony intel came to light. If the Repugnicans want to play "legalistics" here, let them do what they've had the power to do for quite some time...ramrod a real Declaration of War through both Houses and then they can eliminate Habeus corpus like Lincoln did or intern A-rabs like FDR.

Sadly, there are still too many spineless Democrats who can't even say that this regime "lied", yet really get any outrage over the spying and other illegalities that are now coming to light. They're still worried that by "developing a pair" they'll face the wrath of Rushbo and Faux and made to look bad. It's sad, since priority one...before a ScAlito or budgets or resolutions naming yet another ugly building after an old beaurucrat...is to demand full bi-partisan, joint House/Senate hearings into the illegal spying and other activities by this regime. It's time!

Ronald Ernest Paul, MD (born August 20, 1935), a physician and Texas politician, is a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from Texas's 14th Congressional District (map) and a former Presidential Candidate of the United States Libertarian Party. First elected to Congress as a Republican in the 22nd District in 1976, he served through 1984, and then retired due to his support for the concept of term limits for congressmen. After his failed presidential bid in 1988, Paul returned to Congress in 1996 — again elected as a Republican, but against the wishes of the local party, who had backed Paul's primary opponent, the incumbent Democratic representative who had switched party affilation.


Paul professes a limited government paleolibertarian ideology (a libertarian ideology mixed with some social conservatism). His regular votes against almost all proposals for government spending, initiatives, or taxes, and his frequent dissents in otherwise unanimous votes, have irritated some of his Republican colleagues and have earned him the nickname "Dr. No".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

At least on the surface he seems to have alot of tenacity, courage and ethics. Strange he is with the company of Bush and Delay.

A search of his writings gives a very revealing snippet of his atitudes