Neocons disgusted with Rand's NSA bill

[Warlord]

But among many neoconservatives, Paul’s legislation was met with disgust.

“It’s obvious that this is a seriously complicated issue with very real implications for U.S. national security,” Michael Goldfarb, a former Weekly Standard deputy editor, said in an interview.

“And it’s fundamentally unserious to come out 24 hours, not even, after this is revealed publicly and offer your legislative fix that is totally overbroad and completely shuts down the government’s ability to mine data in this manner,” said Goldfarb, who worked on McCain’s 2008 campaign.

“Is it possible that the government overreached here? Sure,” he said, adding the program could be due for “tweaks.” “[But] is Rand Paul doing anything but trying to exploit this and demagogue it? It may put people in a tough spot … it may be clever politics in the moment, but is it good policy?”

Equally problematic for Paul, Goldfarb said, is that the revelation in the Guardian newspaper about the scope of phone records being culled by the government had forced Obama to take a position that ultimately aligned more closely with the hawks than with Obama’s past statements.

‘”This is the day where Obama finally admitted that it is not a false choice between national security and our privacy or civil liberties and values, and Rand Paul’s response takes the same naive, demagogic approach as Barack Obama” has in the past, he said.

Paul advisers say that they – and the former Bowling Green ophthalmologist – recognize that the political strike zone here is pretty narrow.

Many Americans may recoil at the idea of government surveillance, but voters, particularly within the GOP base, have hardly abandoned their post-9/11 enthusiasm for robust counterterrorism programs.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/rand-paul-nsa-92434.html?hp=f1

[Brett85]

Just read that. It makes me feel better about Rand when these kind of people are attacking him.

[V3n]

I just can't wait to see people put their name on record as a "NO" vote against the 4th Amendment.. put their heels to the fire and see who the traitors are!

[Texan4Life]

Goldfarb... more like Goldfart

[Warlord]

I just can't wait to see people put their name on record as a "NO" vote against the 4th Amendment.. put their heels to the fire and see who the traitors are!

They've been pretty much doing it for 12 years, why would they stop?

[FSP-Rebel]

They've been pretty much doing it for 12 years, why would they stop?

Cause the outrage is piling up and people are less inclined to believe there's a terrorist behind every door.

[V3n]

They've been pretty much doing it for 12 years, why would they stop?

Optics... They called it the "PATRIOT Act" - not the "Repeal the 4th Amendment Act".

This one is called "4th Amendment Restoration Act". Say 'no' to that.

[tsai3904]

This one is called "4th Amendment Restoration Act". Say 'no' to that.

They did in December 2012. Rand introduced it as an amendment to FISA and it got 12 votes for and 79 votes against.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=2&vote=00234

Here's the text:


SEC. __X. FOURTH AMENDMENT PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION ACT OF 2012.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Fourth Amendment Preservation and Protection Act of 2012''.

(b) Findings.--Congress finds that the right under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures is violated when the Federal Government or a State or local government acquires information voluntarily relinquished by a person to another party for a limited business purpose without the express informed consent of the person to the specific request by the Federal Government or a State or local government or a warrant, upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

(c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``system of records'' means any group of records from which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular associated with the individual.

(d) Prohibition.--

(1) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Federal Government and a State or local government is prohibited from obtaining or seeking to obtain information relating to an individual or group of individuals held by a third-party in a system of records, and no such information shall be admissible in a criminal prosecution in a court of law.

(2) EXCEPTION.--The Federal Government or a State or local government may obtain, and a court may admit, information relating to an individual held by a third-party in a system of records if--

(A) the individual whose name or identification information the Federal Government or State or local government is using to access the information provides express and informed consent to the search; or

(B) the Federal Government or State or local government obtains a warrant, upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[Aratus]

Just read that. It makes me feel better about Rand when these kind of people are attacking him.


They've been pretty much doing it for 12 years, why would they stop?


Cause the outrage is piling up and people are less inclined to believe there's a terrorist behind every door.

not that we are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel as of yet, but if we want our Republic back, we must demilitarize our society

[V3n]

They did in December 2012. Rand introduced it as an amendment to FISA and it got 12 votes for and 79 votes against.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lm5t1jWrBS1qc0zq7.gif

[eleganz]

David Lane came to the rescue. When prominent evangelical leaders are backing Rand like that even in such a tough situation where 'national security' is supposedly involved...we're off to a great start.


Evangelical conservative David Lane predicted Paul’s anti-government snooping stance would help him if he runs in 2016.
“Rand seems to be uniquely positioned,” said Lane, who organized Paul’s trip to Israel earlier this year, during which the Senator sought to ameliorate fears his foreign aid-slashing stands meant he was dovish. “Rand is standing up for the American people vs full-scale government force and intimidation.”
With his anti-drone filibuster and this, Lane said the senator “has coalesced people across the political spectrum — Democrats, Independents and Republicans — who are offended and outraged at the thought of their government snooping and spying on them.”
Another Paul adviser said that, despite this specific issue, the senator still plans to try to find common ground with those neoconservatives who are open to having a dialogue with him – and that recognizes that not all of them are.
“Rand Paul has consistently demonstrated a willingness to reach out to people who may hold different perspectives and to engage in … discussions about where there are opportunities for common ground,” the adviser said. “Of course he’ll continue wanting to have discussions with those people.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/rand-paul-nsa-92434_Page2.html#ixzz2Vdr8EBEc

[Occam's Banana]

But among many neoconservatives, Paul’s legislation was met with disgust.

"The Almighty says this must be a fashionable fight. It's drawn the finest people." - Stephen the Mad Irishman (Braveheart)

[Brett85]

Why does Rand think he needs to reach out to "neo-conservatives?" In my opinion he should reach out to rank and file Republicans, who aren't the same as neo-conservatives.

[S.Shorland]

When people see through all this (when the wheels come fully off the economy,soon now) and bread and circuses no longer work: HOW BIG an event will be required to cow an angry populace into submission?

[Warlord]

Cause the outrage is piling up and people are less inclined to believe there's a terrorist behind every door.

They won't stop. They will dig in if anything. Tyrants always do.

[supermario21]

Why does Rand think he needs to reach out to "neo-conservatives?" In my opinion he should reach out to rank and file Republicans, who aren't the same as neo-conservatives.

Many rank and file Republicans subscribe and have subscribed to the neocon worldview without knowing it. Even if they aren't neoconservatives, they're closer to that position than ours.

[Warlord]

Yeah some people demand the strict interpretation of neocon. That would be about 20-50 people in the US, ex-trot's with a specific agenda and funded by thinktanks and weapons manufacturers.

However the beliefs of the paid propagandists - that liberty must be compromised for some feeling of security - are unsurprisingly widely held mainly because they've been successful at spreading their poison and if you throw in the word "terrorist" people get scared and agree to anything as Greenwald points out. However, it looks like Obama and the neocons might be overplaying their hand and so the puerile propaganda might no longer work.

This doesn't make the "followers/ "believers" or consumers of propaganda are actual professional neocons but it does mean we CAN use the term a bit looser than we did in the past. These people are persuadable. The propagandists will never like Rand Paul no matter how much he reaches out to them because they're not objective and they're not there to say good things about someone like Rand. Their influence is waning though and he only needs to reach the persuadable consumers of the propaganda and provide an alternative view with a robust defense of liberty and the Bill of Rights. This is a powerful message.

[Noob]

Support Rand Paul and S. 1037

https://secure.freedomworks.org/site/Advocacy?alertId=1075&pg=makeACall

[JCDenton0451]

“This is an all-out assault on the constitution,” Paul declared angrily, saying Candidate Barack Obama, circa 2007, agreed with him.

It was at odds with the opinions of the foreign policy hawks he has privately courted – Paul has had meetings with, among others, Republican mega-donor Paul Singer, a pro-Israel hardliner, and former Mitt Romney adviser Dan Senor.

My question is why do "pro-Israel hardliners" like Singer support domestic surveilance of Americans?? compromise, gwax23 this is a question for you.

As if I had any more reason to be anti-Zionist...

[anaconda]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6_1Pw1xm9U

[anaconda]

Just read that. It makes me feel better about Rand when these kind of people are attacking him.

Rand busts his butt for liberty on a daily basis.

[anaconda]

Why does Rand think he needs to reach out to "neo-conservatives?" In my opinion he should reach out to rank and file Republicans, who aren't the same as neo-conservatives.

Agreed. But I think he is already doing this. Much of Rand's method seems to take him directly to the people. For some reason I can't explain, Rand is also getting A LOT of help from the main stream media right now. I worry that the powers that be are setting him up to be POTUS, only to pull the plug on monetary policy and sink the whole ship in another crisis-response tactic.

[JCDenton0451]

Remember the neocons control Fox News, and most other "conservative" media outlets including talk radio, they also control most of the money on the right. This means they still have a great deal influence, even though their ideas are completely bankrupt at this point.

[Warlord]

Remember the neocons control Fox News, and most other "conservative" media outlets including talk radio, they also control most of the money on the right. This means they still have a great deal influence, even though their ideas are completely bankrupt at this point.

They don't "control" Fox News. Ailes does and he obviously decided after the primary in 2010 that they could book Rand

The neocons have numerous of their own thinktanks, foundations and publications most of them all tied to Kristol with budgets of 5-10m/year, they're small fry compared to the likes of Fox but they make a lot of noise.

[JCDenton0451]

Fox News Channel is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who is a neocon. Ailes is simply a hired manager.

Rupert Murdoch bankrolls the Weekly Standard, need I say more?

[Cap]

Fox News Channel is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who is a neocon. Ailes is simply a hired manager.

Rupert Murdoch bankrolls the Weekly Standard, need I say more?Yup truth.+

[supermario21]

Almost all of the "conservative" guests after Rand and throughout the day were defending Obama and/or the program in general. Bill Kristol even said it was dangerous for conservatives and Republicans to tie this to the IRS scandal because he felt that while the IRS targeting was unjustified, the NSA really wasn't doing anything wrong. LOL.

[Warlord]

Fox News Channel is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who is a neocon. Ailes is simply a hired manager.

Rupert Murdoch bankrolls the Weekly Standard, need I say more?

Murdoch is a strange one. He's pro-war because it sells papers and generates interest. Like the Bond villain LOL who wanted a massive war for ratings. seriously.

Ailes is more than a hired manager he runs the thing day to day. Murdoch does not have the time for that.

[Warlord]

The other reason Murdoch is pro-war might be to do with News Corp and BSkyB being listed companies and therefore tied to investment bankers/Wall St who are in turn financing the MIC. It's all connected like that. Might explain a few things. Also the tabloid style of his shows and journalism reminds me of Drudge and the ratings angle / lets grab a 6 pack and watch the shock and awe or the embedded reporting from some shithole. Both of these explain the pro-war bent of Fox and the media generally I think.

[JCDenton0451]

I don't think it's entirely accurate to call him simply pro-war, Murdoch seems to be extremely pro-Israel. Remember his bizarre tweets:


Why is Jewish owned press so consistently anti-Israel in every crisis? lol?

Nightmare for Israel if Obama wins. Biden outright lied about personal relations with Bibi. Susan Rice for State real nightmare. https://twitter.com/rupertmurdoch/status/257138181168824321

Now, because Israel's interests demand permanent war in the Middle East, Murdoch is pro-war. But his weird attachment to Israel comes first imo.