The Washington Times covers a debate
between New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and US Sen. Rand Paul.
Gov. Christie speaks negatively about a libertarian strain coursing through political parties, presumably both Democratic and Republican.
Sen. Paul says that Gov. Christie worries about the dangers of freedom, while he worries about the danger of losing that freedom.
Gov. Christie speaks negatively about a libertarian strain coursing through political parties, presumably both Democratic and Republican.
Sen. Paul says that Gov. Christie worries about the dangers of freedom, while he worries about the danger of losing that freedom.
Both indirectly refer to the National Security Agency's
(NSA) program of collecting telephone records for all citizens of the US. Gov.
Christie takes a position that this is quite acceptable in the context of
protecting citizens from terrorism. Sen. Paul takes a position that this is
unconstitutional with respect to government seizure of citizens property
[records] without warrant as required by the fourth amendment of the
Constitution.
I take the position of Sen. Paul, but I go further. The federal government is obliged to protect its citizens from possible terrorist activities. However, such responsibility and subsequent implementation of procedures should not be so all-encompassing as to unnecessarily impose on the liberties of the average citizen. In other words, there should be some suspicion of wrongdoing, before a citizen's records can be seized. The collection of millions/billions of phone records does not fill that bill. In addition, it is obviously impractical. There are no cases where a potential terrorist was discovered by the scanning of these million/billions of telephone records. It is suspected by many, including the writer that the collection of such information by the federal government is a deceptive maneuver to obtain better control of the population. The federal government is supposed to be working for the citizens of the US. However, many in the government feel that this is an unjust position and desire to reverse it. Collection of citizen private information is a first step in reversing that control.
A note on Gov. Christie. He came to the public eye as an illogical Republican governor in the Democratic state of New Jersey. Republicans lauded that change, with the expectation that perhaps the state of New Jersey would be returning to Republican control. Subsequent action by Gov. Christie, including kowtowing to Pres. Obama during the recent Hurricane Sandy disaster, clearly indicates that Gov. Christie is actually a Democrat/Socialist parading as a Republican.
I take the position of Sen. Paul, but I go further. The federal government is obliged to protect its citizens from possible terrorist activities. However, such responsibility and subsequent implementation of procedures should not be so all-encompassing as to unnecessarily impose on the liberties of the average citizen. In other words, there should be some suspicion of wrongdoing, before a citizen's records can be seized. The collection of millions/billions of phone records does not fill that bill. In addition, it is obviously impractical. There are no cases where a potential terrorist was discovered by the scanning of these million/billions of telephone records. It is suspected by many, including the writer that the collection of such information by the federal government is a deceptive maneuver to obtain better control of the population. The federal government is supposed to be working for the citizens of the US. However, many in the government feel that this is an unjust position and desire to reverse it. Collection of citizen private information is a first step in reversing that control.
A note on Gov. Christie. He came to the public eye as an illogical Republican governor in the Democratic state of New Jersey. Republicans lauded that change, with the expectation that perhaps the state of New Jersey would be returning to Republican control. Subsequent action by Gov. Christie, including kowtowing to Pres. Obama during the recent Hurricane Sandy disaster, clearly indicates that Gov. Christie is actually a Democrat/Socialist parading as a Republican.
You are a long way from New Jersey and have limited knowledge of the State and its Governor. Much has been made of Christie's work with Obama to provide funding for remediation and repairs at the shore following Sandy. It is hard to say whether or not it had any effect but the recovery, yet incomplete, went forward. Consider as well that New Jersey is a financial shambles because of poor governance over decades. It is a union state with a huge overhang of unfunded liabilities. Christie has alienated the teachers union and other unions by changing policies regarding retirement and health insurance benefits and has managed to right the ship partially. He will be re-elected with a solid majority as a Republican in a State that leans heavily Democrat. Simply consider that over half the workforce in the state is employed by the federal, state or municipal governments or teaches in the public schools. Anyone who has the opportunity to move to another state does so to avoid state and municipal taxes.
ReplyDeleteThe last sentence in the most significant and the reason that control of the Republican party is now effectively by those left of center. Governor Christi has the characteristic narcissism of politicians who want to control and rule rather than govern as was intended by the founders as expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. I fear my own government more than I ever thought possible. However, our founders both had experienced tyranny and knew history well so their warnings were most prophetic.
ReplyDelete