Rand Paul and a number of other Republican Senators are trying to draw attention to this by a Filibuster on the Senate floor, but mostly it seems that the MSM is just trying to make that into "a bunch of flakey right wingers trying to cause trouble", or just "rank partisanship".
There’s a weird reality to it now. Today, the government needs court approval to wiretap a U.S. citizen suspected of terrorism overseas – but it doesn’t need one to kill him.
Have we become so distracted that we have lost the capacity to recall how incensed the MSM was with the idea of W listening in on cell calls to terrorists within the US even with FISA court approval?
Now BO has a "finding" that is is OK to KILL suspected terrorists that are US citizens on US soil and the level of media concern is a yawn?
So we know that BO is "their guy", and "they trust him", but isn't there SOME limit? These people wanted to extend the US Bill of Rights to FOREIGN combatants on FOREIGN soil, and they were ADAMANT about that!
How can this be? Apparently for a very large number of Americans, partisanship extends even to life and death. They may be against "the other side" wiretapping a phone, water-boarding a prisoner, or having a prison in Guantanamo, but for "their side", even killing a US citizen on US soil with no charges being filed, no judge being involved, or no "surrender or we will shoot", is just peachy keen and not worth any level of concern at all!
Oh, and these are the folks that think that "nobody needs an Assault Weapon"?? I suppose if you trust the ideological purity and competence of your government enough that you are willing to let them terminate whomever they like via remote control under SUSPICION of guilt, it might be just fine to terminate folks that disagree with you on the 2nd amendment as well.
The part I don't understand is how you can think that and actually say the Pledge of Allegiance with a straight face at all.
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment