More hypocrisy from Democrats, this time on The Patriot Act. The amount of all-over-the-place on the issue is bewildering.
While the Patriot Act was passed by a margin of 98-1 in the Senate in 2001, and amongst Democrats in the House, by a margin of 145-62, and the intervening years have seen a big parade of Democrat vilification of the act.
Democrats, in the throes of Bush Derangement Syndrome vehemently opposed the Patriot Act when Bush and Republicans favored it. Now they don't seem to mind it so much.
There is some tricky territory to navigate around the act. It's not really a conservative versus liberal issue, despite how it is portrayed in the media. It's an issue of safety versus privacy and liberty. There are plenty of conservatives on both sides of that equation. As for liberals, frankly, it isn't really clear where they stand. It seems like 'if today is Tuesday, then I must be against it', is the rationale.
From the LA Times in September 2009;
As a senator from Illinois, Barack Obama was a critic of the Patriot Act. Last week, however, the Obama administration asked the House and Senate to extend the three provisions. "The administration is willing to consider . . . ideas [for modifying the law], provided that they do not undermine the effectiveness of these important authorities," Assistant Atty. Gen. Ronald Weich said in a letter to Congress.
Then there's a lot of just anti-Patriot Act sentiment on the left.
No one read it? Then why did you vote on it?
I've spoken before about the fact that it seems pretty logical a place to start is to differentiate between citizens versus non citizens in terms of treatment under the Patriot Act. The act seems to make that distinction, although I certainly haven't read most of the Act because, I have a life. In any case, that's not where Democrat thinking is at. Even though President Obama extended the Patriot Act again, he also wanted a court trial for KSM, instead of a military tribunal. The administration is all over the map. That sort of disconnect comes from the top down.
Irate over Guantanamo, Democrats find that it is still open. Disconnects exist all over the place. That's not universally true. There is one Democrat who has consistently argued against it - progressive Russ Feingold in 2006. Wow. Check out the agenda at 2:13.
And NOW? Where is everyone at?
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama has signed a one-year extension of several provisions in the nation's main counter terrorism law, the Patriot Act.
Provisions in the measure would have expired on Sunday without Obama's signature Saturday.
The act, which was adopted in the weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, expands the government's ability to monitor Americans in the name of national security.
Three sections of the Patriot Act that stay in force will:
-Authorize court-approved roving wiretaps that permit surveillance on multiple phones.
-Allow court-approved seizure of records and property in anti-terrorism operations.
-Permit surveillance against a so-called lone wolf, a non-U.S. citizen engaged in terrorism who may not be part of a recognized terrorist group.
Obama's signature comes after the House voted 315 to 97 Thursday to extend the measure.
Hmmm...315-97 and a Presidential signature over the weekend when people might not notice. Go figure.
END NOTE: Sure, it had to be signed before today to extend the Act. But it couldn't have been done during the news cycle on Friday? Of course not. The President is all about optics, and the substance is either missing or just doesn't match his words. Democrats seem to be continually beguiled by dazzling candidates and never get that style-over-substance leads to bad leadership.