In response to an FT article by Demetri Sevastopulo on 1st June 2015, entitled 'US Senate feud exposes rift over spying'
Facts and Figures?
"On 9/11: When Congress passed the Patriot Act following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US, Rand Paul was practising ophthalmology in Kentucky"
Is that supposed to make me think he is unqualified in some way? If so, no cigar.
On 9/11: When Congress passed the Patriot Act following the September 11 2001 attacks on the US, Mitch McConnell was practising demagoguery in Washington.
That doesn't render him unqualified either, though it reinforces my view that term limits would be a good idea.
Vested interests will turn this debate into a charade that suits the status quo and the press will largely play along.
Why did the founding fathers enshrine the bill of rights in the constitution?
Here's my view - Because they had just overthrown an authoritarian government that demanded no restrictions on its power, a government which cast them as traitors for standing up for their rights as citizens. In that raw state, they had the presence of mind to realise that any government could go the same way overtime, unless restricted by a constitution and a rule of law to uphold it. That's why the 4th amendment exists - trash the 4th and you can kiss goodbye to the rest. They learned that lesson from history. This government and the Bush administration that preceded it, have forgotten the lesson, if they ever understood it in the first place.
So it is ironic, but by no means surprising that we have politicians who are so wrapped up in 'politics' that they don't see the irony in enshrining a law called 'The Patriot Act', which trashes the 4th amendment, nor the double irony of accusing someone who opposes it of being unpatriotic. Thomas Jefferson will not know whether to laugh or cry.