"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with
power to endanger the public liberty." - - - - John Adams

Saturday, June 16, 2012

Republicans attack the Bill of Rights

Watch the Bill of Rights slowly be abolished.
Republicans created the Department of Homeland Security in an attempt to centralize police power under the President.  (It's for our own good you know.)  Now the GOP wants the DHS to go on to land of ranchers and farmers at will without a warrant for "national security".

Does the GOP Believe in Anything?
A Republican sponsored law would effectively abolish the Bill of Rights and the 4th Amendment for ranchers and farmers.
  • So-called "small government" Republicans in Congress want to give the Department of Homeland Security the right to go on farm and ranch property near the border at will.

January 2009.  When Republicans took control of the House they read the entire Constitution on the floor . . . . for a brief moment I had hope.  Now I see that it was a publicity stunt for the TV cameras.
Lies and Bullshit.  Business as usual in Washington.
The BS out of Washington is flowing deep and heavy.  Now the GOP is going after the Bill of Rights yet again.  Anyone who believes in the Constitution and property rights should strongly oppose two bills pending in Congress: HR 1505, sponsored by Rep. Rob Bishop (Republican - Utah) and S 803, cosponsored by Sens. John McCain (Republican - Ariz.), Jon Kyl (Republican - Ariz.) and Marco Rubio (Republican - Fla.).
Both bills would give unrestricted power to the Department of Homeland Security on all public lands within 100 miles of the border.   Land that is currently under the jurisdiction of the Interior or Agriculture departments, but a great deal of which is leased to ranchers and farmers.
Defend the Bill of Rights
from Democrats and Republicans.

This legislation — ostensibly for national security purposes — would allow the police state DHS to do many things on this land without the permission of the farmers and ranchers who hold the leases.  The DHS could run vehicles on the rancher's property, build roads, fences, living quarters and airstrips and deploy forward para-military border patrol operating bases. 
All without the permission of the farmers and ranchers and in total violation of the Bill of Rights.
For example, national parks advocates have raised concerns that if the department determined it needed surveillance equipment in a park — say on Chief Mountain in Glacier National Park — it could install it without any public comment or even internal review process.
These bills would allow the department to run roughshod over ranching and farming operations in the area, and waivers to existing laws would remove any incentive for it to work with landowners and communities. These bills are unnecessary and would be harmful to the rural economy, to successful collaborations with the Border Patrol and, most important, to the public and private borderlands.
Even the DHS is not backing the bills. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a Senate subcommittee in March that unrestricted authority over public lands was unnecessary for the Border Patrol to do its job and was "bad policy." Those people who live and work near U.S. borders know that collaboration helps rather than hinders border security efforts.
(Los Angeles Times)

No comments: