Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Which side will you take?

March 17, 2013
Weirton Daily Times

To the Editor,

God bless Rand Paul for finally getting Obama's America-hating, communist cadre to admit at least one of their deliberate misconceptions.

No, it is not constitutional for the President to order, more or less arbitrarily, drone strikes to kill American citizens on American soil; especially without due process, or a warrant.

You Obamaniacs out there: is this what you voted for? You lefties claim your stance honors our rights and freedoms; where was your outcry, then, when an American president was slyly attempting to assume the power to kill people he perceived as potential threats?

Oh, come, now; that would never happen, right?

Remember Ruby Ridge, 1992? Two killed, as a result of entrapment by the FBI.

The Branch Davidians; Waco, TX, 1993? Seventy-six killed, essentially because they resisted acceptance of a warrant.

Elian Gonzalez, 1999? Taken, under force of arms, from his mother's relatives and returned to Cuba.

All, attacks by federal law enforcement, on private American citizens.

Let's not forget, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased billions of rounds of ammunition, thousands of automatic weapons, as well as 2,500 military-issue, mine-resistant troop carriers, complete with .50 caliber machine guns, and gun ports for troops inside. What for?

To "deliver warrants," they say.

Really? They need military-issue equipment to do what law enforcement has done forever, in cruisers? Remember his first campaign? Obama called for a "civilian military force, as powerful and well-funded as the Army?" Many liberals dismissed it.

What say you, now?

You're hypocrites. If this had all happened during the Bush Era, you'd be seething in outraged protest.

How about the Patriot Act? As with any legislation, it's not in how it's worded, but rather, in how it's applied. This being the case, we true conservatives, while mostly understanding the reasoning, weren't really too happy with it.

The American left, however? Well, now; the left was absolutely united in its frenzied certainty that it was going to turn America into a police state, under "Bushhitler."

Obama himself opposed it. Of course, this opposition didn't stop him from extending certain lapsing Patriot Act strictures, mostly dealing with civil rights, in 2009; a move most vocally resisted by a freshman Senator namedRand Paul.

The left, however? Typically silent.

As we have seen in, and learned from, the past four years, this administration is going to have to be nailed to the wall on virtually every aspect of its policies, Obama being little more than a mealy-mouthed, banana republic dictator without the cheap uniform and aviator sunglasses.

Paul seems to understand how Obama will have to be treated, especially in his new era. Parameters must be declared, or he just does what he wants.

Given this reasoning, and having asked, failing to receive a response, Sen. Paul was completely correct in his lengthy filibuster. He made enough noise, forcing the administration to respond, in a way that wouldn't disturb the people.

Nailed to the wall.

Something ugly is coming, America; on which side will you stand, when it does?

Rob Denham

Weirton

 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: