Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space.

The book is on Kindle. Order here.

Tuesday, December 01, 2015

"But I err on the side of security."



Republicans are beginning to rediscover their national security policy. Trump came up with the mantra: "Err on the side of security."

From CNN:
Donald Trump sided with Marco Rubio over Ted Cruz in a debate over U.S. government surveillance, saying he would "err on the side of security."
The Republican presidential front-runner on Tuesday told radio host Hugh Hewitt that he would support the reauthorization of U.S. bulk collection and storage of phone metadata.
"I assume that when I pick up my telephone, people are listening to my conversations anyway, if you want to know the truth. It's pretty sad commentary," Trump said. "But I err on the side of security."
The National Security Agency on Sunday ended its bulk phone metadata collection, shifting to a more targeted approach two years after Edward Snowden's leaks revealed the extent of the September 11-era program. Its end has brought the issue to the forefront of the 2016 presidential campaign.
Rubio, a Florida senator, and Cruz, a Texas senator, have sparred over that issue in recent days. Cruz supported the bill that ended the government's metadata collection program -- a vote that a pro-Rubio group highlighted, casting it as weakening national security, in a new television advertisement in Iowa.
Trump said his support for security measures predates the ISIS attacks on Paris.
"When you have the world looking at us and would like to destroy us as quickly as possible, I err on the side of security," he said. "And, so, you know, that's the way it is. That's the way I've been, and some people like that, frankly, and some people don't like that."
Why would we do otherwise?

5 comments:

  1. Video - House Democrat: Obama risks "Nuclear War" with Russia

    http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2015/12/house-democrat-obama-risks-nuclear-war.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. If the program really does enhance our security, that's all well and good. But if it didn't catch the Boston bombers, how valuable can it be? I'll never forget that several days after that attack, the FBI was asking for help from the public to identify the bombers from security camera photos. This, in spite of the fact that Russian intelligence had warned US officials about the Tsarnaevs' travels to Dagestan, and in spite of the fact that they had even been interviewed by the FBI two years prior! It's one thing to give up our privacy rights in exchange for actual security, but quite another to surrender privacy for a expensive waste that doesn't produce the promised results.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good points Anne. What we the voters are not hearing either, at least from Trump, is specifics, not "err on the side of security" sound bites on how he would balance this issue as president.

      As to commoncents: Obama "risks" war. If (when?) Trump becomes president, the U.S. will be at war in no time. If Trump goes ballistic (no pun intended) on reporters who ask tough questions, I shudder to think what he will do when a foreign leader pushes his button.

      Delete
    2. We were promised "enhanced" security when tsa took over and yet audit after audit reveals weapons get past security and terrorists work in the airport after having passed background checks.

      The only "enhancement" tsa has provided has been "enhanced" fees and "enhanced" groping.

      As far as Trump going ballistic on tough questions, I believe it was well beyond the time to call out the biases in the lsm. Republicans have tolerated it quietly for decades. the media serve as democrat propagandists and Trump and Cruz called them out. About time!!!

      Delete
  3. Those who don't see the NSA's unbridled spying practices as a threat to every American's freedom (and virtually useless for our security) are just kidding themselves. In the hands of a dictator, that power is a danger to our liberty. And please don't fall back on the old canard, "It can't happen here." Obama happened here, in plain sight. So did Woodrow Wilson. So did FDR. All of them were wannabe tyrants, who had the support of Congress and, to its ever lasting shame, the Supreme Court. Yes, there are external threats to our individual and to our nation's security, but there are also internal threats, and the Founding Fathers knew that Government (with a capital G) was one of the biggest threats of all.

    ReplyDelete