Press "Enter" to skip to content

Kristi Noem, Republicans Hand President Obama Surveillance Tools for Tyranny

Pat Powers publishes without comment or critique Rep. Kristi Noem's mealy-mouthed excuse for voting against the Amash-Conyers Amendment to curtail the National Security Agency's blanket surveillance of American citizens' communications.

My friend Leo Kallis posts this much more concise summary of Rep. Noem's vote against the Fourth Amendment from Conor Friedersdorf:

The GOP establishment: Obama is a tyrant, except in the areas where we want to give him sweeping unilateral power to exercise in secret [Cnoor Friedersdorf, Twitter post, 2013.07.25].

Republicans like Pat Powers and Kristi Noem holler that things like health care reform and sustainable development are really sneaky plots to increase government control over our lives. But lay before them a clear and direct example of the kind of big-government data-gathering that is a basic tool of any truly authoritarian regime, and they surrender their resistance, hand the President they hate that power, and bend over backward to write really poor excuses for the tyranny they prefer.

Reminder: 133 Republicans and 83 Democrats voted along with Noem to leave the NSA's surveillance of our communications in place. 94 Republicans and 111 Democrats voted for the Amash-Conyers Amendment.

There is no tyranny but that of our own making.


  1. mike 2013.07.26

    I hope this costs Noem some votes.

  2. mike 2013.07.26

    I just read SoDakLiberty's blog post which talks about the need for someone to run against Noem. Does this bring out the third party candidate of a libertarian faction?

    Could Noem win against Brendan Johnson with a libertarian alternative on the ballot and in the debates to take 3-6% of the vote?

    Brendan might have found and issue.

  3. Rorschach 2013.07.26

    Interesting that more Democrats than Republicans voted to limit government power. That makes the GOP the party of big, intrusive government.

    Think about it this way. If you were against this sort of Big Brother domestic spying when George W. was President - shouldn't you still be against it? If you are for this, where do you propose to draw the line on the government spying on citizens?

Comments are closed.