Martha Coakley Still Doesn’t Get It On The Patriot Act
In the special election for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, the Patriot Act has become issue number one this week. A statement from candidate Martha Coakley in support of the Patriot Act’s programs of government spying against American citizens was uncovered at the beginning of the week. Coakley’s campaign still has not released a statement on its web site to explain her statements defending the Patriot Act. Her press office is trying to pretend the growing scandal of Coakley’s support for Bush’s spying programs just doesn’t exist.
In a debate tonight, however, Coakley could not avoid the subject. When confronted by rival Michael Capuano, Coakley put her foot in her mouth again. “The Patriot Act is about keeping people safe without violating civil rights,” Coakley said.
Here Coakley is again, in 2009, defending the Patriot Act. Hearing Coakley give this statement, we have to wonder whether she is completely ignorant of recent developments regarding the Patriot Act. Keeping people safe? Did she not watch Senate Judiciary Committee hearings in which it was revealed that only 0.39 percent (no, not 39 percent) uses of Patriot Act sneak and peek spying powers last year were used in cases connected to terrorism? Without violating civil rights? Has Coakley not heard the revelations today that the government has, just over the last year, and just from Sprint Nextel, made 8 million separate demands, likely under Patriot Act authority, for Americans’ private global positioning system (GPS) data?
Whether Martha Coakley is truly clueless about the Patriot Act, or is just using the illusion of ignorance to cover for a seething hatred of the constitutional rights of Americans under the Fourth Amendment, she is clearly the wrong choice to succeed Edward Kennedy.
Another Democrat running for Senate in Massachusetts, U.S. Representative Michael Capuano, had the integrity to vote against the Patriot Act at the start, when it was shoved through Congress back in 2001. It wasn’t a politically easy thing to do back then, but it was the right thing to do. For citizens of Massachusetts who respect the Constitution of the United States of America, Capuano seems the better candidate.
[...] Coakley claimed that “The Patriot Act is about keeping people safe without violating civil rights,” in spite of all the evidence given during October’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing showing that the Patriot Act is neither about keeping people safe, nor refraining from violating civil rights. [...]
[...] a December 1, 2009 debate, Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley declared that the Patriot Act was all about [...]
I would not vote for Martha Coakley if my life depended on it. Her office practices unfairly as attorney general of our state. I watched her take out my friend’s good business because her office wanted to interpret the law one way, when the language of the particular law pertaining to the company could have been interpreted another. She had no regard for this woman’s family and that she started this business on her own, and helped so many people because of it. She talks on her commercial about unfair business practices, and she practices them herself. She is not out for our best interest and tries to say she’s out to protect us. It’s a lie, and I don’t trust her. What’s even worse, my friend’s business involved a business partner, who walked away when the attorney general began her investigation. That business partner is not being charged or pursued, and even more unfair, has opened the same company that Martha Coakley forced my friend to close. She won’t be getting my vote.
[...] Coakley victory is disturbing to supporters of the Constitution, because Coakley has repeatedly spoken in defense of the massive government spying against Americans that’s taking place under the Patriot Act, even though the great majority [...]