4 ms·
It varies, the "national security Republicans" are all for the surveillance, e.g. http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/12/mike-rogers-defends-nsa-d
by joelgrus 13y ago
It varies, the "national security Republicans" are all for the surveillance, e.g.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/12/mike-rogers-defends-nsa-data-collection-180105.html http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/12/mike-rog...
whereas the "libertarian Republicans" are just as strongly against it, e.g.
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/12/amash-backed_bill_aimed_to_end.html http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/12/ama...
- ScottBurson 13y agoIt really is an issue that cuts across party lines. I've found that people of a libertarian bent get offended when I suggest this. If they're Republicans, they think that the GOP is the bastion of liberty and the Democrats are the authoritarians. If they're Democrats, it's the converse. But it seems to me that the issue is pretty close to orthogonal to party affiliation. One example is California's two senators: both Democrats, but Feinstein is famously authoritarian, while Boxer AFAIK tends in the other direction.