Tea Party Traitors – Ryan, Rubio, Toomey, Paul

Tea Party Movement

Ah, those darlings of the Tea Party movement, the so-called Conservatives who don’t mind success on the backs of the grassroots people who ensure their support, their election or reelection. As long as they don’t mind a little practice in ignoring the United States Constitution and their commitment to upholding their oath to that sacred document of freedom and liberty.

In the news we have gun control, immigration reform, permissible drone attacks on American soil against citizens of the United States. And who would have thought the aforementioned elected public servants would choose up sides with the Liberals on any or all of these issues?

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)

Remember Senator Paul’s famous filibuster in the Senate that drew attention to drone strikes against US citizens. It was great at the time but things change in politics.

I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.

That was then, this is now:

I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on,” Paul said. “If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash. I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.

Senator Paul didn’t mention collateral damage and death to innocent bystanders. Nor did he mention due process of the law.

In response to the backlash, Sen. Paul released a statement about his views on domestic drone strikes.

“Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations.”

When asked if he was retracting his hypothetical about an armed liquor store thief being killed by a drone, his spokeswoman Moira Bagley told Foreign Policy “not retracting.”

Here’s Paul’s full statement:

My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed.

Let me be clear: it has not. Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations. They only may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster.

Additionally, surveillance drones should only be used with warrants and specific targets.

Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind.

Sen. Paul meant it before he didn’t or we didn’t understand him.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)

Representative Ryan has been in Congress for several terms, elected in a region where Republicans find it difficult to succeed politically. Ryan is well liked and brought real enthusiasm to the Romney campaign in 2012. Tea Party folks climbed on board to a candidate in Mitt Romney they weren’t to pleased with. Ryan floats his votes with the political winds even though he has produced budgets that cut spending and stands up for Constitutional principles. He is, however, a typical politician.

Rep. Ryan has suddenly joined the immigration reform fight and has backed the Senate “Gang of 8” bill that offers amnesty to illegal immigrants, law-breakers who will also receive many benefits tucked into the 844-page monstrosity.

Mr. Ryan has joined a far Left-Wing Representative, Chicago West Side Democrat Luis Gutierrez, to promote the legislation.

Gutierrez and Ryan, who don’t agree on much, said they do share a religious faith and a belief in the benefits of comprehensive immigration reform.

If we actually have the kind of immigration we need to sustain a healthy and strong American economy, we’ll raise per capita income by $1,700 per family.

What Luis and I are putting out there are the basic components of a system that we want to endure. Ryan says. We don’t want to be having this conversation five years from now.

Asked why appear with Rep. Gutierrez, who has some very radical views on immigration Ryan responded:

We’ve been friends for many years. We have very different views on politics and philosophy, but Luis has shown great willingness to compromise and accommodate our concerns and our views on how best to do immigration reform. And when you have a Democrat who is willing to compromise to get a good agreement, to get good reform, who is willing to accommodate our demands on law enforcement and border security, then it’s worth working together.

I’m always so pleased (note sarcasm) to find a so-called Conservative “friends” with a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, code for Marxists.

In a Q & A at Breitbart News Ryan spun around so fast one would think they were riding an out of control merry-go-round at the Congressional circus.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA)

The newly minted Senator who won his 2012 race on the backs of grassroots, Tea Party support broke with the Constitution and the National Gun Association regarding gun control legislation.

When they campaign they always say what’s needed to appease their audiences and the 2nd Amendment is a real slippery slope for politicians, especially in districts where people tote Bibles and their guns while also believing in the Constitution.

Toomey joined Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), another “pro-gun” politician to offer up an amendment to the Senate’s failed gun control legislation to expand background checks for gun purchases. It makes it more difficult for millions of private gun owners to sell their firearms, such as at gun shows. That legislation died a slow death as well.

This is not the first time Toomey has broken with Conservatives. He previously called for the repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, at a time when he was not in public office and did not need to weigh in one way or the other on that intersection of the gay-rights agenda and national security policy.

Toomey is a coward and has proven he’s not a Conservative but a RINO who says and does things that move against the Constitution and his oath of office. He’d rather follow polls than have hardened principles.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

If any politician owes his election to the Tea Party movement it’s Marco Rubio of Florida. Always promoted as the next GOP candidate for President he is quickly demonstrating his willingness to cross the aisle of compromise, much like the erstwhile John McCain (R-AZ) to “get something done.”

Rubio is busy selling his “Gang of 8” immigration nonsense that grants amnesty to law breakers. He’s hitting talk radio hard and the Sunday talk shows. Liberals in the media swarm to him because he has bought in to Senator’s who are members of or support the Congressional Progressive Caucus and are salivating at the chance to legalize over 11 million immigrants who have broken the laws of the land to enter the United States. It’s all about future votes Republicans will never get and not about enforcing the law of the land.

Jim DeMint, former Senator, new President at the Heritage Foundation and respected Conservative has this to say of Sen. Rubio and the “Gang of 8”.

I think he’s found, as I did, that the only way to get any, even small reforms of our system, is you have to give in to the Democrats desire to put people on a path to citizenship and unfortunately that’s something that the whole gang of eight is supporting.

Another Tea Party supported candidate who stays true to his Conservative principles is Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and he chimed into the immigration reform debate.

I think if instead the bill includes elements that are deeply divisive–and I would note that I don’t think there is any issue in this entire debate that is more divisive than a path to citizenship for those who are here illegally–in my view, any bill that insists upon that jeopardizes the likelihood of passing any immigration reform bill.

Personally, I’m becoming very tired of the political class making statements, having a spokesperson tell us “not retracting” and then a late followup to tell us what he/she really meant. If you’re that unsure of your statements maybe you can’t be trusted with policy.

Ryan, Rubio, Toomey, and Paul are all beginning to look like burnt toast. All dancing with the Devil in the pale moon light.