So, Barack Obama (I refuse to give the least of respect and call him Senator) said that:
Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. . . .
After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year’s Protect America Act. . . It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses.
It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives -– and the liberty –- of the American people.
First, let's take his statement one by one:
while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. . . .
Sorry, Barack Obama, but respecting the rule of law means you respect the law of the land; our Constitution. It is the Constitution, and enforcement thereof, that provides the very privacy and civil liberties for the American people you claim need to be respected as you disrespect our very Constitution.
while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year’s Protect America Act. . .
So, in your words Barack Obama, while respecting the Constitution is "far from perfect", you see a degree to which the Constitution can be disrespected? Because, as you state, it would be far more disrespected under another law? Gee, thank you for clearing that up for me; you believe we can disrespect our Constitution, to a degree.
It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses.
Count me as unimpressed that you will work in the Senate to remove this provision. I will say, right now, after you made this press release, you will make another press release after the telecom's get their "get out of jail free card", which will be something along the lines of:
My fellow American's, I'm sorry to say that while I talked to others in the Senate over a latte, they would not listen to reason. I did my best. I would really have loved to put a hold on the bill, or filibustered for days on end till it died, but, I'm campaigning for the Presidency and I just didn't have the time to stand up for our Constitution.
Back to the quotes:
It is not all that I would want.
That's right, Barack, because this fight is all about YOU. The country, the Constitution, the people... we are what to you? A vote? A piece of paper?
But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay.
Yes, America faces it's own demise and granting immunity to people who give millions to politicians is far more important than ensuring the very foundations on which are country were founded remain in place.
So I support the compromise,
That's all I needed to know.
but do so with a firm pledge that as President,
You aren't getting my vote.
I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General,
blah blah blah... political statement... blah blah blah... shit on the constitution... blah blah blah... vote for me... blah blah blah...
and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives -– and the liberty –- of the American people.
Because it just isn't important enough for you to do it NOW. Really, you will in the FUTURE, though...
As the man said to the woman with the leering look; "trust me!!!"