Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Why I'm Witholding Judgement On Edward Snowden

If you've followed the news over the weekend, you'd have found out about Edward Snowden, the leaker of the NSA program that is, well, snooping on us all.

Since there, there have been a lot who have quick to declare him a hero, while the criminal Democrap Party and RINOs like Lindsey Grahamnesty, have branded Snowden a "traitor." All while the Obama/Holder InJustice Department are looking to file charges against him.

Meanwhile, in one of the rare times I agree with them, the ACLU has filed suit against the program.

Well, I'm not too hot about him going off to China for asylum, but I'm not ready to call the guy a traitor, nor a least yet. 

Hear what Mark Levin said...

Who has done more National Security damage to this nation? I mean who is it, that is not securing the southern border? Who is it, who’s slashing and burning aspects of the United States Military? Who is it that’s doing these things? It’s not some little jerk named Snowden, or somebody else. It’s our President, Barack Hussein Milhouse Obama.
Who is making us more vulnerable ladies and gentlemen? I’m very very serious about this. With his embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood. Let me suggest the Commander In Chief, that’s who. And I mean it.
Which is true, but there's more to Obama's NSA program, which bothers me.

Instead of just targeting suspected terrorists, as his predecessor George W. Bush did, these NSA sweeps are looking at everyone, even those who have not been suspected of a crime. Well, doesn't that violate something known as the Fourth Amendment? Apparently, Mr. Constitutional Lawyer Richard Milhous Obama isn't aware of that, or doesn't care. I think it's the latter. He says we have to choose between liberty and security. That's a phony argument, and rejects that there is a balance between the two. If you begin to act suspiciously, then you start inviting the authorities to watch you.

I supported Bush's NSA program, primarily because it was limited in scope. Obama's (as noted above) is not. Obama and Democraps like Stingy Hoyer, Dianne "ChiFi" Feinstein, support Obama's spying on all Americans but didn't support Bush's spying on suspected terrorists. Why is that? Are Islamofascist terrorists part of the Democrat constituency? Liberals act like they care more about the rights of al-Queda instead of American citizens. Likewise, liberals/Democrats see Tea Party, Christian, NRA and patriot groups as real terrorist threats, while acting as apologists for radical Islamists and Sharia law. It's probably also more of how Democraps suffer from too much of the "My party...right or wrong" attitude, and forget they swore an oath to protect the Constitution "from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Added to that is the nature of this current Regime. Political opponents, as we have seen with the IRS abuses, have come under punishment and scrutiny for daring to use their First Amendment right to oppose Obama.  The Obama Lapdog Media, as well as Fox News' James Rosen, had their phone records seized. Don't forget that Obama, himself, gained national office in the US Senate when his opponents divorce records were unsealed and leaked to the press.  Eric Holder couldn't answer whether or not Congress had their phones tapped.  Glenn Beck even has theorized that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts may have been blackmailed into changing his Obamacare decision midstream.

While the Obama Lapdog Media has twisted polls claiming the public supports the seizing of their liberty, it's not true.  Compare this from Rassmussen Reports...public opinion on Bush's NSA program, vs. Obama's.

Rasmussen, December 28, 2005:
Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 23% disagree.
Rasmussen today:
Just 26% of Likely U.S. Voters favor the government's secret collecting of these phone records for national security purposes regardless of whether there is any suspicion of wrongdoing. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% are opposed to the practice. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided.
Notice the one difference between the two programs, besides the different numbers?

To me, the big difference between Snowden and other leakers is the nature of the leak. Snowden claims he was being selective in his leaks, only exposing the fact all Americans are being spied upon. People whom I think should be considered traitors, like Bradley Manning and Daniel Ellsburg ("Pentagon Papers") leaked military secrets for the purpose of not only aiding our enemies but undermining the war effort against them.

And if Obama's NSA program is protecting Americans, why didn't the Boston Marathon bombers' deadly jihadist attack not get thwarted? Why haven't authorities found and arrested the person(s) behind the political SWATing of Patrick "Patterico" Frey, Erick Erickson, and my friend Aaron Walker?

And to those elected officials who have more of a problem with Snowden instead of the revelations of this unconstitutional spying on all Americans, I ask this question...

Did you forget that your oath of office was to preserve and protect the Constitution against all enemies: foreign and domestic? It is not a loyalty oath to any President or political party.

No comments: