Liberals are doing their best to convince Americans (and themselves
no doubt) that the lawsuit Rand Paul plans to file against the NSA is a
grandstand tactic that can be discounted and ignored. The message Obama
supporters are doing their best to convey is this: You cannot sue the
government. Leftwing media outlets—which means 99 percent of them—have,
of course, adopted this cynical line and are doing their best to
communicate it to the broadest possible audience, even though they know
it is not true. But, then, when did telling the truth ever matter to an
Obama supporter (or President Obama for that matter).
Yes, it is difficult to sue the government and yes the parameters within which a lawsuit may be filed against the government are purposefully narrow. However, under certain prescribed circumstances a lawsuit may be filed against the government. Rand Paul is exploring a lawsuit that falls within those narrowly defined parameters. But it is not really the lawsuit or its potential outcome that President Obama and the NSA fear. What supporters of domestic spying really fear is exposure, and nothing will expose the nefarious deeds of the NSA and President Obama more fully than a widely-publicized lawsuit brought by someone—Rand Paul in this case—who has the star power to garner the public’s attention.
Fearing the exposure a highly-publicized lawsuit will bring, Obama supporters—aided and abetted by what Sarah Palin calls the “lamestream” media—are trying to preempt Rand Paul by drowning the idea of his lawsuit in self-righteous scorn and derision. But to paraphrase Shakespeare: Me thinks yon liberals protest too much. In fact, a good indicator of how concerned liberals are about any potential threat from the right is the amount of scorn they heap on its advocates and the amount of coverage their self-righteous denials receive from their partners in the media. But listen closely. When liberals discount the NSA lawsuit, there is a detectable twinge of concern in their artificially unconcerned statements. They sound like the little boy who lies awake at night trying to convince himself that he is not afraid of the dark.
When people ask me about Rand Paul’s lawsuit and the likelihood that it will do any good, I tell them the true story of my friend Colonel Bud Day who filed a class-action law suit against President Clinton on behalf of thousands of retired veterans. Colonel Day died recently, but during his long and amazing life he served America with conviction and courage. For example, at the time of his death he was the most highly-decorated combat veteran in America; a man who held not only the Medal of Honor, but almost every other combat decoration our nation can bestow. Even with his heroic service during World War II in the United States Marine Corps and his subsequent service in Korea and Viet Nam as an Air Force Officer, Colonel Day still ranked his epic battle in the courtroom against President Clinton as one of his proudest accomplishments.
When President Clinton announced he intended to eliminate medical benefits to thousands of retired military personnel, Colonel Day—by now retired from the Air Force and in private practice as an attorney—filed a class-action lawsuit to stop him. The case was heard in federal court in Pensacola, Florida where the judge ruled in favor of President Clinton. Undeterred, Colonel Day appealed the verdict. When the case was heard by the appellate court, the judges again ruled in favor of President Clinton. Day appealed the verdict one more time and the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear it. The Supreme Court—although clearly sympathetic to Colonel Day’s case—ruled in favor of President Clinton. But in agreeing to hear the case, the justices knew they were ensuring it would receive the broadest possible exposure regardless of the outcome.
Prior to pleading his case before the Supreme Court, Colonel Day had been unable to arouse much interest in the mainstream media for his cause. However, arguing the case before the Supreme Court changed things over night. The international exposure the case received on television and in newspapers worldwide created a firestorm of protest against Clinton’s ill-advised efforts and the apparent lack of interest showed up to that point by Congress. But shortly after the Supreme Court announced its verdict, Congress was deluged by an outraged American public. As a result, Congress was shamed into acting on behalf of the veterans. Consequently what Bill Clinton won in the courts he lost in Congress. Sometimes a highly-publicized loss in the Courts is just as good as win. Rand Paul knows this. So does Barack Obama.
Whether Rand Paul wins a judgment against Barack Obama and the NSA is not even the issue in this case. The issue is exposing the breadth and depth of domestic spying by a government agency. Barack Obama needs the details of his domestic spying operation to be kept under wraps. If the full truth comes out before November 2014, Democrats—already reeling from the Obamacare debacle—are likely to suffer a well-deserved drubbing at the polls. My advice to conservatives is this: Don’t discount Rand Paul’s lawsuit. He knows what he is doing and so does Barack Obama. This is why Obama is missing so many tee shots and puts lately. Rand Paul has him worried.
Yes, it is difficult to sue the government and yes the parameters within which a lawsuit may be filed against the government are purposefully narrow. However, under certain prescribed circumstances a lawsuit may be filed against the government. Rand Paul is exploring a lawsuit that falls within those narrowly defined parameters. But it is not really the lawsuit or its potential outcome that President Obama and the NSA fear. What supporters of domestic spying really fear is exposure, and nothing will expose the nefarious deeds of the NSA and President Obama more fully than a widely-publicized lawsuit brought by someone—Rand Paul in this case—who has the star power to garner the public’s attention.
Fearing the exposure a highly-publicized lawsuit will bring, Obama supporters—aided and abetted by what Sarah Palin calls the “lamestream” media—are trying to preempt Rand Paul by drowning the idea of his lawsuit in self-righteous scorn and derision. But to paraphrase Shakespeare: Me thinks yon liberals protest too much. In fact, a good indicator of how concerned liberals are about any potential threat from the right is the amount of scorn they heap on its advocates and the amount of coverage their self-righteous denials receive from their partners in the media. But listen closely. When liberals discount the NSA lawsuit, there is a detectable twinge of concern in their artificially unconcerned statements. They sound like the little boy who lies awake at night trying to convince himself that he is not afraid of the dark.
When people ask me about Rand Paul’s lawsuit and the likelihood that it will do any good, I tell them the true story of my friend Colonel Bud Day who filed a class-action law suit against President Clinton on behalf of thousands of retired veterans. Colonel Day died recently, but during his long and amazing life he served America with conviction and courage. For example, at the time of his death he was the most highly-decorated combat veteran in America; a man who held not only the Medal of Honor, but almost every other combat decoration our nation can bestow. Even with his heroic service during World War II in the United States Marine Corps and his subsequent service in Korea and Viet Nam as an Air Force Officer, Colonel Day still ranked his epic battle in the courtroom against President Clinton as one of his proudest accomplishments.
When President Clinton announced he intended to eliminate medical benefits to thousands of retired military personnel, Colonel Day—by now retired from the Air Force and in private practice as an attorney—filed a class-action lawsuit to stop him. The case was heard in federal court in Pensacola, Florida where the judge ruled in favor of President Clinton. Undeterred, Colonel Day appealed the verdict. When the case was heard by the appellate court, the judges again ruled in favor of President Clinton. Day appealed the verdict one more time and the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear it. The Supreme Court—although clearly sympathetic to Colonel Day’s case—ruled in favor of President Clinton. But in agreeing to hear the case, the justices knew they were ensuring it would receive the broadest possible exposure regardless of the outcome.
Prior to pleading his case before the Supreme Court, Colonel Day had been unable to arouse much interest in the mainstream media for his cause. However, arguing the case before the Supreme Court changed things over night. The international exposure the case received on television and in newspapers worldwide created a firestorm of protest against Clinton’s ill-advised efforts and the apparent lack of interest showed up to that point by Congress. But shortly after the Supreme Court announced its verdict, Congress was deluged by an outraged American public. As a result, Congress was shamed into acting on behalf of the veterans. Consequently what Bill Clinton won in the courts he lost in Congress. Sometimes a highly-publicized loss in the Courts is just as good as win. Rand Paul knows this. So does Barack Obama.
Whether Rand Paul wins a judgment against Barack Obama and the NSA is not even the issue in this case. The issue is exposing the breadth and depth of domestic spying by a government agency. Barack Obama needs the details of his domestic spying operation to be kept under wraps. If the full truth comes out before November 2014, Democrats—already reeling from the Obamacare debacle—are likely to suffer a well-deserved drubbing at the polls. My advice to conservatives is this: Don’t discount Rand Paul’s lawsuit. He knows what he is doing and so does Barack Obama. This is why Obama is missing so many tee shots and puts lately. Rand Paul has him worried.
We
have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity,
profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering
with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we
can engage in reasonable discourse.
Read more.
No comments:
Post a Comment