Rand Paul on Obama on NSA: "The Same Unconstitutional Program with a New Configuration"

Look for much more coverage of Obama's NSA speech this morning as the day rolls on here at Hit and Run, but Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul's reaction is worth a quick note, via a press release:

"While I am encouraged the President is addressing the NSA spying program because of pressure from Congress and the American people, I am disappointed in the details. The Fourth Amendment requires an individualized warrant based on probable cause before the government can search phone records and e-mails. President Obama's announced solution to the NSA spying controversy is the same unconstitutional program with a new configuration," Sen. Paul said. "I intend to continue the fight to restore Americans rights through my Fourth Amendment Restoration Act and my legal challenge against the NSA. The American people should not expect the fox to guard the hen house."

Comments

[Pro Libertate]

A difference that makes no difference is no difference.

[WTF]

The Fourth Amendment requires an individualized warrant based on probable cause before the government can search phone records and e-mails.

What an extremist crackpot!

[Doctor Whom]

Indeed. Why doesn’t he just move to Somalia?

[sarcasmic]

Third Party Doctrine SMASH!

[Episiarch]

Look, Obama said he was going to do stuff about this bad stuff. Those are words. Which means that TEAM BLUE can now rest easy about the spying, because soothing words were said.

Actions? What are actions?

[Bee Tagger]

Actions are verbs. He used verbs didn’t he?

[sarcasmic]

Actions? What are actions?

Part of the MVC framework?

[Thane ? the booty]

NERD!

[some guy]

Takes one to know one!

[Thane ? the booty]

To be fair some asshole MBA could know what an MVC framework is

[Brett L]

Well, they might recognize the words.

[Pro Libertate]

“We’ll secretly think about secretly fixing this problem in a way that secretly continues to secretly protect America from secret threats. Trust me.”

[jesse.in.mb]

See, he should’ve just said that. All Obama has to do is ask for trust and I’ll give it to him. His historical follow through on promises is impeccable.

[Pro Libertate]

“My fellow Americans, it’s about trust. And faith. Also, whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. . .which is the whole point of Obamacare–immortality.”

[Killaz]

Mortality, after all, is the result of market failure.

[Doctor Whom]

Period.

[some guy]

Brian, even tiny block-quoted pics deserve alt-text. In fact, they are the most deserving of all. What is going on there? Is he dancing the dance of his people?

[Warty]

The Fourth Amendment

Jesus Christ, what a racist Confederate anarchist corporate shill scumbag this guy is.

[Some call me Tim?]

You nailed it. Rand would be totally on board if the President was white.

[Marshall Gill]

The Fourth Amendment requires an individualized warrant based on probable cause before the government can search phone records and e-mails.

Funny, I was just reading some Leftarded, shit-stain, Obamafag claiming that you could get warrants for “metadata”.

[jesse.in.mb]

Gizmodo underwhelmed by Obama’s plan.

All of that sounds pretty vague because it is. The president stops short of announcing specifically how intelligence-gathering will be conducted in the future and instead continues to dwell on the idea that his administration will increase transparency, make small course corrections, and set up an outside committee to protect privacy.

Privacy and transparency! I remember there was a candidate once who promised oodles of that. I just can’t remember who it was.

Obama emphasized that the controversy surrounding surveillance programs at places like the NSA probably have more to do with the gap between technological advances and policies than they do with breaking the law or violating American’s civil liberties. He maintained that the intelligence community is full of patriotic Americans doing the right thing. You have to wonder how many Americans who’ve been spied on by the NSA actually feel that way. [emphasis J.i.MB’s]

Whoa, whoa bro, that sounds suspiciously like criticism, expect the Eye of Sauron NSA to be looking into…I mean carry on patriotic citizen.

[Episiarch]

It’s nice to see them being skeptical, but let’s be honest: if you’re still in “skeptical” mode and not “this president is a flat out lying scumbag” made, you’re still a fucking moron.

[Rufus J. Fisk]

I am convinced the only way we are going to get any of our bill of rights back is if the whole fed govt implodes from bankrupcy. Only way.

[some guy]

Nope. Then you get either an Egypt-style 69-page Constitution full of positive rights or lots and lots of blood-thirsty warlords. Such is the nature of man.

[sarcasmic]

Sad but true. Once the American Experiment in liberty dies (it’s on its death bed as we speak), liberty will be forever gone from the world, never to be seen again.

[itsnotmeitsyou]

I don’t think it will be gone forever, just too long to matter to anyone alive, or the next 2 or 3 generations of their children.

It may take several generations of subjugation for any real rebellion to take place, and it may be in the most unlikely of places, but I firmly believe that there will always be people “who have no such desire” that will rise up and try a new experiment in freedom. Hopefully they will have a better time of it.

[Sudden]

and it may be in the most unlikely of places

So Somalia will be the next libertopia? Or North Korea?

[Cytotoxic]

No you’re wrong. America is different. Financial crises in other countries often result in smaller government.

Do you and sarc and other doomsayers ejaculate whenever you doomsay? We’ve heard this ‘freedom/America is doomed’ shit for a long time and it was always hooey.

[The Knarf Yenrab]

Agree. Like goldfish, governments grow to the size of the economic bowl. The next major depression or huge ground war that devastates the economy should do the trick.

So that’s something to look forward to.

[Brett L]

In which The Atlantic has to admit that Rand Paul is the only Senator with a realistic view on foreign policy. And then punch up on him for hating the UN.

Paul didn’t outline a full-blown foreign-policy strategy. And if he did, I suspect I’d disagree with parts of it. Paul, after all, has a record of not merely undervaluing international institutions, but of promoting paranoia about them. He has called for ending U.S. support for the United Nations and peddled absurd theories about the UN confiscating America’s guns.

[CE]

…and peddled absurd theories about the UN confiscating America’s guns.

I wonder where he got that? The UN talks about peace and cooperation and human rights, right? Let’s check their website:

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/SALW/

Small arms facilitate a vast spectrum of human rights violations, including killing, maiming, rape and other forms of sexual violence, enforced disappearance, torture, and forced recruitment of children by armed groups. More human rights abuses are committed with small arms than with any other weapon.

Here I bought mine to prevent those sorts of things.

[CE]

So he DOES want the terrorists to win.