Funny how Al Gore tells the world about his upcoming speech and the MSM fall all over themselves to televise and write about it. Wonder why that could be?
Some highlights:
As we begin this new year, the Executive Branch of our government has been caught eavesdropping on huge numbers of American citizens and has brazenly declared that it has the unilateral right to continue without regard to the established law enacted by Congress to prevent such abuses.
More like a highly classified operation to keep this country safe was leaked to the press by a traitor to this country. Huge numbers? Try 30. And your damn right Bush declared he had the right WITH regard to established law…which gave him that right to keep our country safe.
[…]A commitment to openness, truthfulness and accountability also helps our country avoid many serious mistakes
Does that mean there will be a full accounting of the Clinton/Gore abuses of power? Like say for example, IRS abuses? I think not. So I wonder if Gore was able to say the following without breaking up:
A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government. Our Founding Fathers were adamant that they had established a government of laws and not men. Indeed, they recognized that the structure of government they had enshrined in our Constitution – our system of checks and balances – was designed with a central purpose of ensuring that it would govern through the rule of law.
He must be talking about his boss since he was the only one who broke the law.
He also wants protection for those who leak classified information that will make our country less safe:
Second, new whistleblower protections should immediately be established for members of the Executive Branch who report evidence of wrongdoing — especially where it involves the abuse of Executive Branch authority in the sensitive areas of national security.
Out of almost 7000 words he gets one thing right:
Moreover, there is in fact an inherent power that is conferred by the Constitution to the President to take unilateral action to protect the nation from a sudden and immediate threat, but it is simply not possible to precisely define in legalistic terms exactly when that power is appropriate and when it is not.
My question is why he left out Echelon, Able Danger, The Gorelick Wall, or Carnivore? Oh, I guess it would just highlight all of Clinton’s programs.
In the end this speech is just another example of why Democrats cannot be trusted with our nation’s defense. All they care about is the rights of terrorists and winning re-election, instead of the safety of the country.
Other’s Blogging:
See author page