Again with the Wyden Accolades

Sure, he’s better than the Congressional members who knew and didn’t speak out against government abuse and illegality, and a damn sight better than the ones who actively support it, but certainly not better than those who didn't know or were misled, and being better than the bad isn’t really much of an accolade.

[Ron] Wyden finally has the audience he sought. All it took was Snowden. This is an awkward fact of Wyden’s success: To get anyone’s attention, the senator needed somebody else to break the laws that he would not.

“This debate should have started long, long, long ago. And it should have been started by elected officials and not by a government contractor,” Wyden said Friday.

  WaPo

So, what is he, but an elected official?

How proud he must be that he didn’t break any law. Only because not turning in another lawbreaker (in this case the NSA) is not against the law. At least not for Congressmen.

He said he spent years trying to start the debate, without actually saying what the debate was about.

And what kind of sense does that make? I want to start a debate that’s very, very important, but I can’t tell you what that debate is about. Pray tell, asshat, how do I debate something when I don’t know the facts?  Since when did governing become a game of charades?  "Three words.  First word: Sounds like..."

In March, for instance, Wyden asked Clapper about domestic ¬intelligence-gathering.

“Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” he asked.

Wyden knew the answer. Clapper knew the answer. The answer was yes.

“No, sir,” Clapper said.

And now Wyden is talking trash about Clapper for having lied. Well, what if we had put Ron Wyden on the stand and asked him a direct question like that? Since he says he couldn’t break the law, or the oath he had taken, he would have had to lie, wouldn’t he? The double standard is astounding.

But Wyden counts it a success and a necessary move (he also says he warned Clapper about the question beforehand). He said he wanted to establish a public marker to show that the administration had been spreading untruths about the reach of domestic spying.

“You can’t do vigorous oversight if the leaders of the intelligence community are misleading the American people, and Congress, in public hearings,” Wyden said.

Nor when the men and women who are charged with oversight aren’t willing to correct the record.

Now, Wyden says he will press — along with allies such as Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) — for legislation to end the bulk collection of telephone records and to declassify some decisions by the secret court.

And where would we be if Edward Snowden hadn’t come forward with what Ron Wyden and Mark Udall should have?  Perhaps it is simply a lesson for all American citizens who have the sense to see it, that we cannot entrust our lives and our rights to group of dollar-dependent pantywaists on a hill.

“We’re starting to put some points on the board,” Wyden said, noting the close vote on Amash’s amendment. “There is no question in my mind that our side is going to grow, and we’re going to stay at it until this is fixed.”

”Our side.” Why don’t you take credit, Mr. Wyden, while Edward Snowden sits in a foreign airport transit zone facing serious punishment, including the possibility of kidnap and rendition, and maybe even at BEST is looking at life in prison? Big brave defender of justice.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.