White House Implies Rand Paul Puts ‘Political Ambition’ Above National Security

[jct74]

WH Implies Rand Paul Puts ‘Political Ambition’ Above National Security [VIDEO]

ALEX GRISWOLD
3:24 PM 05/26/2015




White House press secretary Josh Earnest not-so-subtly called out Republican Kentucky senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul for his 10-hour long filibuster of the NSA’s metadata surveillance practices, accusing him of putting “political ambition” above national security.

EARNEST: All the hard work’s been done on this. I mean, it’s complicated policy, it’s working through the partisan politics that’s involved, trying to understand the technology that’s involved, the stakes are really high when it comes to our national security and when it comes to civil liberties of the American people. All of that’s been worked out, because of the President and his national security team working effectively with Democrats and Republicans.

The other thing I would point out is that every single Democrat in the United States Senate voted for this compromise. And right now what we’re seeing is a difference of opinion of the Republican side of the aisle. At some point, the political ambitions of individual members of the U.S. Senate are going to have to come second to the national security of the United States.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/26/wh...ecurity-video/

[donnay]

Really? One word: Benghazi

[Sam I am]

It's quite ironic that he's fear-mongering and giving a lecture on political ambition at the same time.

[JK/SEA]

meh, i mean, what else is he supposed to say?...''Ron Paul was right, vote for Rand''...?

[phill4paul]

All the hard work’s been done on this. I mean, it’s complicated policy, it’s working through the partisan politics that’s involved, trying to understand the technology that’s involved, the stakes are really high when it comes to our national security and when it comes to civil liberties of the American people. All of that’s been worked out, because of the President and his national security team working effectively with Democrats and Republicans.

Obama be workin' hawd.

[acptulsa]

Because he couldn't have been putting the Constitution and our God-given rights above anything.

And because the government couldn't possibly make us less safe.

We already have our boots on. But we're going to have to trade them for hip waders before the end of the month.

Suggested message of the week: We ain't scared of privacy and freedom, Obama. Not one bit.

[01000110]

LOL

So they get called out by Rand that what they are doing is illegal and basically hasn't worked or thwarted anything so they fear monger.

Im seeing zero difference here between Obama and the nut job neocons like McCain and Graham, they are all against freedom and liberty and want nothing but to keep control over you.

[Occam's Banana]

If Rand is serving his "political ambition" here, then he is clearly not doing so by kissing up to the establishment (at least, not on this issue).
So then he must be doing so by means of appealing to voters (by clearly enunciating his opposition to the mass surveillance policies of the government).

Thus, the claim that national security should take precedence over Rand's "political ambition" essentially amounts to the claim that national security should take precedence over voters' wishes.

Ain't it funny how establishment elites (or their lackey mouthpieces like Josh Earnest) jus' love 'em some democracy and populism when it suits their purposes, but suddenly become condescending paternalists when it doesn't ... ?

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

I'd be making a web ad from that tonight.

[specsaregood]

I guess this is what happens when you go on cbs' morning show and call the president a disappointment.

[Ronin Truth]

And don't you all know that Barry absolutely NEVER has and NEVER would do any such thing?

[hells_unicorn]

Oh man, the irony in this is just too much to handle. Next they'll tell us that holding elections endangers national security given the NSA doesn't poll very well of late.

Oops, maybe I shouldn't be giving them ideas.

[r3volution 3.0]

I want to see this creature try to bull$#@! his way through the pearly gates.

Everyone hates a $#@!ing rat.

[phill4paul]

Oh man, the irony in this is just too much to handle. Next they'll tell us that holding elections endangers national security given the NSA doesn't poll very well of late.

Oops, maybe I shouldn't be giving them ideas.

NSA voter databases will decide which citizens are American enough to vote. How often their vote will be counted. How hard they vote. Democracy and Republic wrapped into one. A flag and a cross.

[Working Poor]

I hope some of you will go post a comment on that video.

[cindy25]

not true. Rand has done things for political purposes (changing his position on aid to Israel comes to mind). but NSA and Patriot act are Rand's issue. next goal-end the TSA

[Peace&Freedom]

Thus, the claim that national security should take precedence over Rand's "political ambition" essentially amounts to the claim that national security should take precedence over voters' wishes.

Ain't it funny how establishment elites (or their lackey mouthpieces like Josh Earnest) jus' love 'em some democracy and populism when it suits their purposes, but suddenly become condescending paternalists when it doesn't ... ?

The advocates for a surveillance state talk about 'balancing liberty with security,' but attack and oppose any attempt to restore liberty when push comes to shove. They want security without regards for liberty, period.

[jct74]

POTUS speaks on the Patriot Act



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLlKojPit0o