THE MISGUIDED BALANCING ACT

Obama said he welcomes the debate over NSA surveillance programs and that he is "seeking the right balance between national security and privacy concerns" (aka freedom).  I didn't know Obama was doing a circus act (but maybe I should have known).

This is a commonly-held, but erroneous belief:  that you can be 100% free or 80% free or 65% free, etc.  That freedom is quantifiable.  That it can be measured like the amount of milk you like in your morning coffee.  "I'm freer than you are" is not the same as "I'd like a little more milk".

Why?  Because you either are or are not free...like, you either are or are not alive.

Secondly, the President's call for a balancing act suggests that he believes security and freedom are in conflict with each other, that you cannot be both totally secure and totally free at the same time.  That to be secure, we must give up some of our freedom.  That, too, is erroneous.

In fact, we desire to be and must be both:  secure and free.

Let's look at free first.  We must be free if we are to live the full potential of our glorious life because Mother Nature so requires it.  I have written about this times before.  Acting in harmony with our nature is a prerequisite to happiness and a fulfilling life.  Remember, too, that freedom does not include the right to aid our enemies in any way, to help them or make it easier for them to use force against us.

And what does being secure mean?  Secure to do what?  To live the full potential of our glorious life.  To be free.  If security in fact requires...it doesn't...the surrender of our freedom, then it is not security that you are getting...and I don't want it.  It is of no interest to me.

Is it to you?

PS:  In his speech about NSA surveillance, Obama stridently said that Edward Snowden, who publicly revealed NSA'S illegal and unConstitutional activities, was "no patriot...and if he wants to clear the matter up, he should return to the U.S., face criminal charges and present his case".

So, according to our President, the revealer of the criminal activities should stand trial.  Should the orchestrator of  those criminal activities also stand trial, Mr. President?