I don't think he's being cynical. The points smell of rhetoric. "We must be mindful of the precedents set" "Avoid collateral damage" "Promote innovation over l

I don't think he's being cynical. The points smell of rhetoric. "We must be mindful of the precedents set" "Avoid collateral damage" "Promote innovation over litigation" None of this is actionable against the legislation in it's current form. What you're doing is interpreting actions based on your own bias and joining the dots in your own mind as to what these things mean. You're not seeing the other side, which is frequently the problems with these debates. Bottom line - I think his heart is in the right place, I just don't see these points as being particularly poignant given the context in which they are being seen from the other side of the debate.