June 7, 2013

The NSA data collection program separates the partisans from the ideologues...

... now that the President is a Democrat.

Where are you?
  
pollcode.com free polls 

121 comments:

cubanbob said...

I've consistently viewed this issue as a complicated balance and withhold support and criticism."

Should have added I've consistently viewed this issue as complicated and support and criticize the possibility of potential and actual abuses. Thats my choice.

Skeptical Voter said...

You left out one point of view. It is a complicated issue with some tough choices. It's permissible under certain circumstances, but you have to have trust in government to make it work. My late father was a big time New Dealer. Fresh out of college as an engineer, he was running Civilian Conservation Camps in the mountains in New Mexico and Colorado. His life was spent working for government agencies that he believed would only do things for the good of the populace. He held that view until he died in 2004.

These days, for many in my generation, that presumption that government will only work in a disinterested fashion for the common good is, in Ron Ziegler's words "no longer operative".

I wouldn't trust the Obama crowd to carry out the garbage.

Writ Small said...

The majority of R's commenting here are hypocritical on this issue, but I will be pleasantly surprised if the poll shows that.

Darrell said...

The difference? Obama is doing everything the Left was saying that Bush was doing--but wasn't. Just as the cocksuckers always do.

Russ said...

I think this dragnet thing (collecting who calls who) is horrific. It would have been horrific under Bush as well.

When push comes to shove and the government goes tyrannical, they're not so much interested in what you're saying, but who you're talking to.

The STASI would be proud.

Phil said...

Using NSA to spy on calls to Afghanistan is OK. Using it to spy on EVERYONE is fucking bullshit. No matter who is doing it.

SteveR said...

I wouldn't be so concerned about data mining if they hadn't bragged about data mining for political purposes, as if they had a secret weapon.

Mostly I like how its made people squirm or look inconsistent.

edutcher said...

Went with 3 - under Dubya, it was far more specific in whom it targeted - phones directly linked to terrorists.

Choom wants to know everything about everybody and that's the difference.

ricpic said...

I have no doubt that without government surveillance we would have suffered more Islamic terrorist attacks than we have since 9/11. How to protect civil liberties under conditions of increased government surveillance is the question. Anyway, it's a question beyond my pay grade since I'm straight and simple, not gay and sophisticated.

Nathan Alexander said...

Here's another choice you left out:

I support the concept of inadvertant collection of citizen information in the pursuit of foreign information, but it needs to be done correctly with proper oversight, in full accordance with all Intelligence Oversight guidance as found in EO12333, EO12334, and DoD Reg 5240.1.

There is no indication that these Intelligence Oversight rules were broken under President Bush.

There are now indications, although not definitive proof, that these rules were violated repeatedly under President Obama. However, based on the Obama Administration's behavior as demonstrated by the IRS, HHS, EPA, DoJ, FBI, etc, there is no reason to give the Obama Administration the benefit of the doubt. There needs to be a housecleaning and investigation so that we can have full accountability.

And if the full accountability and investigation reveals wrongdoings by the Bush Administration, those officials should not be spared from accountability, either.

Tank said...

I'm one of those whackadoodle assholes that that anti-Semite gay pig is so worried about.

Get off my lawn.

Nathan Alexander said...

@Writ Small,
Attempting to poison the well, eh?

Jay said...

Writ Small said...
The majority of R's commenting here are hypocritical on this issue,


Really, because you say so?

John said...

there is a problem with the poll.

There is no choice for opposed under Clinton.

See the Echelon Program. This surveillance is nothing new. It started back in the early 90's, before there even was a web with Clinton/Gore collecting all data not just headers on all phone calls and email.

They would scan it for key words and if found, give it human attention.

Many phone calls actually leave the US and come back in. They go up to satellites or are routed through Canada or Mexico. As soon that they become non-US calls, the govt has a lot more leeway.

You have no privacy. You never have. Get over it. I think it was Bill Joy of Sun that said that.

John Henry

Nonapod said...

I'd be coold with all this surveillance if I could completely and utterly trust the NSA and FBI and those who have jurisdiction over them both to never abuse this information, this power, for political and/or personal ends. Unfortunately, I am unable to do so. The reasons are simple, I don't trust human beings to stop being human beings. Even if 99.9% of the individuals in these organizations are good, upstanding people who would never dream of abusing this power, abuse would still occur at some point.

Jay said...

Writ Small said...
The majority of R's commenting here are hypocritical on this issue


Actually, any leftist voting for Obama is a hypocrite on this issue.

Thanks for participating.

Robert Cook said...

"...you have to have trust in government to make it work."

"Trust in the government" is like the legal "presumption of innocence" in reverse. Even a defendant at trial whose guilt is indisputable must be afforded, for the purposes of trial, the legal presumption of innocence, and the state has the obligation to present a case to judge or jury that proves to them beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is culpable for the crime with which he's charged.

By the same token, but in reverse, even if we personally favor and trust in the individuals who represent us in government, even if we have voted for them, we must require they prove to us they are not lying to us and they are acting in our interests and not in the interests of their own self-aggrandizement or in the interest of other parties with whom they have special relationships. We should never passively accept or assume that "the government knows what's best and they'll do what's right."

In short, we should trust that our system of government works and is just, but we must remember that our government is made up of people, and we can't trust people.

techsan said...

It not the spying by itself...it's the IRS behavior combined with government-employee/liberal/Democrat alignment that makes it stink. Sprinkle on a "free" press with liberal/Democrat sympathies. As this whole "fundamental transformation" that Obama advertised now begins to become public, it's not pretty if you are a citizen who isn't an approved victim of some kind.

Colonel Angus said...

We should never passively accept or assume that "the government knows what's best and they'll do what's right."

In short, we should trust that our system of government works and is just, but we must remember that our government is made up of people, and we can't trust people.


Careful Robert. You're sounding an awful lot like a conservative. In point of fact, that was almost Reaganesque.

gerry said...

I wouldn't trust the Obama crowd to carry out the garbage.

Preciseley. Inside every Progressive is an authoritarian.

For example, the now-declassified Venona Papers revealed that FDR's administration was rife with Communist sympathizers and outright spies, some at very high levels.

Tailgunner Joe McCarthy was rigtht.

John said...

Maybe off topic and delete it if you want

If you want to worry about privacy what about the Bluetooth sniffers that are going up all over the US? You will see them every couple miles along major highways.

They sniff your Bluetooth phone, I-Pod, radio etc identify the Mac address and send it to a database. the nest station does the same and they can tell how long it took to travel the distance.

All for the purpose of giving better traffic flow, of course.

All anonymized and could never be used to track you. Oh, no. not never!

See more info and pics of what to look for here

http://trafficcast.com/products/view/blue-toad/

http://www.postoaktraffic.com/default.aspx

the above are vendors. This site describes how Houston TX system works.

http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/bluetooth/transtar_bluetooth.html

Be afraid. Be very afraid!

John Henry

Patrick Henry said...

This is not complicated. Spying on American Citizens in any manner without reasonable probably cause is a violation of the 4th and 9th Amendments and the general rights of the People.

This is bad, and this is why I've always opposed such "complicated" arguments. Because this is the slippery slope. It was clear when this all started. 9/11 changed nothing except the excuses tyrants use.

Colonel Angus said...

It not the spying by itself...it's the IRS behavior combined with government-employee/liberal/Democrat alignment that makes it stink.

Indeed. Any wonder why there is concern among conservatives when Democrats are hell bent on gun confiscation while DHS buys ammunion in the tens of millions?

sydney said...

Robert Cook is the best leftist on this site.

William said...

As a practical matter I think we have more to fear from terrorists than from political zealots. I clicked the first button, but the scandals attached to the IRS and the EPA give me pause.

Lem said...

I haven’t looked to see what's different now from what was being done under Bush, but I supported what Bush was doing.

It could be that what was leaked under Bush was only a partial scope of the surveillance and now, with this leak, we have a more complete picture of what was being done all along. Or maybe as the tech has improved so has the scope of surveillance.

So I may have to re-evaluate my stance depending upon what I have in front of me.

Until then, I’m for it… before I make up my mind to be against it ;)

edutcher said...

sydney said...

Robert Cook is the best leftist on this site.

That's not saying a lot, but you do have to give him points for consistency.

William said...

As a practical matter I think we have more to fear from terrorists than from political zealots. I clicked the first button, but the scandals attached to the IRS and the EPA give me pause.

Sorun said...

The Obama Administration has already demonstrated that it's willing to abuse any sort of government trust for political purposes.

Matthew Sablan said...

"I wouldn't trust the Obama crowd to carry out the garbage."

-- In fact, everywhere I've lived, the government could rarely do that right.

Bruce Hayden said...

Using NSA to spy on calls to Afghanistan is OK. Using it to spy on EVERYONE is fucking bullshit. No matter who is doing it.

Those are basically my feelings. The FISA debate under Bush (43) mostly revolved around the recording of international calls, calls that cross our national borders. Calls that were purely international were freely recorded, and those purely within are subject to the federal Wiretap Act instead. The phone records were always in the background, but not really all that much of an issue.

My worries are that the data, once collected, is not just limited to the NSA trying to track down terrorists and prevent terrorism. Rather, there will inevitably be calls by the FBI and other federal agencies for access to such, and at first, they will tug the heart strings. The Boston bombing. Kidnapping of little girls. Etc. But, then it will become common place. And, then, maybe, it will be used for nefarious reasons.

A number of TV shows, notably NCIS and NCIS LA, show federal capabilities to easily search phone records, and they rarely show getting a warrant for such. It is almost as if it were at their finger tips. Sure, this is TV, and therefore fantasy, but, it does make you think.

Nathan Alexander said...

Robert Cook is the best leftist on this site.

Eh, Robert Cook fails to realize that these things he complains about are inherent to and inseparable from Leftism in power.

Renee said...

Technology is different from 2001, hard to compare.

edutcher said...

If the Choom Gang thinks they can save themselves by leaking this, I think they've got another think coming.

Watergate wasn't just the break-in, it was anything the Lefties didn't like about the Nixon Administration including a great many things they had done before and are doing to this day.

It was the totality.

And, again, for those who think this crowds out something like Benghazi, what happens when somebody asks the musical question, "If you had this much raw data, why was Chris Stevens in Benghazi that night"?

That crunching sound you hear in the background is the entire American Left running aground on 50 years of lies.

Hagar said...

AA may be right that this latest furore is another attempt at misdirection; bringing up a very complex matter and raising a fuss about it to deflect attention from the very simple issues that lie at the bottom of the current scandals.

An important difference between the Bush and Obama administrations is that the Bushies were focused on our enemies overseas, while the Obamaites think, well, those are are far away across the seas, but the Repubs, Tea Partiers, and KKK are right here.

elkh1 said...

"I've consistently viewed this issue as a complicated balance and withhold support and criticism."

My brain is mush.

Elliott A said...

Please understand that this question is disassociated with my ungiven opinion. How does the use of public phone, data, and internet networks differ from other public behavior and activity? You are fair game in the street or in a park to be videoed or observed. Did they mine encrypted data? (IMHO the equivalent of the contents of a sealed letter you send through the post office) I'm not sure the legal precedent would be that there is an expectation of privacy unless the call or data is or are encrypted or you have a face to face conversation in a private place.

edutcher said...

Bruce Hayden said...

My worries are that the data, once collected, is not just limited to the NSA trying to track down terrorists and prevent terrorism. Rather, there will inevitably be calls by the FBI and other federal agencies for access to such, and at first, they will tug the heart strings

The FBI has been a part of this for some time. The WaPo story names them right at the beginning.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

All the wingnuts are paranoid. They incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. They’ll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.

wyo sis said...

"In short, we should trust that our system of government works and is just, but we must remember that our government is made up of people, and we can't trust people."

While I do trust a republic as a system of government I do NOT trust what we have now. It's dangerous to trust this government.
We had a system of checks and balances at one time, but we no longer have that. The system we have now doesn't work and it is far from just.
People make it worse. When people are corrupt or greedy even a just system will decay.
But, hasn't that already been mentioned by someone? Like maybe Benjamin Franklin.
"A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Lem said...

The Obama Administration has already demonstrated that it's willing to abuse any sort of government trust for political purposes.

That much we now know with certitude.

Kirk Parker said...

"Robert Cook is the best leftist on this site. "

Well, that depends somewhat on how you define "leftist" and, especially, "best".

But yes, when he's on he's on, and though I almost always disagree with him--including 'and' and 'the'--his 10:55am is so nearly perfect that I can't find a single word I'd change in it. Well done, sir!

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

How does the use of public phone, data, and internet networks differ from other public behavior and activity? You are fair game in the street or in a park to be videoed or observed. Did they mine encrypted data? (IMHO the equivalent of the contents of a sealed letter you send through the post office) I'm not sure the legal precedent would be that there is an expectation of privacy unless the call or data is or are encrypted or you have a face to face conversation in a private place.

Really? If I leave my house door unlocked, you think it's ok for the government to walk in and search my house?

Lem said...

Technology is different from 2001, hard to compare.

My understanding is that a judge is checking the program and a select group of legislators is also in the know.

So, I assume that whatever has changed (if something has fundamentally changed) has been run through them.

Jay said...

“Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, and creative, and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.”

Hilarious.

garage mahal said...

If your car broke down and don't have AAA, call any phone number and say "allah akbar", and someone will be along soon to pick you up!

Freder Frederson said...

Contrary to what you think I think, I thought it stank under Bush, and it stinks just as bad (or maybe even worse, since Obama implied he was going to cut this kind of crap out) under Obama.

Freder Frederson said...

Obama is doing everything the Left was saying that Bush was doing--but wasn't.

Why do you say that? All indications are that these programs started under Bush. And before the warrants were issued by the FISA court, Bush went around the FISA court and was apparently intercepting massive amounts of information through tapping into phone lines with equipment installed directly in phone company data centers.

Freder Frederson said...

under Dubya, it was far more specific in whom it targeted - phones directly linked to terrorists.

That is an incorrect statement.

Jay said...

Obama begged Congress to re-authorize the Patriot Act and Harry Reid was bashing Rand Paul for slowing down said re-authorization and Harry Reid the Patriot Act a "critical tool in the war on terrorism"

This is an Obama program focusing on domestic calls and data which is orders of magnitude larger than anything Bush did. The Bush program, from what we know, focused on calls outside the country. So If you're looking to bash, or even bring up Bush, you're a silly partian hack.

Thanks for the reminder, Freeder

Jay said...

Freder Frederson said...


That is an incorrect statement.


Hilarious.

Now the obfuscation and lies must begin. Because freedip must rationalize voting for this twice.

Jay said...

Freder Frederson said...

All indications are that these programs started under Bush.


Since the FISA court was established in 1978, there are no indications this started under Bush.

Jay said...

Bush went around the FISA court and was apparently intercepting massive amounts of information through tapping into phone lines with equipment installed directly in phone company data centers.

Complete and utter bullshit

Zach said...

The IRS and journalist-bugging scandals can't help but affect your opinion of this program.

On the one hand, traffic analysis is one of the most powerful methods to figure out what the enemy is doing. The NSA and its predecessors have been doing it for decades, and I have no doubt that it produces incredibly valuable information.

On the other hand, traffic analysis is also a very strong method for repression. If you watch "The Lives of Others", what is the STASI doing? They're taking notes of who enters the artist's apartment at what times, when they leave, what they're talking about -- exactly the sort of information that PRISM is gathering.

Do you want to prosecute anybody who leaks to James Rosen or Fox News? PRISM would let you do it.

It strikes me that in the age of big data, the real invasion of privacy occurs when people start searching the databases. That's when individual people start getting separated from the anonymous gigabytes of raw data.

Maybe the law ought to focus on the types of searches the government is allowed to perform on collected data, rather than on the collection of data. I have little doubt that even completely legal databases could be quite helpful in the cause of political repression.

Jay said...

Watching freedip pretend is fun.

Note:

WASHINGTON—The National Security Agency's monitoring of Americans includes customer records from the three major phone networks as well as emails and Web searches, and the agency also has cataloged credit-card transactions, said people familiar with the agency's actions

That isn't what Bush did.

Just stop now, dumbass.

Freder Frederson said...

Complete and utter bullshit

Just because you don't want something to not be true doesn't mean it isn't.

Jay said...

Freder Frederson said...

Just because you don't want something to not be true doesn't mean it isn't.


wikipedia is not a valid source

allegations are not fact.

Thanks for participating.

Freder Frederson said...

That isn't what Bush did.

According to statements from Congress, this was the routine renewal of a warrant for a program that has been going on for seven years. Prism, the other program revealed, started in 2007. Which means both programs started under Bush.

You are simply wrong.

Colonel Angus said...

I thought it stank under Bush, and it stinks just as bad (or maybe even worse, since Obama implied he was going to cut this kind of crap out)underObama.

Considering Obama doubled down on much of Bush's foreign policy well before his re-election I suspect most who voted to give him a second bite at the apple really don't think this stinks so bad.

Jay said...

All indications are that these programs started under Bush

Your "indications" are silly drivel and bullshit.

Obama is doing this. This is an Obama program approved by Democrats.

So If you're looking to bash, or even bring up Bush, you're a silly partian hack.

Freder Frederson said...

So If you're looking to bash, or even bring up Bush, you're a silly partian hack.

You might want to recheck the subject of this thread.

Colonel Angus said...

Wouldn't it be a delicious irony if the excesses and constitutional abuses of the Obama Presidency united liberals and conservatives to demand smaller government?

Yeah, I know. Dream on.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

From the wiki "the NSA was authorized by executive order to monitor, without search warrants, the phone calls, Internet activity (Web, e-mail, etc.), text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S."


WASHINGTON—The National Security Agency's monitoring of Americans includes customer records from the three major phone networks as well as emails and Web searches, and the agency also has cataloged credit-card transactions, said people familiar with the agency's actions

One thing is not like the other.

Jay said...

Freder Frederson said...

You are simply wrong.


Hilarious.

freedip is now pretending FISA did not get re-authorized in 2011. Oh, and a Democratic Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act in July 2008, it included both immunity and a four-year extension of the government’s warrantless spying powers

again, the lies must take place to rationalize voting for this twice.

Note: what the Bush NSA did is not what the Obama NSA is doing.

Your dumbass responses are silly and predictable.

Jay said...

Even the ACLU understands what freedope does not:

“In many ways it’s even more troubling than [Bush era] warrantless wiretapping, in part because the program is purely domestic,” says Alex Abdo, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project.”But this is also an indiscriminate dragnet. Say what you will about warrantless wiretapping, at least it was targeted at agents of Al Qaeda. This includes every customer of Verizon Business Services.”


Hilarity.

Anyone saying "Bush did it too" is a silly, ignorant hack or lying.

Jay said...

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

One thing is not like the other.


I know, but freedope just knows the NSA was involved in both instances so that is good enough to draw an equivalence.

Nathan Alexander said...

Here's the other point on the hypocrisy angle:
Conservatives are against Big Govt, and think that Big Govt is prone to these sorts of excesses. Conservatives are more likely to pay attention to and protest such overreach by the govt.

Liberals want bigger govt. They say that a govt can be big w/o being corrupt. So when they complain about govt actions under Bush, it is only a complaint about the nature of Bush himself, not the nature of govt.

Thus, liberals are the ones who will complain when a conservative does it, but cheer when a liberal does the exact same thing...as long as it is only against conservatives. Note the cheering or yawns from liberals all over the place regarding the IRS actions, and only a mild irritation now that it is discovered that their guy included them in the illegal scrutiny this time...although the mild irritation quickly becomes a pivot to blame Bush again.

In complete disregard to the actual facts, of course.

garage mahal said...

This is an Obama program approved by Democrats.

And Republicans.

edutcher said...

You can document that with something other than "Bush did it", I hope?

Nathan Alexander said...

Too bad this bit of irony gets lost in all the scandals:

http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/07/%E2%80%9Cuhhh%E2%80%A6uh%E2%80%A6uhhh%E2%80%A6people%E2%80%9D-obama-total-loss-words-when-staff-forgets-his-speech

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

" Note: what the Bush NSA did is not what the Obama NSA is doing."

I don't think we know this yet. I would not be surprised if Bush's NSA did these exact same programs. I wouldn't be surprised if both administrations have done worse.

I do know the DNI lied to Sen Wyden in a hearing. I don't know if anyone under Bush lied to the Senate.

Nathan Alexander said...

@garage,
This is an Obama program approved by Democrats.

And Republicans.


Wait. Didn't you liberals say Republicans were nothing but stubborn total obstructionists who wouldn't let Obama enact his agenda?

My, how malleable the "truth" is for you liberals. It seems to be whatever it is you need it to be at the time.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

garage mahal said... This is an Obama program approved by Democrats.

And Republicans.

6/7/13, 12:10 PM

Republicans are honest about their beliefs in sursurveillance and privacy. Obama lied. There is a difference.

Jay said...

Aww, freedope all bum hurt?

For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans' phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)

It's hardly a new stance for Obama, who has made similar statements in previous campaign speeches, but mention of the issue in a stump speech, alongside more frequently discussed topics like Iraq and education, may give some clue to his priorities.


Comedy gold.

Colonel Angus said...

Seems the liberal argument is: If that idiot Bush hadn't started this, Obama wouldn't have had to expand the program!!!

Elliott A said...

@Bill ROT Your house is private. The airwaves and wires are public.

James said...


So, I assume that whatever has changed (if something has fundamentally changed) has been run through them.


Are you that confident that a 79 year old Diane Feinstein can really conduct an informed discussion on metadata? From what I've seen of the legislators so far they barely have an understanding of data mining.

James said...

Doesn't the F in FISA mean "Foreign?"

edutcher said...

Yes, but Zero thinks it means "Federal".

mariner said...

Bruce Hayden,

Those are basically my feelings. The FISA debate under Bush (43) mostly revolved around the recording of international calls, calls that cross our national borders. Calls that were purely international were freely recorded, and those purely within are subject to the federal Wiretap Act instead. The phone records were always in the background, but not really all that much of an issue.

The problem here is that the Obama administration, and perhaps the Bush administration before it, is playing fast and loose with the definition of "international call".

During the previous discussions I followed, a call from one person in the U.S. to another person in the U.S. was not considered an international call and monitoring it was beyond the pale.

Now it seems that when a call originates in the U.S., leaves the U.S. to a communications satellite and returns to the U.S. it's an international call because it left the terrestrial U.S.

I believe this is a good example of giving government agents limited power which government agents then manage to twist into practically unlimited power, without our even knowing they've done so.

bagoh20 said...

I supported it under Bush and still did under Obama until I found out how untrustworthy this administration is. Now I support significantly scaling it back regardless of who's in office, but especially when they clearly don't respect the constitution.

I was wrong, and have learned an old lesson. You can't risk giving the government more power just because you trust a few people there. I'm wiser now.

Freder Frederson said...

If that idiot Bush hadn't started this, Obama wouldn't have had to expand the program!!!

That isn't my argument at all.

Drago said...

Freder: "That isn't my argument at all."

That's the ONLY argument the left has had for 5 years.

cf said...

Ms. Althouse, I agree with others that you have left an important option out, and it puts those who vote Three at a disadvantage, because you have already framed us as Idealogues.

The anti-terror laws after 9-11 were written with care and bipartisanship. I believe they were a triumph for early 21st century America, in anticipation of the battles ahead. The Bush Administration worked openly to thread our freedoms through a maze of dreadful issues with an honesty and courage that I badly miss.

The Pelosi Democrats lost little time, after approving these actions, and began lying and demagoguing about them for personal gain. They used our desire to be Good against Us.

So they get the Obama Oligopoly into power saying the Constitution was being shredded, and proceed to make a tickertape parade of comstitutional lawlessness for themselves, coercion for the rest of us, and systematic suppression / denial of our rights: to freely associate and speak our minds, to be treated equally by our government agencies, and to be free from unreasonable search and seizures, for starters.

These corrupt Power whores have exponentially moved the careful practices of the Bush administration into the very dangerous lawlessness that they ululated against, and were claiming was happening then.

Ptewy! (That is, I spit on their $500 shoes.)

damikesc said...

When I believed that the program tracked foreigners, I was OK.

Now that it is tracking specifically Americans ALONE --- no, I'm not OK.

Drago said...

Nathan: "Wait. Didn't you liberals say Republicans were nothing but stubborn total obstructionists who wouldn't let Obama enact his agenda?"

Yes.

You can to any comments section for just about any media source and you will see the lefties routinely claim that the republicans have said no to everything for Obama from day 1.

They then proceed to pretend that this has kept Obama from getting anything he needs to get the economy moving, save our infrastructure, etc.

They seem to forget that Obama got obamacare thru along with quite a few other bills that empowered his completely trustworthy federal bureaucracy.

Obama's "stimulus" (union payoff) bill was put through in the first year which the lefties all promised us would save the economy AND give us all those shovel ready infrastructure jobs!

Obama even put "Sheriff Joe" in charge of that stimulus bill to ensure all that good stuff got done.

Of course, now the left claims that we need a "stimulus" bill to give us jobs and repair those bridges that are falling down even though that was one of the specific stated purposes of the original stimulus bill.

Given their back flips on every single issue/topic, the word malleable itself is insufficient to capture the true degree of intellectual "flexibility" of the lefty walking dead.

Yeah, there is some "shovel ready" stuff going on here with garage and his pals, but it ain't related to jobs or infrastructure.

Drago said...

damikesc: "When I believed that the program tracked foreigners, I was OK. Now that it is tracking specifically Americans ALONE --- no, I'm not OK"

How dare you get all "fact-y" and "context-y" and "nuance-y".

Don't you know that Obama is powerless to stop all those momentum-laden Bush policies that carry on due to the (now patented) "Cheney Inertia" which precludes our ever agonizing President Wonderful from stopping those dastardly republicans?

I mean, don't you KNOW that?

Inga said...

What I see is leftists here saying it stinks under Obama and it stunk under Bush as well. Why don't rightists admit that Bush was complicit in undermining Americans rights? Why are so many of them so partisan? How can we trust them? It was a leftist who broke this story, it's leftists who are demanding an answer from Obama,THIER President.

Why didn't the rightists do the same under Bush?

Nathan Alexander said...

What I see is liberals trying to turn discussion of Obama scandals into complaints about Republican hypocrisy.

It is transparent partisanship, but for some reason they just can't stay on topic on the Things the Obama Administration Is Doing Wrong.

I wonder why that is?

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

Robert Cook is the best leftist on this site.

Robert Cook appears to be not a leftist but a classical liberal.

Jay said...

Inga said...
What I see is leftists here saying it stinks under Obama and it stunk under Bush as well


Of course you do.

You have no fucking clue what is going on here.

Clyde said...

I'll admit to being partisan. I thought that what Bush did was necessary after 9/11, but it only would have worked if we'd actually profiled the people who had attacked us: Muslims. Our government was too timorously politically correct to do so, so instead it just threw out a dragnet, apparently.

I also suspect that when Obama came into office, the program grew from the size of a mouse to the size of a mastodon by comparison. Maybe that's naïve; maybe it was always that huge, but I doubt it. One thing's for certain: Given the way that the IRS and other government agencies have proven themselves to be politically partisan and untrustworthy, it is now troubling that Obama's regime has so much power in their hands.

Jay said...

Why don't rightists admit that Bush was complicit in undermining Americans rights? Why are so many of them so partisan?

Laugh out loud funny.

Notice you, nor any other leftist, can admit that Obama has taken this program from foreign surveillance to domestic surveillance.

As was already pointed out, you're too busy trying to change the subject to do so.

bagoh20 said...

"Why didn't the rightists do the same under Bush?".

Plenty on the right did.
What happened, and it seems forgotten, is that after 9/11, most people on both sides suddenly mostly cared about security, including me. That led to expanded powers and even the Iraq war with lots of Democratic support for all of it. Then with the election in 2004, sides had to be taken and differences defined. The left, being out of office, took the anti-government stance only because that was anti-Bush, and they stuck with it until they got the Presidency. Some on the right, and most libertarians, opposed the policies from the start. The only reason most on the right supported it was because we were at war. We no longer are, and Obama has said so, so why the vastly expanded policy now.

This simplistic "Bush did it too" crap is just lazy headed or refusal to admit that it's gone too far, or to do any discriminating analysis. That's where the partisanship is. It doesn't care what the external reality is, or justification, just who is in office. Bush being in Texas now is not the only thing that has changed since the early 2000s.

Inga said...

Do you really think its a realistic expectation to just forget past President's wrongs when discussing current President's wrongs?

Really? Are Americans expected to stuff it down the memory hole, never to be brought up when it relates to a current situation? That's not going to happen and if it were to happen often enough, we would repeat those mistakes, as in this very situation.

bagoh20 said...

"Why don't rightists admit that Bush was complicit in undermining Americans rights? "

I admit it, and lots on the right do. I'll also admit that Lincoln undermined them as well, and so did FDR, both in time of war with great concerns about security and survival.
Let Obama make the case for the need first, then do the deed as those men did. They didn't risk our rights, and then justify it with "Hey, do you want 100% security or not?" type bullshit.

bagoh20 said...

Inga, why are you both saying Obama is wrong with this and arguing with people who agree with that? Is it so hard to just say Obama is wrong to rob me of my rights, period? Fixing Bush's mistake means attacking Obama policy. Sorry you don't like that, but that's where we are. Face it.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I've consistently viewed this issue as a complicated balance and withhold support and criticism.

Hey, could one of you guys at NSA update our relationship status to It's Complicated?

Thx

Unknown said...

Scratch a liberal....find a fascist.

MadisonMan said...

When I believed that the program tracked foreigners, I was OK.

How can the people tracking tell?

Achilles said...

MadisonMan said...

When I believed that the program tracked foreigners, I was OK.

How can the people tracking tell?

6/7/13, 2:45 PM

Without getting into the weeds of GSM or CDMA stuff every carrier and all its towers have a country code as part of the MSISDN number attached to your phone.

Chip Ahoy said...

Bush understood limitations this administration does not. Bush understood his nation's enemies are foreign antagonists, this administration understands its enemies are to its immediate right, anyone who does not accept his own antagonisms. So I voted for trusting Bush but do not trusting Obama, not one tiny bit, and I still think loyalty to Party is misplaced and makes people incredibly stupid, in fact, too stupid to talk to.

Jay said...

Inga said...
Do you really think its a realistic expectation to just forget past President's wrongs when discussing current President's wrongs?


Uh, you still can't bring yourself to say what the current President's wrongs are.

Achilles said...

Inga said...

Do you really think its a realistic expectation to just forget past President's wrongs when discussing current President's wrongs?

Really? Are Americans expected to stuff it down the memory hole, never to be brought up when it relates to a current situation? That's not going to happen and if it were to happen often enough, we would repeat those mistakes, as in this very situation.

6/7/13, 2:12 PM

Obama just has to promise to force me to pay for Inga's abortions and birth control and she will support him in all his fascist fantasies. Isn't democracy grand?

Jay said...

Inga said...
Do you really think its a realistic expectation to just forget past President's wrongs when discussing current President's wrongs?


This is an Obama program. Obama is the President, you're here doing nothing but being a silly, dishonest hack.

Note:
The National Security Agency has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants, according to a top secret document obtained by the Guardian.

X said...

Inga said...
What I see is leftists here saying it stinks under Obama and it stunk under Bush as well.


you have no credibility on civil rights. you wanted a movie maker locked up for a youtube video, and ObamaHillary obliged you.

edutcher said...

Inga said...

What I see is leftists here saying it stinks under Obama and it stunk under Bush as well. Why don't rightists admit that Bush was complicit in undermining Americans rights? Why are so many of them so partisan?

Because Dubya applied the law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - as written.

Choom has applied it (and apparently is trying to sell it) as the
Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Big difference.

But the She Devil of the SS knew that.

BTW, that line, "What I see is leftists here saying it stinks under Obama and it stunk under Bush as well"?

No, dear, what we see is Lefties trying to cover themselves after their Messiah has been shown to be the would-be Fuhrer e all said he was.

Jay said...

Just imagine if the Bush Administration wanted to put a record of every woman who had an abortion into a federal HHS database.

I wonder how differently that story would be reported and play out.

Baron Zemo said...

I think it is fair to remember that Woodrow Wilson read the Zimmerman telegram when talking about Obama's abuses of privacy.

I mean it's the same thing right

Simon said...

I supported it when Bush was running it and I support it now. And I'm a little surprised that some of my fellow Republicans have become such reflexive critics of Barack Obama that they have sided with candidate Obama's criticism of Bush administration policy over President Obama's embrace of it.

edutcher said...

Baron Zemo said...

I think it is fair to remember that Woodrow Wilson read the Zimmerman telegram when talking about Obama's abuses of privacy.

I mean it's the same thing right


It is?

Revenant said...

I didn't have a problem with the government snooping on all overseas calls. I do have a problem with them doing data mining on all domestic calls, for whatever reason.

The federal government traditionally has authority over what crosses the national border. What happens within the borders is largely none of their business.

edutcher said...

Exactly - and that's how most Americans see it.

garage mahal said...

Democrats. Republicans. Libertarians. The entire political class is rotten to the core. Link.

edutcher said...

But not really the Democrats, right, garage?

Baron Zemo said...

Jeez Captain Literal no joke is safe around you.

Baron Zemo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ignorance is Bliss said...

garage mahal said...

Democrats. Republicans. Libertarians. The entire political class is rotten to the core. Link.

So Ron Paul is rotten to the core because he is not bought and paid for by his biggest campaign contributor? That's your argument?

Titus said...

Baron Zemo, I tried to get on your blog today and could not?

Did you shut down for business?

I hope everything is ok.

Hugs and Kisses and Tits and Thanks.

titus.

Revenant said...

So Ron Paul is rotten to the core because he is not bought and paid for by his biggest campaign contributor? That's your argument?

Garage likes to haul out the "any libertarian who doesn't live naked in a cave is a hypocrite" line of argument every once in a while. :)

Jeff said...

It was wrong when Bush did it, and it's wrong when Obama does even more than Bush did.

The libertarians among us predicted that the govt would use 9/11 to justify a massive expansion of the security apparatus. So we've seen the TSA, spying on everybody, huge numbers of new security agencies whose operations we know nothing about, people pretending atrocities committed via drones are somehow acceptable, at least one unnecessary war, and now this. Will we never learn?

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

--Benjamin Franklin