General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI don't understand why so many progressives are letting themselves be manipulated
into a huge uproar against Obama about programs that began in the Bush years, were repeatedly approved by large majorities of Congress, and were scaled back and/or eliminated by Obama? Warrantless wiretapping ended before Obama took office and another Bush program ended in 2011. The collection of telephone metadata goes on, but this information was discussed in public years ago. Why was there no uproar then? Why is it happening now, after Benghazi, the IRS, etc.? Why is all the anger directed against Obama instead of both parties in Congress?
We've known since 2001 that the US, Presidents and Congress, was going after al Queda all over the world. So how did people think they were being tracked? Through carrier pigeon? Bloodhounds?
I understand why people are disturbed by US surveillance and think the debate is important and necessary and that further changes may need to occur.
But after three fake scandals against Obama in quick succession, why are progressives so willing to, once again, form a circular firing squad? Some ask why we focus on Snowden. I'd like to know why the focus on Obama for programs heavily supported by members of both parties in Congress?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
leftstreet
(36,106 posts)Pfft
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
leftstreet
(36,106 posts)
Cleita
(75,480 posts)
tblue
(16,350 posts)I think the op us telling us to let that stuff go. S/he doesn't care and we're not supposed to either.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
railsback
(1,881 posts)Just a bunch of whining and 'end of days' speculative talk.
Which seems to be the poster's point.
mick063
(2,424 posts)Once you put on that robe, you are infallible.
railsback
(1,881 posts)Just because people don't like it doesn't make it illegal.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Because too many wannabe-anarchists - who share a distrust and hatred of Big Gubmint with the TeaBaggers - believe that the people don't need no stinking laws! We don't need no protection against phantom bombers and airplane-hijackers. It's all in our heads! 
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Such silly, whining, end of days speculative talk on the part of MLK. Didn't he know, nothing that was happening was against the LAW!!
railsback
(1,881 posts)Persecuting gays, liberals, Jews! Public executions! Mass genocide! Check points every block! Curfews! Its ALL coming, folks! Get your guns, duct tape your windows and ready your cyanide capsules!
Good Gawd.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,406 posts)at least based on some of the discussions I've seen here recently.
I'm sorry but I didn't realize that we had become a third-world totalitarian dictatorship. Our country ain't perfect but c'mon!
railsback
(1,881 posts)They have the waterboarding ready, bamboo shoots for the fingernails, and 50,000 hours of Growing Pains.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,406 posts)Aaaaaaaaaaaah!!!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I notice you left them out. How could anyone forget those mass killings? Human beings being slaughtered and no one knows why. It's all secret!
We won't persecute anyone who doesn't protest the status quo. But see the torture of those who do, like Bradley Manning. The brutality towards OWS, the near killing of several of those peaceful protesters. Just keep quiet, watch what you say and don't rock the boat and you'll be okay.
And we have 'Secret Kill Lists'! How democratic of us! But we can't know what lands someone on one of those 'KILL LISTS'. What did they do? No one knows! It doesn't matter, it's for the Homeland! Trust your leaders.
The Patriot Act, Homeland Security. Such carefully chosen names for the demise of the rule of law.
And everything is legal!
railsback
(1,881 posts)such as my post.
For instance, Manning's 'torture' constituted solitary confinement and some nudity. C'mon. Its not like anyone punched him in the face like he punched Showman.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Afghanistan, in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and wherever else we are killing people 'for the Homeland'. Well, it's not for the 'Homeland' as everyone knows, it's for PROFIT.
I noticed that once again you skipped right over the slaughter of all those Muslims.
It's interesting how Americans have come to view the victims of our WMDs as non persons.
It's 'legal' but it's also a major crime, what this country has done over the past decade to innocent human beings. Would you like to see some photos? I don't like to look at them, they break my heart, especially the babies, the little girls wearing their pretty dresses just like little girls here, little boys holding their toys sometimes, you have to be without a soul to condone this sort of thing.
And then are the drone strikes where they are blown into so many pieces their grieving families can't identify them and sometimes have to settle for an arm, a leg to bury.
I know, we don't want to bother our beautiful minds with such things. We'd rather whine about Godwin's law or whatever.
But it is all being recorded for historical purposes whether we like it or not and we are not looking like the good guys, too many bodies to hide from history.
Once again, as MLK said 'never forget that everything they did in Germany was LEGAL!'
You started this conversation by invoking the LAW to justify crimes. I invoked MLK's wisdom to try to point out to you that just because something is legal doesn't mean it is not, or cannot be, a crime of massive proportions.
railsback
(1,881 posts)and at a much higher ratio. In fact, people have been raging against each other for centuries, something that will never change until that day when each race is molted into one race, the human race, which will probably take a few more centuries. As far as the LAW, the LAW is what the LAW is, until someone changes the LAW. Invoking Germany into this is like..well.. like when the Right calls Obama Hitler. Both are highly irrational.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)a clear violation of both the FISA Law and the Constitution.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)leftstreet
(36,106 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)Or haven't you heard?
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Obviously not.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)In addition, remember the Fourth Amendment
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)AND THAT ISN'T HAPPENING.
Sheesh.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)gcomeau
(5,764 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)with the ability to know all.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)And also the ability to read.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)said 10 hail Pres Obamas and went back to watching Dancing with the Non-Stars. You havent been gifted with common sense.
Just because you shut your eyes, plug your ears, and shout over and over "There is no problem, there is no problem." It doesnt mean that there is no problem.
Plez try to keep an open mind.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)
booley
(3,855 posts)how do you know it's not happening?
That's the part that has always confused me.
How do you know when no one else does?
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)
fjlovato
(29 posts)I am a 73 yeard old liberal Democrat and have never claimed to be a "progressive", what ever that is. A real liberal believes in government while, what I percieve to be a progressive is a conservative with his/her brains kicked out. Read some of these posts - these progressives are afraid of everything much as the conservatives. They deserve each other.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)
boilerbabe
(2,214 posts)
KarenS
(4,073 posts) nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Irony indeed
RobinA
(9,888 posts)a repeat post, repeated to stir things up? At the very least it's about the 100th post along these same lines, and I particularly remember the "circular firing" squad language with reference to other scandals.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)of the Bush years, the history of Congress and the laws they put in place, the agenda of the neocons and the Republican party then and now, as well as the actions of the President. These facts exist. Now unless you are prepared to work for change in the laws, even dissent becomes a dog casing its tail after a while.
The Link
(757 posts)What about cutting SS?
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)And he's said leakers' should have their balls cut off.
I didn't vote for Snowden.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)to make these decisions, not the leaker.
dawg
(10,624 posts)I voted for them to defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies both foreign and domestic. But it seems like the leakers are more concerned about that, regardless of whatever their other political notions might be.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)That doesn't seem to be a way to protect our constitution from potential enemies.
dawg
(10,624 posts)
I'm more concerned about mass surveillance of Americans. I don't think Snowden had any significant intel that the Russians and Chinese wouldn't already have been aware of. If he did, then the administration should be doubly damned for such having such lax security over important state secrets.
You can't have it both ways. Either Snowden is primarily "leaking" to the American people and had nothing of any importance to give to the Chinese or Russians other than making the U.S. (appropriately) look bad.
Or, the administration is so lax with crucial national security information that a relatively low level employee of a subcontractor was able to walk away with information important enough to provoke a world wide scandal.
Personally, I have a major problem with either scenario.
Which one makes the government look worse, do you think?
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)to undercut Social Security. If that was his scheme, it was a very poor one, because anybody with a half-brain could see they're unrelated.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts). . . but how did he relate them with a plan?
1) Tell the world about the NSA's surveillance program.
2) ?
3) Repeal Social Security.
How was the first supposed to set the stage for the third in this grand scheme?
Social Security has nothing to do with this. In fact, Snowden has nothing to do with this anymore, unless you're bitter and resentful. His ideology or his reason for blowing the whistle has no bearing on the consequences that followed. And in all truth, a progressive/liberal would have done the same thing he did. Except a progressive/liberal wouldn't have been able to get security clearance.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)to leak documents about foreign spying.
So much of understanding even the first set of documents is a matter of interpretation, and he's lost all credibility on that since he decided to go to China and Russia with his stolen documents.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)The only person he's lost credibility with is you, and all other who thought he never had any credibility for crossing Obama.
Have you ever heard the expression, any port in a storm? Did you believe any stories about enhanced interrogation? If I were him, I would have run to any country that didn't have an extradition treaty with the US.
In other words, I understand all his moves so far. If you and I are this far away from away each other about this, we don't belong in the same political party. Because I want the 4th Amendment and believe the president should keep his Oath of Office, the thing that says he'll protect and uphold the Constitution, I don't have a choice but to oppose him on this. I believe Congress should keep their Oath of Office, too.
Good luck in 2014.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)Are you saying that he was lying?
MattSh
(3,714 posts)The issue not Snowden and it is not whether he is now or ever has been Libertarian.
Maybe that's why you don't understand. And maybe that's why you'll never understand...
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. - Eleanor Roosevelt
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)to release more information about American spying on other countries.
If he really cared about US internal surveillance he wouldn't have turned the focus off that and onto the fact that the U.S. spy agencies spy on other countries.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Well?
think
(11,641 posts)I fucking love it!
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)think
(11,641 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Innocent people get killed. You would apparently rather have a pilot onboard the plane itself, for some reason. OK, I'll grant that.
think
(11,641 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'm torn; we lost the initiative a decade ago and never tried to get it back because we never bothered to articulate actual military goals. However, wars are much harder to stop than start, and I don't know what to do at this point (keep in mind I have Afghani friends who credit the Pakistan campaign with keeping them alive, so I'm on the fence here).
think
(11,641 posts)Drones help dehumanize war.
The first order of business before the first gulf war by George HW Bush was to make sure the war was sanitized. There would be no pictures of battlefield carnage and collateral damage to color the opinions of the American public.
People don't realize how successful he was. Drones further sanitize the horrors of war.
Obviously JMO
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Because no country would ever fight a war in a world where one machine gunner could kill an entire battalion. Sigh.
think
(11,641 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)How is it that we can know that the drone killing of civilians is killing children and yet give any presumption of ignorance to the Obama Administration?
Are we being led by a chess master? Doesn't he know?
Any argument that it is better to kill the children with drones instead of airplanes with bombs is logically unsupportable because we are not supposed to kill civilians with airplanes and bombs either.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)If you simply want to say "we will not use air strikes", then we can avoid killing children with them. Otherwise, it will happen.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's fewer deaths than if we sent in infantry, but innocent people will die.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)saying ten times the civilians are killed with drones as opposed to manned aircraft. It doesn't matter whether we target them or no. They are still dead.
Peace, Mojo
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The fact that it's a drone doesn't make it more likely to kill civilians.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)believing that the current administration has nothing to do with carrying out these programs. I don't understand how you can be so easily manipulated into believing the ridiculous charge that there was no uproar then.
I don't understand how you can be so easily manipulated.....
Wait, wut? I think I have a very good idea how YOU and those of your ilk can be easily manipulated.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)But so do both parties of Congress. Why is all the focus on Obama? And not Republican and Democratic members of Congress who also approved these programs?
And why the scandal now, when these programs were publicly approved years ago and have been scaled back since then?
cali
(114,904 posts)It's paranoia to think this is all about him. And there's been an uproar. If it's terribly pronounced now, it just could have to do with the whole Snowden drama.
And these programs have sure as shit NOT been scaled back- unless YOU think you know more than Pat Leahy.
Oh, and btw, I think it's bullshit to say people are being manipulated into their beliefs. You want to discuss something with folks or start a fight. YOU wanted to start a fight. I'm willing to dish it right fucking back at you.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)However, all of your posts are directed at Obama.
Requiring a warrant and oversight from both other branches of government is a significant scaling back of the system under W. It's a scaling back of Executive power.
Well, it wouldn't be so effective if the angry people figured out they were being manipulated.
railsback
(1,881 posts)because I'm afraid my porn activities might be being monitored.
BumRushDaShow
(128,829 posts)They are anarchists.
It's remarkable the lack of outrage here about "Stop and Frisk" and the reality experienced by whole segments of this society, where since its inception, the Constitution was rarely or never enforced as a guaranteed protection for those segments. It doesn't make this current situation "right", but it exposes the hypocrisy of the current poutrage.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)by very large majorities of both parties.
BumRushDaShow
(128,829 posts)But maybe that is the goal of the infestation on DU. To destroy the party and make it "Libertarian" or "Green" or whatever. Limpball's "Operation Chaos: Pt. Deux".
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)They are Congress, why don't you support what they do, along with Udall and others?
In 2006, Weyden voted NO on extending and expanding the Patriot Act, Obama voted YES. So some of the focus is on him because he supports the policies that are in the spotlight.
Playing angry centrist word games is not going to work. Characterizing others, which is all the center ever has because they can not take a real stand and remain in that constantly shifting and calculated center, is not enough. People including Democratic Senators are speaking about policy, you claim the speak about Obama. Claim away, pnwmom. Claim away.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,301 posts)You say yourself that you "understand why people are disturbed by US surveillance and think the debate is important and necessary and that further changes may need to occur". That is, I think, what people here want. Obama gets some of the blame - after all, the buck stops at the President's desk - but I don't think he is the sole target, by any means.
Number23
(24,544 posts)The Patriot Act, as odious as it is, is legal. Is regularly reviewed by Congress. Is supported by both houses of Congress as well as the majority of the American people.
Is it any wonder why inactive activists ("inactivists?"
want to focus only on the president? It is much, much easier to add this to the long list of made up Obama Failures than actually do the hard work of getting Congress to repeal this law.
What they don't understand is that by screaming "OBAMA FAILED!! OBAMA FAILED!!11" about this, they are in fact alienating alot of people who are also incredibly concerned about this issue but are smart/informed/less reactionary enough to know that screaming for the president's head on this issue is a counter-productive waste of time. And dumb as donkey shit.
think
(11,641 posts)NSA whistle blower Russ Tice. Tice is the same whistle blower who blew the lid off of Bush's illegal wiretapping.
This information was not public knowledge until 2 weeks ago!
And no. We are talking about wiretaps NOT metadata.
If a whistle blower waits ten years until another whistle blower comes forward and is taking the heat before he even leaks this VERY important information what makes you feel so sure that the NSA isn't violating the laws still?
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/tag/russ-tice/
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)Makes a lot of sense . . .
think
(11,641 posts)The story broke two weeks ago and you act like it is no big deal that the NSA did this ALREADY.
So even though it will fall upon deaf ears I repeat:
It's not about Obama! It is about an NSA so out of control that we aren't told of this massive wiretapping of our govt officials until it's leaked by a whistle blower ten years after the fact!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)in tact. In fact it appears that some improvements have been made.
I dont know if Tice is correct or not but I am concerned that our government spy agencies might be politically motivated.
think
(11,641 posts)I would expect that if that was a lie he wouldn't be so free to say such things (except when censored from doing so by MSNBC minutes before he went on air.)
So from what I can see he's free to say it on any network that will let him. If they'd let him.....
Why?
Those papers, if they existed, would be classified. "That never happened and those documents don't exist" would make Tice claim there is a cover-up.
So first of all, how would you prove it's a lie, and second of all, what network gives a shit about "truth" these days? They care about ratings. They all screamed the IRS "scandal" for weeks, and completely dropped it when it turned out Issa was lying. If they gave a damn about truth, they'd be screaming just as loud about Issa. Instead, they've moved on.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)on how this makes Obama look, or that makes Obama look, or how that thing over there may impact Obama's reputation, or how that thing over here might color his legacy...ITS ABOUT THE POLICY. And criticism is being leveled at Obama because he very publicly supports the policy.
Response to pnwmom (Reply #30)
Mojorabbit This message was self-deleted by its author.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)It's not that we don't want warrants. It's not that we don't understand bristling against increased surveillance. But, watching DUers pretend that this is all new is astounding.
think
(11,641 posts)leaders of congress, journalists, activists, other federal judges, and lawyers & law firms were wire tapped?
Is this old news too? (The story just broke two weeks ago)
Do you believe it? Do you deny it? Do you dismiss it? Do you care?
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)think
(11,641 posts)The one that states WE KNEW THIS ALREADY?
Well it appears there is a great deal we didn't KNOW already....
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)think
(11,641 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Not likely.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Total focus on Snowden, Greenwald and Assange vs. NSA.
While Civil Liberties are being crushed by GOPer run states. GOPers don't believe in SSI nor Medicare nor any health care coverage, nor worker or women rights, and they sure don't give a eff about voting rights. They will do away with snap and like NC do away with unemployment coverage, all in the name of their masters - CORPORATION ARE PEOPLE TOO.
While the same poster keep crying about PRIVACY, we will have electrified fences, armed drones, and trigger happy border patrol. Mexico border is it for starters.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)say this was news to them.
Secret body of law
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3142617
jeff47
(26,549 posts)and more time doing their damn jobs.
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)Into being surprised and outraged at the consistency liberal democrats, and especially DUers are still adamantly against the ongoing violations of our 1st and 4th amendment rights?
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)That have been consistent on this issue before any Paul was even a glimmer of the tea party's eye.
And they need to stop their smear campaign full of snark, innuendo, name calling, and whacko conspiracy theories, against fellow democrats and especially DUers.
Stop it!
siligut
(12,272 posts)The suggestions that there is no difference between the parties? DU is being hit heavy and while we actually have some legitimate gripes, the only way to keep this spying business in check is to swing the SCOTUS in our favor and that means electing Democrats.
The moles on DU are hitting the NSA business hard and focusing on Obama. It is pretty obvious who some of them are too. Watch for the newbies who are pals with other newbies, they are the easy ones.
Demit
(11,238 posts)Yes! Turn in your neighbors! We are being infiltrated! Look for the suspicious ones! They're very easy to spot, they don't think like we do! They talk differently from us!
Jesus, I never thought I'd see talk like this on a Democratic board.
siligut
(12,272 posts)We don't have secret handshakes or passwords, anyone can join in. We get RWers fairly often here. Your dubious outrage is noted.
Apophis
(1,407 posts)If you're not outraged about that, you're the one being duped.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)and are still being used. Pres Obama, to maintain continuity, retained Clapper and Mueller. The programs were initiated and run by Republicans under Bush and continue running today.
"I understand why people are disturbed by US surveillance and think the debate is important and necessary and that further changes may need to occur." Really? You dont think we should ignore it and concentrate on Snowden and Greenwald? I am glad you recognize this.
n2doc
(47,953 posts)Please list one such national security mission or program. Just one.
cali
(114,904 posts)a perfect fit for the op.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)So in OP's fantasy world, that means eliminated.
Is there a DU award for most delusional OP? I think we have a contenda...
jeff47
(26,549 posts)used to be a 100% Executive branch program.
Now it requires review from both other branches of government. That is scaling back executive power.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)They don't see the forest for the trees and are willing to vilify Obama while making a traitor a hero.
They will all come back with the 4th amendment and how it is good that this is out in the open and ignore the crime against the state that was committed. Same people were calling for Cheney and Bush's head 6 - 8 years ago are making a hero of some low life that gave away top secret information while we still don't know what he told to whom. We just know he has spent considerable time in two communist countries.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)6-8 years ago, and we continue to criticize Obama for not only embracing those same policies but expanding them. That's being consistent.
What isn't consistent is being outraged over the policies 6-8 years ago but now giving our guy a pass.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)If you kill the bad guy on the block, you are still guilty of murder. Just because he is bad, does not give you the right to kill him.
Brewinblue
(392 posts)Really?
Russia the country with more billionaires than any other. China, the poster child for capitalism run amok.
Are you aware that the cold war is over?
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)And Russia while claiming doing capitalism, still has a pretty solid control over what the average Russian does palatially or socially.
And where was it that Snowden originally headed after Russia? Cuba.
And China is still the largest perpetrator of industrial espionage while pretending to practice capitalism. The Communist Party still runs China.
And Putin is ex-KGB?
dawg
(10,624 posts)If I thought it was all his fault, I wouldn't be so upset. He'll be gone soon enough, after all.
But it isn't just Obama. It's the whole sorry lot of them. And I refuse to make excuses for them just because it's "our" guy this time.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)
elleng
(130,864 posts)except something about human nature that I'd have to explore later.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I could have voted for McCain/Romney.
Obama would have gotten destroyed if he had run on a platform truly reflecting his actions in office.
nolabels
(13,133 posts)Of course McCain/Romney would have been so much better in hindsight. What our choices were was actually what corporate America decided they could be. We have had no choice since JFK was murdered and has been pretty much just the same either or of the lesser of two evils since then.
When Obama secured his second term it seemed to me it might have gained us a little extra time but not much more, that's looking like it might have been a false hope also.
We can look to other side of world, to Egypt, to see how gets when the state is only answerable to itself and the people are brave enough to stand for themselves, that's our trajectory
Maven
(10,533 posts)You mean like when he signed the most oppressive and constitutionally unsound provisions of the Patriot Act into law for another three years? As just one horrifying example?
http://www.alternet.org/story/155045/how_obama_became_a_civil_libertarian's_nightmare
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)??? Where were you then? We fought against it then and we fight against it now. We have been fighting against this sort of crap since 2001.
"Bush did it first" is a pretty piss-poor excuse for Democratic presidential behavior.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)they have honestly convinced themselves that no one protested when Bush was doing this.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)it was 8 years of one outrage after another. Trying to keep up with all the crap he was doing was like playing Whack-a-mole-on-steroids
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)...
“There’s a problem with prosecutions that don’t distinguish between bad people -- people who spy for other governments, people who sell secrets for money -- and people who are accused of having conversations and discussions,” said Abbe Lowell, attorney for Stephen J. Kim, an intelligence analyst charged under the Act.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-18/obama-pursuing-leakers-sends-warning-to-whistle-blowers.html
That much overuse is just bullshit. Besides, there's a requirement that it has to occur during a declared war, which we haven't done in quite a while. It's torturing the law into obtuse meanings to use it against people who are inconvenient, because they are bringing to light things which are legitimately wrong. There is no alternative to leaking under these circumstances, except to do nothing and let the gross abuses go on. And Obama knows this full well, he is too smart a guy not to get that.
Marr
(20,317 posts)and they spend most of their time stirring things up with big, bonfire posts like this one. They manage to create the impression that they represent half the debate, when they're really just an incredibly small crew.
leftstreet
(36,106 posts)And no I'm not suggesting these people here are teabaggers, but you just described perfectly how the interests of the tiny 1% are presented and maintained as a dominant, valid point of view in the face of overwhelming majorities of dissent.
Marr
(20,317 posts)
MisterP
(23,730 posts)those old Baggers were misguided and nonsensical and gave the impression that they believed that Medicare and Social were some sort of private corporation that rewarded them for being white
but at least they didn't say "do with the elderly as Thou wilt, I'll cover for Thee until Thine labors are complete and Medicare is no more"
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)a mean streak to tie it all together.
Marr
(20,317 posts)They make a lot of noise, call a lot of attention to themselves, etc. And when a post that's critical of the administration starts, one of those 20 or so names is almost *always* one of the very first responders, and they kick it off with something designed to completely derail discussion.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)
City Lights
(25,171 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)Who are never satisfied and are now willing to throw the country under the bus.
Number23
(24,544 posts)That's it. Day in day out. Nothing but personal attacks on the president's supporters who he apparently despises as if anyone gives a damn. The OP is about why don't people hold Congress to account more and here he comes, yet again, completely overlooking the OP to launch another attack on DUers.
But according to him, it's only the president's supporters who have "substance free" posts. 
Marr
(20,317 posts)What do you ever do besides rant against criticism of the party?
And before you get started again, no-- I will not put you on ignore.
treestar
(82,383 posts)one thing I note that a person with a criticism feels entitled to complete deference. As long as you are saying something negative, we are not to question it, or we "defend" some strawman of the critic's devising.
II have many times not even gotten to a point of defending President Obama, but only wondering if the latest outrage is really valid. It seems once a person makes a negative claim, we are not to question that but follow in lockstep of outraged disappointment.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)There there is only one right you do not have. And people who give no credit to Obama for what he did already while making as if it is the only issue that matters are just wrong. There's always going to be some new demand. I am a woman and we don't have all our rights all the time, or some are threatened, but this is the US where we can talk about it, protest and I don't go around saying I have no rights. Not when looking at women in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia for instance.
If I am a bigot for caring about other issues, then fine. I don't think gay marriage is the only civil rights issue there is. Or the only issue that matters. And there is free speech. And the rest of the bill of rights. You should be ashamed for not caring about anyone or anything else.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2952192
From the same thread:
283. Obama has done more than any previous President.And you have plenty of rights. The right to free speech, etc.
Skittles
(153,147 posts)it is tiresome
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Actually, I do understand the notion of "our team, right or wrong".
Pholus
(4,062 posts)which ends with "if right, to be kept right; and if wrong to be set right."
FirstLight
(13,360 posts)...and I think it is GOOD that this is all coming out...
see, people knew there was something like this going on with the Patriot Act and FISA...but nobody really thought they were a target. Nobody thought their personal web trail and phone conversations would garner attention. So we all just wen on about life like good little sheeple...
now we all realize that ALL of us are suspect, that secret courts decide what we do is suspect, and that the reality of our every move being tracked is REAL and we have no legal backing to fight against it...
I think it's about time for some outrage and dissent...regardless of who is in office. Obama is NOT infallible, nor is he guiltless in the dismantling of our Constitution either. Saying this is not his fault but Congress' is naieve, IMO... This all has been a calculated series of steps, coming from on High (yes, the Corporatocracy is the true ruling power in this nation) and yet those politicians who played along with it all deserve to be held accountable...even though they are merely puppets themselves.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)the other guys and have pretty much the same combustible hair they have. Sure do seem to have a lot of it, though, to get bent so often. What's next week's hysteria going to be about?
http://cryptome.org/isp-spy/yahoo-spy.pdf
Is Yahoo's policy for warrants, subpoenas, and all such legal dealings. Google, AT&T, and just about everyone else with a public server has similar policies-- this has been going on without serious complaint from those who really care for many years. And they have thousands and thousands of subpoenas to deal with. Yahoo even has a special department to answer them.
Granted that TPTB have crossed the line here and there and have been caught with their pants down, but does anyone seriously believe that any agency with the ability to do these things would not do them just because it's not nice or the Constitution might cause a problem? Some guy running an agency with the job of protecting us from attack will just back off?
Don't bug foreign embassies? Remember when the Israelis and the Russians got caught? The real feeling in spy agencies around the world was "dumbasses got caught" and the politicians got their rocks off complaining while making sure we never get caught.
There may be rules, but the first rule they follow is "get the job done."
Do I agree? Of course not, but that only means I won't get that job.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)national surveillance state. And, in case you had forgotten, one Dem representative in Congress (Loretta Sanchez) called what has already been revealed merely 'the tip of the iceberg.'
I was outraged about this when Bush was President and, truth to tell, am slightly less outraged now, only because so many other things have transpired since then to deaden my outrage - like torture, the drowning of an American city, force-feeing Guantanamo hunger strikers, allowing Bush and Cheney to escape legal consequences for their war crimes, ad infinitum.
Furthermore, your use of the term 'manipulated' is telling and reveals exactly what you think of progressives. That term harkens back to an earlier, darker age in American history when progressives were called 'dupes.' So you might want to re-think your choice of words a little bit.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)
kickysnana
(3,908 posts)deliberate legalization of tyranny often in secret.
I don't get why third ways would give up their constitutional rights and freedoms for a silver tongued pretty face who has done all of the above and intends to continue.
Read. Get a clue. This is not dancing for the stars. This is our lives, our future.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)why some people on this forum, if Obama ordered 5,000 people to shoot themselves directly in the foot would not only justify it with "at least it's not in the head!" but would wonder why it was taking so damn long for people to hurry up and do it.
countmyvote4real
(4,023 posts)And Snowden/Bolivia-gate takes the cake.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)I don't understand why that qualifies as anything other than supporting or enabling the screwing.
ANd what's particularly pathetic about efforts such as these is that they conflate what has been suspected with what has been known, like the two words are synonymous or something, and like suspicions or even incomplete knowledge command or demand the same level of outrage as incontrovertible facts/knowledge..
In May 2013, Snowden was permitted temporary leave from his position at the NSA in Hawaii, on the pretext of receiving treatment for his epilepsy.[6] On May 20, Snowden flew to the Chinese territory of Hong Kong.[51][52] He was staying in a Hong Kong hotel when the initial articles revealing information about the NSA that he had leaked were published.[51][53] Among other specifics divulged, Snowden revealed the existence and functions of several classified US surveillance programs and their scope, including notably PRISM (surveillance program), NSA call database, Boundless Informant. He also revealed details of Tempora, a British black-ops surveillance program run by the NSA's British partner, GCHQ.
Why shouldn't BHO be a focal point given his position as Chief Exec and Commander in Chief? And who's responsible for say, pursuing the interpretations of Section 215 and others that may or may not conform with the language or legislative intent behind it? Is he outta the loop on all of that?
There's usually only one proximate cause for a lack of understanding, but in this case it has long appeared there are easily identifiable obstacles just as big as ignorance -- like the inability to accept that an otherwise "good man" might be up to no good.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)
oh my, thats a good one.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)dissonance train wreck.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Drastically increasing = scaling back and/or eliminating. Mass surveillence of citizens = protecting our freedom. On and on. Mass delusion from the Obama Personality Cult. CogDis indeed.
Gman
(24,780 posts)Lots of people have to have something. In 2009 & 2010 it was single payer option and change wasn't fast enough. So in the 2010 mid-terms lots of people decided they were going to teach Democrats a lesson and they sat on their hands and laughed when Dems got swept out of the majority in the House. " That'll teach 'em they can't do that to 'the base!'" And 2010, being the most important election in 10 years, was the year legislatures were selected to determine redistricting. So now the lesson taught ends up producing things like what's going on in Texas.
How foolhardy can one be? The left are suckers for it every time.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)One man had the ability to stop it. Not a majority of Congress, not a majority of the Senate. One man could have, should have, said he would in the Primaries, Veto it. One man, not bi-partisan members of congress, had the bully pulpit, and could have used it to argue and get people riled up about Civil Rights. Imagine for just a moment the image that would have made on the world. I could write that speech, you could write it. Anyone could.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Press. I have just sent the PATRIOT ACT Reauthorization back to congress with my Veto. As a Constitutional Scholar, as a Constitutional Professor, I know this act is a direct violation of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments. I know many of you have been warned that failure to pass this would result in shadowy forces gaining the upper hand. Yet, when we violate our most basic laws, our most basic principles, we have already lost. There is no balance to be struck between security, and privacy. There is only the constitutional requirement that this Government can and will uphold. I call on Congress to revise this law in ways I've already discussed with them to make sure Civil Rights are not violated."
You could write the rest of the statement. Obama comes off as a hero, defending against partisan forces the Congress. Defending the people, and their rights. We have this discussion, as many programs are declassified so we can better understand the questions and advise congress of what we, the people, really want from our Government.
One man had the power. One man buckled under the pressure. One man signed the bill into law. One man seized the opportunity to start this discussion with the American People. One man decided the truth mattered. Unfortunately, that one man was a dolt named Snowden. It could have been, should have been, President Obama.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)They are. I don't like it and I don't like that everyone in Washington except a few like Grayson and Sanders is supporting it.
That they have been doing it for at least 10 years doesn't lessen it. It means that anyone can be blackmailed, particularly in government, just like J. Edgar Hoover did. It is a police state.
and I question the cheerleaders...I'm beginning to think some of them are plants. Especially some that have something to say about everything... There is one on here that was trying to tell me what was what in my own state...and she was completely wrong and she is one of the main anti-Obama cheerleaders here...anyway, I'm leery of many on here now a days.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)thats why when they claim to be progressive/liberals my first thought is no - libertarians/gop.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)another planet and not one -but many posters!
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...from the policies to the person. I believe this sort of argument is called a "Red Herring".
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)in the face of all evidence to the contrary that:
1. Snowden and Manning are nation-saving whistleblower heroes.
2. Assange and Greenwald are truth-telling investigative journalists.
3. Hedges and Chomsky are left-leaning truth-tellers.
4. "Socialist Anarchist" means anything other than Libertarian.
5. Ron and Rand Paul are honest brokers and correct on many issues.
6. Medea Benjamin is not a Libertarian disruptor.
7. Obama is to blame for "naked scanners," never mind that they've been replaced.
8. Obama is worse than Bush and hurtling us toward fascism.
9. Obama is worse than Nixon and it's already fascism.
10. Obama is a member of the 1% and secretly helping them crush the 99%.
And if your "plonker" starts throbbing when reading one or more of these, please, we really don't need to know. 
...............
p.s. "tea-bagger or whatever" -- hattip to cali here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3157216
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)wrong is naive. The intelligence community will push the limits and probably exceed them if they dont have oversight. They, of course are supposed to have oversight but it looks like that has failed. We need more information before we judge.
Let's put off pointing fingers until the investigations are complete. We can always deal with Greenwald and Snowden later if it turns out they tried to scam us.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)"But after three fake scandals against Obama in quick succession . . ."
No, two fake scandals and a real one. And if the Obama branch of the Democratic part can't see it, definitely, all of Europe and the rest of the world can.
Your information about this is so incorrect that it's not even worth discussion. No, they weren't scaled back or eliminated by Obama. That's not factual. He went along with it just as happily as he let the Wall Street bandits go un-prosecuted.
I'm afraid this split isn't going to get better. I can't predict what the outcome will be, but this issue is not going to die down. This is something that's going to keep festering, because the surveillance isn't going away. It's going to be a constant aggravation to people who believe the President should keep his oath of office, and it's also not going to sit well with people who take 4th Amendment rights seriously. That would be liberals, progressives. Get used to it.
And defending Obama doesn't help. It aggravates the problem. Whether you like it or not, history is not going to be kind to Obama.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)So the government keeps your metadata, all neatly categorized and readily accessible on tap. Some minor event occurs. You are arrested for trying to cross the street while some group you never heard of is demonstrating or committing havoc around you. The government decides to investigate further, picks up your library lending record, your employment record, your military service record, information on your mortgage or landlord, the names and addresses of all your relatives and friends, your tax records, your previous arrest records if any, all the telephone numbers you have ever had, your driver's license records, your car registration papers, your kids' student loan records, the information your children and grandchildren if you have them, their schools, addresses, ages, every address you have lived at in the last ten years, every telephone number you called in the last 20 years, newspaper articles published mentioning your name or the name of a close relative, all references to you on the internet, anything you have posted on DU or any other website, all those photos you posted on Facebook after your fabulous trip up the Amazon last year plus the Christmas photos you e-mailed your sister-in-law, the names of your past husbands, boyfriends, affairs if any (no one will dare to have any after this information), the name of the motel you checked into when your plumbing broke down (Hmmm! very suspicious. Why did she check into a motel a block from her house while her husband was out of town?), records of all your flights, your gas station receipts (Hmm. Yuma, Az. Wonder what she was doing there?), your passport records if any, your high school grades (What? So smart but didn't make the Honor Society?), your hospital records (especially that stay back in the 1960s when you had a minor nervous breakdown, that's a plum), any suspiciously short hospital visits to a Planned Parenthood, that police report filed by your neighbor back in 2000 because your car blocked his driveway, the speeding ticket you got 10 years ago . . . . . . . . . .
Read the file on Snowden. And he managed to pass a cursory, perhaps downright sloppy security clearance.
That's why we are upset. No life can bear that much scrutiny without a moldy onion turning up somewhere.
DonRedwood
(4,359 posts)I too wonder, what the next wave of anti-Obama news will bring. Notes from a meeting in 2006? A photo of Obama standing with a priest who later it was found once preached a message? Perhaps, when Obama was 7 he didn't share a cupcake.
All those things would be made into anti-Democratic news on FOX. And the people in here are falling for it.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)These faux-progressives just want a repeat of 2010. So does their idol, GeeGee - preferably with Republicans sweeping all state houses, legislatures, AND the U.S. Senate. That appears to be their dream because that will be the result if they keep up this anti-Obama, anti-Democratic Party harping while giving the Republicans a HUGE pass each and every time, and supporting the Ron Paul fanatic, GeeGee and anti-social security/shoot leakers in the balls (unless he does it), Snowden.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,301 posts)There's a small story "DNI chief Clapper apologizes for 'erroneous' answer on NSA surveillance" - but no mention of Obama in it at all. There's nothing at all about Morales' jet being diverted. They have 4 opinion pieces linked to on the front page - 1 attacking Obamacare, but nothing about surveillance.
If we check their Opinion page, we do find a dramatic "Can America survive Obama? " What do we find is says about the surveillance story?
They link to the whole opinion piece, and we find that the opinion is: Obama is not going after Snowden hard enough:
In fact, Snowden has been charged in a federal indictment with espionage, among other counts.
The president also disparaged suggestions he should be more involved, saying he had not spoken to the leaders of either China or Russia. “I shouldn’t have to,” he said, because the case “is not exceptional from a legal perspective.”
You would think White House reporters traveling with the president would push him on his listless approach to the crisis, but you would be wrong. Obama spent 14 minutes with the press corps as Air Force One flew later to South Africa, but got no questions about Snowden. Instead, according to The Weekly Standard, reporters asked only about the Africa trip.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/what_obama_worry_BESXT1q0d22RAx4YnqMMMN/1
So, you see, Fox's take on the story, when they have one, is "Obama is not persecuting Snowden enough". Anything else on their Opinion page about this? We have "Edward Snowden should return to America and face the music" Go and read it. And then tell me which side of the argument on DU it takes.
Then we have "Dont call me a traitor because I shrug at NSA phone surveillance program". Again, just look at which side that's taking.
Their final piece on this (from June 24th): What Hong Kongs Snowden decision tells us. Once more, we find them attacking Obama for not doing more to stop Snowden, or to shut down Wikileaks.
They just don't care about the surveillance. Fox News is on the side of the people who attack Snowden, and cheer when Morales' plane is diverted.
kentuck
(111,078 posts)"It's all legal" bullshit. Good Germans.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)These faux-progressives want a second helping of 2010. Their criticisms and complaints against Republicans are non-existent, and they'll believe a Teabagger like Snowden over a Democrat like Obama, even to the point that they'll make shit up.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)He didn't close Gitmo (all he did was propose another jail for them... wasn't planning on freeing them). He didn't stop the NSA from collecting pretty much every piece of data on every phone call in this country.
Oh, and it's in his authority to stop it, or redirect it through Justice, the NSA, and other agencies. He COULD do something. But he doesn't.
THAT is why people are pissed off.
"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
he didn't close Gitmo? House GOPers voted against closing Gitmo, recently. The last I've seen there are three branches. Oh by the way, hopefully he can work around these obstructionist by way of legal action.
And I like that phrase "faux progressives" LOL lol lol
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)The president has the power to move them or free them. He never did, preferring to try and build a new prison on U.S. soil. THAT is what the GOP voted against. Nice try, though.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Because Congress has power over all government spending, and forbade any money be spent to move them.
So no, Obama does not have the power to close Gitmo unless you want him to literally abandon the prisoners there.
But hey, keep attacking Obama for something he can't change. I'm you attacking Obama instead of the real problem (Congress) will get that prison closed real soon now!
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)It's not about Obama, per se. And it matters not what kind of majority voted for these oppressive, unconstitutional laws. They're wrong and we have a moral obligation to defy them.
- This is about us and what kind of country we're leaving our children.....
Pholus
(4,062 posts)Right now, you're saying my concerns mean I am being manipulated.
At election time, you'll tell me I have no choice unless I really mean to back "President Palin"
Why don't you drop the bullshit and just tell me the appropriate time to discuss the freaking issue rather than your team colors approach to policy?
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 3, 2013, 03:15 PM - Edit history (1)
It's because when we voted for Obama in 2008, we thought we were voting to end the insanity of Bush's ridiculous War on Terror. We thought that America would return to its democratic traditions and abandon post-Cold War imperialism. We thought domestic spying would stop and due process of law and civil liberties would return.
The PRISM program is tracking al Qaida, yes. I have no problem with that. I have a problem in that it is tracking everyone else, including you and me. We are all suspected terrorists.
That private industry is tracking us for the government instead of the government doing it directly doesn't make it OK. For one thing, private industry is, like the government, a power not to be trusted. I don't want ExxonMobil, Disney, Microsoft or my phone company to know what I am doing any more than federal law enforcement unless there is a good reason for them to know it. If the feds think I'm selling drugs, that's a good reason and they can get a warrant. I can't think of any reason for private industry should be spying on me or any other private citizen. If I want something from private industry, I'll call them.
Second, by requiring private industry to collect "metadata" about everyone and his uncle and then making it available to the government on request, the government has simply forced industry into a partnership where industry does the spying. It is still government surveillance, and it is still in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Justice Scalia can't make it otherwise, even if that fascist bastard can persuade four other fascist bastards on the court to go along with him.
If I find a listening device in my home, I will treat it as I would any other bug: throw it on the floor and crush it under my foot.
This is not protecting America. It is destroying the village in order to save it.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)You get your news from Fox News! Your a racist hater who thought he was voting for a super hero, the rest of *us* knew who we were voting for, etc......
-p
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Liberals lying about programs in order to upset other liberals.
False.
The documents that have been leaked reveal that the program is not allowed to track US persons, and if it accidentally tracks one (oh, that John Smith is from Tulsa, not Timbuktu) the data is deleted.
Oh sure, people will say that the data is kept anyway, but that's not supported by anything Snowden has actually leaked.
Hey look, you're lying about this one too!
First, the metadata program is not PRISM.
Second, the metadata program is not requiring private industry to collect anything. The metadata is already collected by the phone company in order to send you a phone bill. Each phone company deletes that data on a different schedule. From as short as 3 months to as long as 5 years.
What the NSA is doing is storing that metadata so that it is not deleted, and is available if someone is prosecuted for any crime - from terrorism to insider trading. The actual searching of the data is required to go through the FBI, and a specific warrant must be issued.
Again, people will claim that process is not being followed, but Snowden did not leak anything showing the process is ignored.
You might want to take a minute to read that Constitution thingy.
But to use less snark, how can it be a violation of your 4th amendment rights when it isn't your data? It's the phone company's data. They can do whatever the hell they want with it. Unlike medical records, there are no laws declaring this information private.
But hey, 2014 is gonna be an even bigger Republican landslide than 2010 thanks to lying about these programs and blaming it all on Obama. That will surely end these programs!
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)But hey, 2014 is gonna be an even bigger Republican landslide than 2010 thanks to lying about these programs and blaming it all on Obama. That will surely end these programs!
You're crying wolf, sir. No one, certainly not I, will vote Republican because we are upset about how a Democratic adminstration is handling this data. We are upset because the program continues to exist. No one is "blaming it all on Obama." We know it started under the usurpers, Bush and Cheney. Again, we are upset with President Obama because he has not ended it. The fact is that it was wrong under the Bush junta, and it doesn't become right now that it's being done by the Obama administration.
The idea that Republicans will end these programs because the Obama administration hasn't is horribly naive. The Republicans will put this wholesale invasion of privacy on steroids.
(H)ow can it be a violation of your 4th amendment rights when it isn't your data? It's the phone company's data.
Like the difference between a bribe and a large campaign contribution, that is a distinction that can only be made by an act of positive law. The data concerns me and my private affairs. I didn't give the phone company permission to share it with anybody. That they share it with the government, that the government stores it, is a violation of my right to be secure in my papers and effects under the Fourth Amendment.
The metadata program is not PRISM.
Well, one point for your team. It isn't PRISM. The metadata program is called BLARNEY.
However the fact it's called BLARNEY and not PRISM doesn't mean that the government is within its rights use data about you and me collected by the phone company for reasonable business purposes, like sending me my bill. Whether the government stores that data itself or requires the phone company to store it makes no difference. Just for that much, the government should show probable cause against specific individuals and get a warrant. Anyone who says otherwise is full of BLARNEY.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)If you'd bothered to study history of a whopping 3 fucking years ago, you'd find that the problem was not Democrats voting for Republicans. It was Democrats not bothering to work to promote Democrats.
Democrats still voted for Democrats. They just didn't bring anyone else to the polls.
Bullshit.
You need to spend only 5 minutes in GD to discover tons of threads blaming Obama, and 0 blaming Congress for authorizing it in the first place, and then not bothering to do their oversight duties.
If you're going to claim no one is blaming it all on Obama, you should probably not blame it all on Obama in the next sentence.
The program under W is over. It was replaced by one that required both other branches of government to provide oversight.
You are not this stupid. I refuse to believe that you can get on the Internet and find DU, but are unable to detect sarcasm even when it's labeled with an eye roll.
So please, stop pretending to be that stupid.
No, you just didn't bother to read the terms of service where you gave the phone company permission to share it with anyone they felt like.
Again, it is not your data. Thus it is not your papers and effects.
The point is you folks who are blaming it all on Obama are conflating the two program in order to maximize outrage. You are claiming the NSA is spying on US persons by claiming PRISM and the metadata program are the same thing.
That's also known as lying.
Actually, if you had bothered to read that terms of service, you'd realize it makes a world of difference. The phone company is under no obligation to keep the metadata private. The government is required to keep it private under the broad FISA warrant, and can only look at your data under a specific warrant.
But that doesn't fit the narrative you want to believe. So you just toss it aside so you can keep shouting "Obama let us down!!!".
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)I am not blaming it all on Obama. This started under Bush and Cheney and continues under Obama. It is a violation of the Fourth Amendment to perform this kind of surveillance. There can never be enough oversight to assure that it will not be abused. The fact that a few fascist bastards in black robes have a view different from mine in no way changes my opinion.
Yes, Congress deserves to be excoriated as well President Obama and the Frat Boy for this level of domestic surveillance.
If you're going to claim no one is blaming it all on Obama, you should probably not blame it all on Obama in the next sentence.
Come back when you can make sense. It started under Bush, Obama continues it. Perhaps he's made some reforms to to sugar-coat, but it's still neither reasonable nor acceptable. It's still domestic surveillance with a wide latitude. It's still un-American.
Obama's reform of the Bush/Cheney surveillance programs is insufficient to satisfy the expectations I had of him, and the expectations of many. Yes, Obama let us down. Deal with it.
The point is you folks who are blaming it all on Obama are conflating the two program in order to maximize outrage. You are claiming the NSA is spying on US persons by claiming PRISM and the metadata program are the same thing.
That's also known as lying.
My mistake was honest. Perhaps others conflate the two programs with the sinister purpose you assign to me, but I do not. I have no use for people who do. I resent being called a liar and believe you owe me an apology.
A couple of other things you should know:
- History was always my best subject in school. I always got A's in history.
- In eighth grade, per the requirements of the State of California, and the further requirement of my history teacher who was a real old fashioned type who made us memorize the Constitution with all its archaic spelling and punctuation, I did in fact become quite familiar with the I was the only student in a class of about forty who got an A in each of exams she gave us at the end of the semester. I have retained those lessons for nearly fifty years since. You are out of line to suggest that I do not know history or that I am not familiar with that "Constitution thingy."
jeff47
(26,549 posts)You've continued your outrage fires, but you've failed to address the little problem of it's not your data. It's the phone company's data. By both the 1979 SCOTUS decision, and the terms of service you agreed to when you signed up.
Obama's reform of the Bush/Cheney surveillance programs is insufficient to satisfy the expectations I had of him, and the expectations of many. Yes, Obama let us down. Deal with it.
And that would make it all Obama's fault. You are blaming him for continuing the program. You are not complaining about your Congresspeople. And then you pretend you aren't blaming it all on Obama.
So...this is an utterly critical destruction of your Constitutional rights, and you did not bother to find out what was actually going on?
Seriously?
You display that massive failure, and then want to claim you're the injured party?
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)If records of my phone conversations are not my data, it's because because the law says it not my data.
You know what Zola said? The law is an ass.
That's right, the law is an ass. The same law that says records of my phone conversations don't belong to me also says that if the wind blows Monsanto's seed onto a farmer's field, there is an implied contract between Monsanto and the farmer. How did bullshit so counterintuitive end up being the law? The same law that says corporations are people and that there is no evidence that large campaign contributions influence politicians . No evidence, eh? How hard did the justices on the Supreme Court look? That is such nonsense that one can only wonder who paid the justices and how much to embarrass themselves by saying it.
I'm blaming it all on Obama? Are you still pretending I don't know that the law is made by the legislative branch? Most people whom I engage in discussion know that and don't need to have the entire legislative process explained to them. So, yes, it goes without saying that Congress bears some responsibility for this bullshit. How is it Obama's fault, then? Because he requested a law with these features in it, because he enforces it and, worst if all, because he defends it. What has it gotten us? Let's see how long it takes for him to smooth over the ruffled feathers after yesterday's diplomatic blunder in Vienna. Oh, and if you need to be told, I hope he can do it.
Are you a lawyer, Jeff? You sound like one. You tell me what the law is and then spin up an argument ornamented by every informal fallacy known to the great logicians from Aristotle on that it is the only way it can be.
No, the law does not have to be the way it is. The law is what we make it to be. The law is an ass. A law that is bereft of justice and reason is an ass, and so is a man who doesn't know the difference between the law and justice.
Yes, the American people are the injured party. This program casts a wide net to gather evidence, whether it's based on probable cause or not, and the issues a warrant later. It only makes sense if each and every one of us is a suspect. That's not justice; that's tyranny.
Number23
(24,544 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)The reason Democrats didn't do well in 2010 is because most of those who voted for Barack Obama expected the changed that Obama promised. There's been very little change, except for the worse.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)we're not firing at other liberals. We're firing at DINOs and other authoritarians who are suddenly on board with drone murder, domestic spying, torture, and the NDAA because their hero is the one implementing them
tblue
(16,350 posts)You "don't understand" Okay, that's where you're at. Nobody can argue that you do if you say you don't. But, do you want an explanation or are you just telling us you're fed up and exasperated or what? I mean you no ill will. But what do you want us to do? Explain or shut up or argue with you or make a chart or what?
At this point I think every explanation that can possibly be given has already been posted here somewhere ad nauseum. We could fill a huge book with explanations. Are those inadequate? You're looking for something different? More illustrative maybe? Maybe do a search on DU and then get back to us. Surely somebody will be glad to get back to you.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)
lark
(23,091 posts)He's the president and the person we put in office. A lot of people in congress didn't get our votes, so what they do is not as big of a betrayal as from one we thought was one of us.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)The head whips will cause a hurricane.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...into supporting the expansion of the National Security State to heights previously unimagined.
I really don't get it.
And defending Obama against all comers is not a good enough excuse.
He's the President, it's his Administration, he's well into his second term. At what point, again, do these programs become his programs?
Yes, Congress deserves lots of scorn. On both sides of the aisle. I don't know about you, but I see scorn for Congress repeated here pretty often. But that does not absolve President Obama of his own responsibility for these programs.
The fact that you think this is just another "git Obama" scandal does not make it so.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)It's disgusting that so many here are willing to gave a pass on this because it's a Democrat doing it
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
has never been the man he said he would be! Change, huh!
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)...while I can understand the uproar - we didn't expect Obama to retain these policies- I see the call for metadata. We need a national conversation before it goes further.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)detention of =US citizens= with neither trial nor representation, and fought to get it reinstated when a court ruled it unConstitutional?
That he has engaged in extra-judicial executions of Americans suspected of terrorism or terrorist ties? Of his unprecedented crack-down on whistle-blowers? Of PFC Manning sitting in solitary confinement for three years before going to trial for exposing US war crimes? Of DHS deciding they can take your personal electronics on a hunch anywhere along the border and up to 100 miles inland of that? Of TRAPWIRE? That the House just overwhelmingly passed the 2014 NDAA whose section 1061 provides for the creation of a new intelligence division dedicated to analyze captured data and metadata? That FISA was extended five more years? That the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments have died under Obama's watch, not Bush's?
Seriously?
Obama said they wouldn't scramble fighter planes to get a 29 year-old hacker, but used political pressure to ground a plane they thought he might be on, creating an international incident? That he's allowed spying upon our allies in the EU? That with some 7700 Occupy Wall Street members arrested for pointing out the problems in this country, many beaten and assaulted by militarized police, encampments systematically smashed, with FBI and DHS spying upon us from day one and =sharing their findings about us with the very corporations we point out as The Problem=....by the "patriot act" and the FBI's own definitions of domestic terrorism, Obama is guilty of either ordering it or merely allowing =domestic terrorism= against Occupy, against the citizens of this country for political and financial interest. And he continues to bail them out to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars while forcing "austerity" upon the rest of us, just like the very same banksters are doing to Europe.
POOR OBAMA.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)be manipulated" *then also*: the critical left is a tool of Rove while the ones enacting and enhancing secret Bushite institutions and interpretations are the only ones *really* fighting Bushism
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)You are aware that Obama's other option is to literally abandon them in place, right? Congress blocked funding for any other option. Congress has absolute power over spending, and there's no way to move the prisoners without spending money.
Oh wait....that wouldn't make Obama look bad.
Execution requires the person to be in custody. When they are not in custody, and are in another country, we call it "War". And the AUMF gives Obama the power to fight that war.
Of course, if you called it "war" instead of "execution", it wouldn't be nearly sinister enough.
One man's whistle-blower is another's spy. The fact that you like the individuals doesn't change the law.
Oh, but that would again not be nearly so sinister.
Yeah, it's almost like Manning's defense team decided to waive his right to a speedy trial.
Oh wait...that's exactly what they did. But again, that wouldn't make Obama evil.
Congratulations! You've caught up to a century ago.
Oh, but pointing out that Customs has had this power since they were formed wouldn't make Obama evil.
Yeah, given just how much you've massively overstated your previous points, I really don't think we should trust your analysis of the current state of our Constitutional rights.
Yeah, clearly he did that....because you say so. How 'bout a statement from any of the relevant countries saying "The US told us to?"
Oh wait...that would be providing proof instead of just assuming evil.
Yeah, the US never spied on the EU before Obama. Sure. And I've got some lovely oceanfront property in Kansas for you.
In addition, I'll throw in the oceanfront property in Oklahoma if you believe the EU doesn't spy on the US. If you'd like an example, France famously got caught conducting industrial espionage against the US.
But hey, don't let the real world get in the way of attacking Obama. That might make Republicans not win big in 2014, and you'd never be able to teach Democrats a lesson.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)there is zero hope for the Democratic party.
For fuck's sake. Unbelievable. Astonishing. Boggling. Hopeless. Truly hopeless.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)If your statement was true, you'd be able to refute what I said.
Instead, you're running away while calling names. Kinda indicates your beliefs aren't completely grounded.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I'm in an uproar against indefinite detention, execution without due process, drone warfare rules-of-engagement, blanket domestic surveillance by the NSA.
To the extent that Obama is knowledgeable of and involved in the decisions to instigate these policies, he should be held accountable for them. Just because Republicans are crying wolf over Bengazi and the IRS is no reason to accept bad policy.
G_j
(40,366 posts)when Obama embraced Bush policies.
Let the buck stop there!
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)The passive voice is an interesting tell with this OP. She writes, " I don't understand why so many progressives are letting themselves be manipulated..."
Who, pray tell, is manipulating progressives? The fact that you have this unidentified force causing people to be upset at a government for such inconsequential things such as establishing the infrastructure for a fascist state, the silly detail of the NSA bald-faced lying to Congress about the programs, and the little minor detail that this is all based on secret legislation and a complete lack of public oversight, is your own cognitive dissonance creeping out.
I don;t see this as a circular firing squad. i see this as a group of people circling the wagons because they suddenly realized the so-called leaders are the ones attacking them.
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)a story now and all you people that think life comes to you through the magic of television have, finally, taken notice.
It was antithetical to America 70 years ago, as it was 20 years ago, as it was 10 years ago, as it is today. Open your eyes and quit being a sucker.
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)They never liked Obama, and this is their chance to shit all over him.
They take all opportunities.
treestar
(82,383 posts)So they are the ones trying to do the manipulating.
Hekate
(90,642 posts)Hope you've got your flamesuit on and a large economy size fire extinguisher handy.
Hekate
Skittles
(153,147 posts)STOP WORRYING ABOUT OBAMA AND START WORRYING ABOUT AMERICA
Tarheel_Dem
(31,232 posts) 
Turbineguy
(37,317 posts)are as credulous as teabaggers.
(Let's see what that does for my iggy count)
Cha
(297,136 posts)Because Greenwald's been telling them for years how evil President Obama is ..when GG is the one who's freaking nasty evil. Now, Snowden's derping the same shit from China and Russia.
But, "it's not about Snowden" 
except it is. He made it about himself when he fled to China and now Russia instead of standing up with civil disobedience. And, no he's not a whistle blower, either.
Snip***
Snowden's Uncivil Disobedience
Edward Snowden, the former intelligence analyst who leaked to the Guardian and Washington Post classified documents on the National Security Agency's anti-terrorism surveillance program is not practicing policy-based civil disobedience, or any form of civil disobedience for that matter – despite Sen. Rand Paul's claim to the contrary. His flight to Hong Kong and possible efforts to win asylum from Iceland or China violate a central tenet of the philosophy. Resisters who break a law must accept that they may be arrested and have a duty to submit to punishment.
Moreover, Snowden, to answer a question posed yesterday by Jacob Hayutin on this site, is not a whistle-blower. A whistle-blower is one who reveals to the public wrongdoing, corruption or illegal behavior committed by those in authority, but who also cooperates with investigators as they work to ascertain the veracity of those allegations. Snowden had a chance to properly blow the whistle. He could have reported serious problems associated with the National Security Agency program to Congress under a process established by the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act. The law would have provided Snowden legal protections and given Congress an opportunity to properly investigate the matter without jeopardizing national security. ***Snip
Snip***
As of now, Snowden is an unpredictable variable carrying a trove of information of great value to countries conducting espionage activities against the United States. If Snowden is truly committed to protecting American democracy, to demonstrating civil disobedience, he should voluntarily return to the United States immediately. Otherwise, the government should exercise whatever legal means it has at its disposal to bring him back to the U.S. to face the consequences of his actions. ***Snip
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/jamie-chandler/2013/06/18/nsa-leaker-edward-snowden-is-neither-a-whistle-blower-nor-a-civil-disobeyer
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)The repulicans with their right wing businessmen have an agenda. We are falling into their trap. We need to attack them.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)I have yet to see anyone prove that warrantless, illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens has been exposed.
Everything else is paper-bag hyperventilating over what the government COULD POTENTIALLY do.
But has not been proved to be doing.
There's a big damned difference.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)I will agree with you if you give me a piece of pie.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)by both the Conservative right and the Progressive left. A deep antagonism to the Government goes back to their origins in the late 19th century. It was particularly apparent when Huey Long lead progressives who detested Roosevelt as a banker who did not do enough for the poor.
At the time, Huey Long's Share Our Wealth Program advocated confiscating any fortune over 3 million dollars and would give enough money for all the poor to buy a house and a car.
Roosevelt was a liberal, not a progressive.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)a whole lot of the damage being done to our nation is happening on account of the appointments that Obama made. And those who defend Obama refuse to admit that O's appointments were not made on account of any Republicans hurting his elbow or bending his fingers back.
He made those appointments because he is a Associate Spokesperson for Corporate America. They wanted and needed big military people left in office, so Gates remained after Bush left. Obama then helped all his friends on Wall Street by appointing Geithner, and he also re-appointed Bernanke. Those two alone have cost us 4.7 trillions of dollars by their collusion in loaning out monies to the Big Financial Firms that will never be paid back.
Then there is the matter of Monsanto, and the appointments that Obama made to ensure his buddies in the Big Ag Industry will indeed corrupt and pollute our farmland until we end up being the most sick poisoned populace on the earth. Currently China is doing 2 billions dollars a year worth of business in Africa, while we do half that, and part of the reason for that is the African Nations don't want America's GM crops and goods.
Obama has advocated for CPI cuts to Social security and MediCare, even though his ACA bill (Well, okay actually his buddy Rahm Emanuel's ACA) forced the half trillions of dollars of cuts to Medicare. he coddled BP afte the B oil spill destroyed the Gulf. he shut down radiation monitoring stations that might have helped people realize how saturated Alaska and The West Coast were with radiation after Fukushima. He still advocates for Big Nuclear Power plants. He still advocates for natural gas and fracking. And the meaning that is not so obvious in his recent "environmental address" is that he still wants natural gas to go ahead. (Josh Fox, who created the film "Gaslands" made a real point of emphasizing his concern about Obama's energy policies in his recent John lOiver interview.) Someone needs to explain to him about the loss of drinking water and habitat for animals and people if fracking continues to be allowed to run amuck.
He promised us transparency but for the last year, he has attempted to fast track the Trans Pacific Plan in secret. Oh but of course, Lily Ledbetter, gay marriage, and of course, women are still allowed to own their ovaries, uterus and fallopian tubes, though mine might be on their way out due to all the radiation my neck of the woods has experienced.
