If this happened under George Bush, you would be outraged. Be outraged by Barack Obama too!

[LovingA2andMI]

Sorry, but I'm having an huge problem with the "excuses" on why the Government "Data-Mining" Techniques on American Citizens who are NOT terrorists. What ever happened to "reasonable suspicion" or does it exist anymore? We are ALL SUSPECTS. Like the Boston Bombers before their crime committed against innocent citizens at the Marathon I guess.

How INSULTING!! Also, this story dated March 15, 2012, off of Wired, does not give one bit of "warm and fuzzy" feeling right now about President Barack Obama administration continuing these actions. Not at all!!

"Under construction by contractors with top-secret clearances, the blandly named Utah Data Center is being built for the National Security Agency. A project of immense secrecy, it is the final piece in a complex puzzle assembled over the past decade. Its purpose: to intercept, decipher, analyze, and store vast swaths of the world’s communications as they zap down from satellites and zip through the underground and undersea cables of international, foreign, and domestic networks.

The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013. Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication,including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital “pocket litter.” It is, in some measure, the realization of the “total information awareness” program created during the first term of the Bush administration—an effort that was killed by Congress in 2003 after it caused an outcry over its potential for invading Americans’ privacy.

But “this is more than just a data center,” says one senior intelligence official who until recently was involved with the program. The mammoth Bluffdale center will have another important and far more secret role that until now has gone unrevealed. It is also critical, he says, for breaking codes. And code-breaking is crucial, because much of the data that the center will handle—financial information, stock transactions, business deals, foreign military and diplomatic secrets, legal documents, confidential personal communications—will be heavily encrypted.

According to another top official also involved with the program, the NSA made an enormous breakthrough several years ago in its ability to cryptanalyze, or break, unfathomably complex encryption systems employed by not only governments around the world but also many average computer users in the US. The upshot, according to this official: “Everybody’s a target; everybody with communication is a target.”

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/

The excuses IMHO are over!!!

[Sunlei]

1. lets ask congress why they voted this crap through constantly.

[xtraxritical]

41. It started with Bush, the President is doing everything he can to try and spotlight the issue

so that Congress will use their war powers to change the law.

[woo me with science]

56. Oh my WORD.

[Aerows]

79. Come on, Woo

You know this has to be 11 dimensional chess, right?

[woo me with science]

92. Yes! Every long, long road to a free, truly democratic society

Last edited Fri Jun 7, 2013, 01:38 PM - Edit history (1)

absolutely requires the implementation of authoritarian police state measures along the way.

We little people do not have the smartness to truly comprehend this, but I believe the Third Way because they tell me so.

[Aerows]

95. I always thought

it was better to be a smart ass than a dumb ass.

Oh wait, you said smartness. Yep, I'm too unsmart to realize that a police state is the only way to stay safe.

[xtraxritical]

90. He said this quite plainly in a speech about a week or two ago. Try and keep up snarky.

[woo me with science]

91. BWAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

It would be funny if it weren't such a serious issue, and such an asinine defense.

[xtraxritical]

116. Read this ad hominem snark people...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/07/nsa-surveillance-program-oversight_n_3405716.html

[woo me with science]

117. I belieeeeeeeve!

I belieeeeve! I belieeeeeve that the President opposes this as much as I do and is doing everything he can to bring back our Constitutional protections! I belieeeeeve!

Rats.

You know, I've tried that mantra many times before. Don't get me wrong. There's a small part of me that really envies the ability to cleave to a politician's words with such wondrous faith and comfort. It's this stubborn, reality-based habit I have of looking at history and the record.....It just bursts the bubble and makes all that glorious harp music disappear every damned time.




Chilling Legal Memo From Obama DOJ Justifies Assassination of US Citizens
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101654954

Obama seeks longer PATRIOT Act extension than Republicans (December 2013)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x380450

When it comes to civil liberties, apparently Democrats are just as bad as Republicans.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022101960

NSA's Massive New Spy Center to Track Your Emails, Internet Activity, and Phone Calls
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101620852

Obama Quietly Signs Abusive Spy Bill He Once Vowed to Eliminate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022104861

Obama repeals Magna Carta, asserting powers our forefathers denied to Kings
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101655620

Obama's Memo on Killing Americans Twists 'Imminent Threat' Like Bush
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101654919

Obama no better than Bush when it comes to security vs. civil liberties.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022355307

Obama Admin Seeks Permission TO LIE In Response To FOI Requests - Even To The COURTS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2185303

NDAA on trial: Obama Administration fights ban on indefinite detention of Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101748688

Obama administration complicit with private prison industry: President Obama's IncarcerNation
http://www.nationofchange.org/president-obama-s-incarcernation-1335274655

Obama, Democrats Push to Make Bush Spying Laws Permanent
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022084702

NDAA, signed by Obama, is a direct attack against legitimate protest and dissent
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022064803

NSA Whistleblower: All Americans under constant surveillance, all info. stored, no matter the post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002193487; http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021935289

Bipartisan Congress Disgracefully Approves the FISA Warrantless Spying Bill for Five More Years
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022087323

While Public & Media Focused on 2nd Amendment, 5th Amendment Quietly Dismantled
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022390581

How the Obama administration justifies extrajudicial killing of Americans,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022318187

Judge Says Under Law Executive Branch Can Commit Acts That Sure Do Seem Unconstitutional
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022122464

Obama Justice Dept. says wiretap lawsuit should not proceed
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014337039

NDAA Lawsuit- Hedges v. Obama, The Last Thin Line of Defense
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022357078

Federal authorities step up efforts to license surveillance drones for law enforcement
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022383596

Big Banks and FBI worked together vs Occupy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022095056]

FBI Investigated 'Occupy' As Possible 'Domestic Terrorism' Threat, Internal Documents Show
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022061578

FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring (Updated the OP)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022057064

Public Buses Across Country Quietly Adding Microphones to Record Passenger Conversations
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021965291

Street artist behind satirical NYPD 'Drone' posters arrested
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021920967

The Obama DOJ urged the Supreme Court's endorsement of strip searches.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002521527

Obama Administration Fights to Allow Warrantless GPS Tracking
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1074474

Anonymous to FBI: hey, dudes, maybe you could take a break from...investigating activists....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022145621

Half a billion dollars for drones to spy on Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021876414

From Bradley Manning to Aaron Swartz -- The Government's Inhumane Persecution of Brave Truth Tellers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022276941

The sight of Army helicopters and the sound of gunfire...on Houston's south side
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022276742

Kiriakou and Stuxnet: the danger of the still-escalating Obama whistleblower war
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022275570

Can the DEA Hide a Surveillance Camera on Your Property?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022237059

Social Media and the Stasi
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021888029

Homeland Security Wants to More Than Double Its Predator Drone Fleet Inside the US, Despite Safety/Privacy Invasions
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014312823

CIA Behind Bizarre Censorship Incident At Alleged 9/11 Plotters’ Gitmo Trial
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022280285

“I Am Wearing My Conviction As A Badge Of Honor.”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022275128

Meet the Contractors Turning America's Police Into a Paramilitary Force
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12525281

How Secrecy Corrodes Democracy
http://election.democraticunderground.com/101655009

Obama Quietly Issues Ruling Saying It's Legal For The FBI To Break The Law
http://election.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7545687

US Pulls Plug on Iran Cable News (Press TV)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014394770

DHS Watchdog OKs 'Suspicionless' Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022339091

[Skittles]

100. STOP IT WOO

NOW I HAVE THAT THEME SONG IN MY HEAD FOR THE REST OF THE DAY

[woo me with science]

120. I hear you can replace an earworm with

"We represent the Lollipop Guild."

Oh, damn. That's a relevant earworm, too.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

94. Do you really believe what you typed?

I'd like to know, for the record.

[xtraxritical]

102. I just waste my time with you but here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022966734#post34

[DisgustipatedinCA]

103. We aren't going to agree, but I do appreciate your replying

I'm not looking at this from a political angle, and that's by design. This goes straight past issues of left and right, and I'm not even bothering to read what Republicans are saying about it, because that doesn't matter at all. If your rejoinder to that statement is going to be something about losing in the mid-terms if we attack our own, etc, my reply would be that the die is already cast. Obama spied on American citizens by the millions, and continues to do so. He's already earned whatever political fallout he's going to receive by running this program in the first place. I'm very aware that the GOP will make as much hay of this as they can, while I'm simultaneously aware that they're complicit, and would not want to see this investigated very deeply, lest their own sins be revealed. But I don't care. This, unlike the vast majority of national issues is bedrock material. You stand at the barricades on this one, no matter who your opponent is, or you don't stand for anything.

[woo me with science]

111. I just want to say...

your posts on this issue have just been stellar...across multiple threads.

Thank you.

[xtraxritical]

113. People, you've had since 2005 to make a stink about this, are you all trolls here?

Also, I don't care what Ben Franklyn said, all he had to deal with were Tory's with muskets. Anyone that thinks they're not being data mined already is naive. I think the PTB have much more intelligence on this issue than any of us, and it's bipartisan. My numbers in the book and I always assume it's a party line.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

114. So roll over and pee on yourself if that's your style

Myself, I fucking hate big brother authoritarians who feel the need to spy on everyone in the country. Do you happen,to possess any principles on which you won't budge?

[woo me with science]

119. This ABSURD argument again?

Because something has gone on for a while, it's not legitimate to be upset about it anymore? That's your argument? Seriously?


That speech would have been great during the debate over slavery. That had been going on for *hundreds* of years, and those abolitionists were throwing hissy fits about it in the 1860's? Pfffft!

Or those Catholic priests molesting kids. We've known about that for ages. Why would anyone care when it happens now? They had YEARS to fix it. Whiners.

I actually find these sorts of posts useful, because they underscore the utter hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy of the Third Way's shifting positions on matters as important as our fundamental Constitutional rights and protections, depending on what party is in office.

[Marr]

98. Wow.

I don't even know what to say to that.

[LWolf]

97. It's interesting to note

that when The Patriot Act was extended two years ago, my Senators complained about it being rushed through without adequate time to discuss and debate. Where was the rush coming from? The White House.

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/post_30.html

[jeff47]

2. IMO it's about data retention.

First, we don't actually know if there's any conversation content going into these data centers. The leaked court order only refers to data like "555-1212 called 555-2121 on June 19th at 6:34pm". The claim that the NSA is pulling content from various communications companies has been around for decades. And these new allegations have been denied by the relevant companies, while these same companies are not denying the phone records order. If they were trying to keep any NSA contact secret, they'd deny both.

So for the moment, I'm operating under the assumption that they are not collecting content - it appears to be the same old claims that have been recycled continuously since the '70s without any new leaks to back them up.

But what good is the phone records without content? You can't find "terrorists" if you don't know what people are saying to each other.

I think it's about data retention. The phone companies keep this data for various amounts of time. Some keep 3 months, some keep 3 years.

If there's another 9/11-scale attack, the government would like to find co-conspirators quickly. Once they have a suspect to start from, they could use the call records to track down people he was in frequent contact with, in an attempt to find those co-conspirators. But if the phone company deletes the records after 3 months, they won't have the data to trace those connections.

But there's an important thing with this theory: they have to have a number to start from. There's no reason to suspect any particular phone number is used by a "bad guy" until he does something "bad".

[rhett o rick]

15. So you are basically saying that the government will take care of us, so go with the flow.

Drink that cool-aide, your government knows best.

Our authoritarian leaders know best.

[uponit7771]

3. This is false, Im more upset people have gotten past the outrage they SHOULDVE expressed at the time

...and gotten Obama a more progressive congress.

No progressive congress

[LovingA2andMI]

4. What's false?

The story? You really think so?

[Union Scribe]

7. What would that have done about this?

Obama supports these practices. He would have been at odds with any progressive legislature that was against spying on Americans.

[LovingA2andMI]

10. THIS^^^^^^^

Pretty darn much and its frankly sad.....

[rhett o rick]

67. What makes you think that Pres Obama isnt getting what he wants with

regard to human rights?

[CakeGrrl]

5. Congress voted for it under Bush. Get a more PROGRESSIVE CONGRESS.

Apparently it's far easier to say the President didn't do _______ fast enough or soon enough than it is to deal with the fact that Congress has a role in this.

[LovingA2andMI]

8. Have you ever heard of an Executive Order?

The NSA is a Federal Agency which is bound to act under any Executive Order the President issues. With that, to end this "data-mining" all President Obama had to do is to forward a memo over the the NSA.

With that, he gets no "excuses" from me about a Progressive Congress on this story. Also, didn't Harry Reid promise to end the filibuster then re-instated the filibuster this year?

[SugarShack]

6. The senate must be RID of DiFi.....get it now?

[LovingA2andMI]

9. Umm no....

What does DIFI have to do with a NSA facility in Utah?

[randome]

11. Um, it was started in 2006 when Bush was President.

Outrage was expressed with the result that a legal warrant and Congressional review was required.

Greenwald's 'scoop' is not news.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[LovingA2andMI]

12. Are you serious?

And B.O.'s Administration CONTINUED IT when all it would have taken is a FREAKING EXECUTIVE ORDER to the NSA to stop it! Sorry, but the "I'm A-Okay with Barack Obama's NSA's spying on my stuff because he's a Democrat" excuses are FALLING FLAT on common sense thinkers like me.

Keep on believing the spin --- "The Government is here to help by spying on your stuff, even-through you're at not a terrorist".

I'll stay in the reality of this situation, myself.

[randome]

13. A judge is required to approve it. Congressional review and approval every 90 days is required.

That's a far cry from what Bush tried -and failed- to get away with at first.

This has been known for years so why is everyone freaking out about it now? Both Republicans and Democrats are on the committee that reviews this every 90 days since 2006.

Metadata only and Congressional review every 90 days -they are at least paying lip service to restraint. Again, far different from the Bush Era.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[LovingA2andMI]

16. You can continue the spin....

But its' NOT WORKING with me and other Common-Sense Politically Minded individuals. No excuses for B.O. Administration on this one. NONE!!!

[randome]

18. It's not spin. I genuinely don't care if Verizon keeps records of when I use my phone.

And if they turn that data over to the government, what does that mean to me? Nothing.

Big freaking deal. And I think the newer generations feel much the same way. Those who have grown up with technology permeating nearly every aspect of their lives probably don't throw a fit about stuff like this. That's just my hunch, though. It's not like I've conducted a poll or anything.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[LovingA2andMI]

22. It's Spin!

And I plus many more People like minded care VERY MUCH about this story. Here's a clue, if the Democrats make lame excuses on this instead of admitting fault and changing immediately the practice, they will lose the Senate and the House will remain under GOP control in 2014. It will be like 2010 but worse.

People who have done NOTHING WRONG don't like being spied upon, understand?

[tblue]

60. Ok but when Pres. Jeb Bush can snoop on

everything you do and say, including, say, those nasty diatribes you posted on DU re: him, or that email you sent telling people about an Occupy event, or that order you placed for that Greg Palast book on counteracting vote suppression, will you still be okay with all of your communications being intercepted by your government?

[randome]

70. If there is a legal warrant and a sufficient review process...yeah.

I'm not afraid of anyone, politicians or otherwise.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[rhett o rick]

19. Your attempts at rationalization are pathetic. Regardless of how many "approve" this, it

is an intrusion into our freedoms.

But for some fascism is a welcome comfort.

[stevenleser]

23. Is it rationalization or is it accuracy? The fourth amendment requires a warrant. Admin is getting

one.

You don't like the fact that a warrant is being given. Isn't the problem you have at that point with the judiciary and not the executive?

Isn't the remedy also in the judiciary? An appeals court or the Supreme Court would have to decide whether a warrant obtained this way violates the fourth amendment.

Unless you are going to tell me you are a lawyer that specializes in this kind of law, you dont know whether or not this is a violation of the fourth amendment.

[rhett o rick]

25. Ah yes, it feels so much better if we are screwed "legally".

But some of us must bow down to our authoritarian leaders.

Rationalization is your key to happiness.

[stevenleser]

33. I'm sorry the Constitution frustrates you so. Isn't the remedy that you propose an amendment?

Impotently attacking me doesn't seem to be the solution to your issue.

[rhett o rick]

42. The Constitution? We left that a long time ago.

The Patriot Act isnt Constitutional. Domestic spying isnt Constitutional. Indefinite detention isnt Constitutional.

Does the comfort of fascism welcome you?

[stevenleser]

45. Well, since you admit you hate the Constitution and prefer dictatorship, I can't help you.

If we are going to create straw men instead of addressing each others arguments, I'll play along.

Let me know when you decide to leave the logical fallacies behind.

[LovingA2andMI]

26. Which is why organizations like the ACLU exist....

And I for one CAN'T WAIT for them to take this case to the U.S. Supreme Court!

[stevenleser]

31. See below, FISA has already been found legal at the Court of Appeals level. We'll see. nt

[LovingA2andMI]

36. What the heck are you talking about....

From Jameel Jaffer WHO BY THE WAY appeared as a ACLU guest on Rachel Maddow's "program" Thursday evening

@aterke @maddow I meant much of it now authorized by statute.Still unconstitutional, though.- Jameel Jaffer (@JameelJaffer)

https://twitter.com/JameelJaffer

Who is Jameel Jaffer?

"Deputy Legal Director, ACLU, and, until June 2013, Open Society Fellow".

I think Mr. Jaffer knows a bit more than YOU DO!! Goodnite and your spin is NOT WORKING but keep trying because only the SHEEP are listening.

[stevenleser]

37. I linked below to an actual decision by the Court of appeals for the second circuit.

I didnt create the decision, they did. The wording is there for you to see.

[pnwmom]

104. How do you know the document is accurate in all respects and not altered?

How can you explain that the document in the hands of the WA POST doesn't match the one held by The Guardian?

Do you think Karl Rove tactics are no longer practiced by the Rethugs?

Are we just going to trust the anonymous "leaker" on this? Or wait till we know more.

[Blue State Bandit]

14. Not that I appreciate being tracked, but I thought it was Bush side stepping FISA?

When Obama hires a guy to put back doors on congressional e-mail servers, oh, and said guy dies in mysterious plane crash, my outrage will match what I had for Bush.

Until then, I think we should focus on keeping these tools out of the hands of Koch fueled Tea Baggers.

Just sayin'.

[rhett o rick]

20. The fact that Bush was worse doesnt lessen the violation of our freedoms this President

is supporting.

Fascism is painless, it takes on many changes.

[Blue State Bandit]

28. And I'm sure the "leaker" is happy you feel that way.

Because I have no clue as to what "Fascism is painless, it takes on many changes." means.

[rhett o rick]

44. Authoritarianism is very attractive to some. Big Brother will take care of you.

We are in a class war. Plez dont turn on your class mates.

[stevenleser]

49. But you hate the Constitution and prefer dictatorship anyway, so you should be fine with wiretapping

[Blue State Bandit]

55. I'm not turning on anyone here, but with all the "isms" being thrown around...

this thread, I had to check my address bar to make sure I wasn't commenting of a FAUX news forum.

[LovingA2andMI]

17. Koch Brothers are a problem....

But they are not the only problem with B.O.'s Administration NSA is spying on Americans not suspected of ANY CRIMES. I don't make excuses for Democrats or Republicans when their actions are WRONG AS HELL!

[JaneyVee]

50. Koch Bros are WAY more of a problem than collecting metadata. Trust me.

[stevenleser]

21. No, it was considerably worse under Bush. This is definitely incrementally better.

Under Bush, we had the NSA wiretapping (listening/recording phone conversations) without a warrant. That means no one approved it, no paper trail, no accountability, no ability at all to address wrongdoing if it occurred.

Under Obama, we have collection of Metadata under the authority of a warrant issued by a FISA court.
No actual phone conversations listened to or recorded, and there is a warrant authorizing the actions. Congressional committees in both houses have the ability to go back check why each warrant was issued and on whom.

That doesnt mean what is happening under Obama is "Good" it's simply not illegal or unconstitutional.

[LovingA2andMI]

24. It's not illegal or Constitutional?

I think the American Civil Liberties Union would beg to differ on that. This will end up at the Supreme Court under a 4th Amendment challenge....you can bet on it.

[stevenleser]

29. FISA has already been found constitutional at the US court of appeals for 2nd Circuit

http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/nat-sec/duggan.htm

.
.
.
Defendants moved to suppress the fruits of the FISA surveillance on a variety of grounds. They contended that FISA surveillance violates a target's First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights because it is too broad; violates the doctrine of separation of powers because it requires the courts to decide political questions; and denies due process and equal protection to aliens. In addition, defendants contended that the requirements set forth in FISA had not been met because an insufficient basis had been provided for the issuance of the surveillance order and because the government had failed to comply with FISA's "minimization" requirements. They also contended that FISA had been improperly used simply to obtain evidence of criminal activity rather than to protect the national security. Defendants asked the court to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine these issues.
.
.
.
We regard the procedures fashioned in FISA as a constitutionally adequate balancing of the individual's Fourth Amendment rights against the nation's need to obtain foreign intelligence information. The governmental concerns are detailed in the passages quoted above from Keith and the legislative history of FISA, and those concerns make reasonable the adoption of prerequisites to surveillance that are less stringent than those precedent to the issuance of a warrant for a criminal investigation. See generally United States v. Belfield, 223 U.S. App. D.C. 417, 692 F.2d 141, 148 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (examining in camera review procedures of FISA (see Part II. B. 2., infra)). Against this background, the Act requires that the FISA Judge find probable cause to believe that the target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, and that the place at which the electronic surveillance is to be directed is being used or is about to be used by a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power; and it requires him to find that the application meets the requirements of the Act. These requirements make it reasonable to dispense with a requirement that the FISA Judge find probable cause to believe that surveillance will in fact lead to the gathering of foreign intelligence information.*fn5 Further, if the target is a United States person, the Act requires the FISA Judge to determine that the executive branch's certifications pursuant to ? 1804(a)(7) are not clearly erroneous in light of the application as a whole, and to find that the application properly proposes, as required by ? 1801(h), to minimize the intrusion upon the target's privacy.

We conclude that these requirements provide an appropriate balance between the individual's interest in privacy and the government's need to obtain foreign intelligence information, and that FISA does not violate the probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment.
.
.
.

4th amendment requires a warrant. Admin is getting one.

What you are saying is that it is improper for the judge involved to grant one in this situation. That is more of an issue with the judiciary than the executive at that point, isn't it?

Appeals courts and the SCOTUS address fourth amendment issues all the time http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/06/05/supreme-court-s-fourth-amendment-surprises.html . I am sure as soon as someone has standing they will appeal.

[LovingA2andMI]

38. Nice but I'll take my legal opinions

From the ACLU on any issues dealing with Civil Liberties. It will be NICE to see B.O.'s Administration try to defend this crap before the U.S. Supreme Court soon.

Also, the Court will likely take this case since its a Constitutional argument at play. Again, I can't wait and millions others of Americans will back the ACLU pursuing this case at the Highest Court in the Land -- The Supreme Court --- not a internet media website court.

Have a lovely evening!!!

[stevenleser]

40. The ACLU will likely be arguing first before a court of appeals... Like the 2nd Circuit. The SCOTUS

may not even decide to hear it.

I find your attempt to deny that the decision at the second circuit exists to be quite childish. Is this really how you act when presented by facts that contradict you?

[LovingA2andMI]

43. Personally, I don't give a FLIP FLYING FLIP

About some "facts" you pulled from an "internet" Daily Breast website. Here's a clue, YOU ARE NOT CHANGING or CHALLENGING my STRONG OPINION on this. The actions were wrong and the ACLU will met B.O.'s NSA at the Supreme Court real soon.

You digest that -- "blind leading the blind gets nowhere in the end".

[stevenleser]

46. Your tantrum aside, the decision is searchable by anyone on DU. If you want to discredit yourself

on DU, attempting to stamp your feet and deny the existence of verifiable links and facts is the way to go about it.

[LovingA2andMI]

52. Are you blind, deaf and .....

You are debating a point that's un-debatable with me. You on DU or anywhere else is not going to change the MAJORITY of Americans opinions spying on their phone records, internet searches, Skype calls, Gmail, Bank Records, Financial Records, Google Hangouts, land lines ARE WRONG. Get it...WRONG! Why? One, they are not the terrorists. Two -- They are American Citizens. Three -- We have a Constitution that his designed by the founding Father's (not B.O's NSA) to protect our free speech, the right to peacefully Assemble, the right to against illegal search and seizures among other rights.

We are not China, Russia, North Korea or Turkey. We are Americans and we demand not to be treated as criminals when we are not suspected of any crime. Why? Again, we are NOT the terrorist.

And again, you can type and debate until 5am tomorrow morning and you're not changing my mind. If anything opinions like yours will end with Democrats in the House and Senate taking the fall out for B.O.'s lack of issuing a SIMPLE EXECUTIVE ORDER to stop this unnecessary raid of Americans personal data, by losing the Senate and not retaking the House in 2014. Like 2010....Common-Sense Americans will just stay home~

Can't wait for the ACLU to debate this "data-mining" issue before Our U.S. Supreme Court and I bet you hope it never happens because your side will likely lose~

[stevenleser]

53. And I found another case, US v Nicholson, this time the fourth circuit ruled in favor of FISA

http://www.leagle.com/decision-result/?xmldoc/19971543955FSupp588_11443.xml/docbase/CSLWAR2-1986-2006

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Harold J. Nicholson's ("Defendant's&quot Motion to Suppress All Evidence Derived from Searches or Seizures Conducted Pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ("Motion&quot . In this Motion, Defendant attacks the constitutionality of FISA in general and as applied in this case.1
For the reasons set forth below, Defendant's Motion is DENIED.
.
.
.
In the twenty years since it was enacted, FISA has been upheld as constitutional by every court to address the issue.3 Against this backdrop, Defendant asserts numerous grounds for suppression in this case, claiming that (1) electronic surveillance under FISA violates the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement; (2) physical searches under FISA likewise violate the Fourth Amendment; and that FISA procedures violate (3) the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth Amendment; (4) the Right to Counsel provided by the Sixth Amendment; (5) Article III of the United States Constitution; (6) the Political Question Doctrine; and (7) the doctrine of the Separation of Powers.

A. FISA Satisfies the Requirements of the Fourth Amendment.
Numerous challenges to FISA have arisen under the Fourth Amendment, which protects the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. ..." U.S. Const. amend. IV. Most notable among these cases is United States v. Pelton,835 F.2d 1067, 1075 (4th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1010, 108 S.Ct. 1741, 100 L.Ed.2d 204 (1988), which constitutes binding precedent for this Court. In that case, the Fourth Circuit held that
the provisions of FISA [are] "reasonable both in relation to the legitimate need of the Government for intelligence information and the protected rights of our citizens," ... and therefore compatible with the Fourth Amendment.
Id. (quoting United States v. United States District Court,407 U.S. 297, 327, 92 S.Ct. 2125, 2141-42, 32 L.Ed.2d 752 (1972) ("Keith&quot ).4 In short, the Fourth Circuit
ruled in Pelton that FISA, as it existed at that time, was wholly constitutional.5

[stevenleser]

47. P.S., the decision is United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (2nd Cir. 1984) nt

[Fire Walk With Me]

30. Are you aware of the NDAA section 1021, HR347, etc.?

Chris Hedges and others sued Obama over section 1021, had it struck down as unConstitutional. Obama then sent lawyers and got it reinstated, and he signed it into another year of activity.

unConstitutional. Obama defended and again signed something ruled unConstitutional (the indefinite detention of US citizens with neither trial nor representation).

Intolerable. I don't care who is in office, it is intolerable.

[Hippo_Tron]

32. You're right about the not illegal part, constitutional is more subjective

I think that a lot of people would argue that the FISA court is a court in name only and really a stretch as far as the 4th amendment goes.

[stevenleser]

34. See my above regarding the challenge at the 2nd circuit, but also note this part of the decision...

Prior to the enactment of FISA, virtually every court that had addressed the issue had concluded that the President had the inherent power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information, and that such surveillances constituted an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. See United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 629 F.2d 908, 912-14 (4th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1144, 71 L. Ed. 2d 296, 102 S. Ct. 1004 (1982); United States v. Buck, 548 F.2d 871, 875 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 890, 54 L. Ed. 2d 175, 98 S. Ct. 263 (1977); United States v. Butenko, 494 F.2d 593, 605 (3d Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 881, 42 L. Ed. 2d 121, 95 S. Ct. 147 (1974); United States v. Brown, 484 F.2d 418, 426 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 960, 39 L. Ed. 2d 575, 94 S. Ct. 1490 (1974); but see Zweibon v. Mitchell, 170 U.S. App. D.C. 1, 516 F.2d 594, 633-651 (D.C. Cir. 1975), (dictum), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 944, 48 L. Ed. 2d 187, 96 S. Ct. 1685 (1976). The Supreme Court specifically declined to address this issue in United States v. United States District Court [Keith, J.], 407 U.S. 297, 308, 321-22, 32 L. Ed. 2d 752, 92 S. Ct. 2125 (1972) (hereinafter referred to as " Keith &quot , but it had made clear that the requirements of the Fourth Amendment may change when differing governmental interests are at stake, see Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. 2d 930 (1967), and it observed in Keith that the governmental interests presented in national security investigations differ substantially from those presented in traditional criminal investigations. 407 U.S. at 321-324.

[Fire Walk With Me]

27. Exactly: It is intolerable regardless of who holds office. n/t

[Blue State Bandit]

35. Father of Patriot Act Aghast that Americans are Being Spied On.

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), one of the authors of the Patriot Act, said in a Thursday letter to Attorney General Eric Holder that he is "extremely troubled" by the National Security Agency's seizure of the phone records of millions of Verizon customers through a secret court ruling.

And that should tell you everything you need to know about this "scandal".

[LovingA2andMI]

39. ^^^^ Exactly!!

Glad I'm not a part of the blind sheep camp and proud stand by the Rational Common-Sense Thinkers camp instead!!

[stevenleser]

48. I dont think you understand that person's post. nt

[Blue State Bandit]

58. Rational Common-Sense Thinkers want their membership card back please.

How could someone be pissed at Obama for this, and not know who Jim Sensenbrenner is.

FAUX news strikes again.

[stevenleser]

61. Look at the evidence with that person...

1. Freaks out and throws a tantrum when I provide links to actual cases that pertain to the issue being discussed
2. Completely misses what you are saying regarding Sensenbrenner
3. Accuses another poster of spinning when they are simply explaining certain facts that are not in dispute. (Under Obama there is a warrant and no wiretapping, under bush it was warrantless wiretapping)

There are two possibilities. Either that person is under 15 years old, or they are a Freeper.

[rhett o rick]

63. I think your "blind sheep" are just "follower authoritarians".

I am reprinting this from a previous post; Sadly there are those among us, the conservatives, that must stand by the authoritarian leadership. They defend the authoritarian leadership to a fault. Some may ask why do people voluntarily follow these authoritarian leaders?
Here is an explanation from Bob Altemeyer’s book, The Authoritarian Specter.

(Follower) Authoritarians believe that proper authorities should be trusted to a great
extent and deserve obedience and respect. They believe that these are important
virtues which children should be taught and that if children stray from
these principles, parents have a duty to get them back in line. Right-wing
authoritarians would ordinarily place narrow limits on people's rights to criticize
authorities. They tend to assume that officials know what is best and that
critics do not know what they are talking about. They view criticism of authority
as divisive and destructive, motivated by sinister goals and a desire to
cause trouble. Authoritarians believe, to a considerable extent, that established
authorities have an inherent right to decide for themselves what they
may do, including breaking the laws they make for the rest of us.

Follower Authoritarians look for the comfort of Big Brother's security.

Sadly we see a lot of “Follower Authoritarians” right here in DU City.

The Authoritarian Specter is available for free here: http://patrick-fournier.com/d/cours3-6607.pdf

[stevenleser]

65. You're really desperate to push that meme, aren't you? Problem is, no one fits that description.

What is really surprising about this kerfuffle is, this is a problem that has existed since October of 2001 with the Patriot Act.

There have been various flareups in the 12 years since then when people suddenly remember this has been going on. This is not new.

Many of us have been complaining about it all along. I wrote this in 2006 http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022958940 where I clearly say that warrantless wiretapping is evil and that at the very least we should turn away from that practice and force FISA warrants.

I also clearly say that I am not a fan of FISA either. I'm sure everyone defending the administration on this issue would say the same. They are not fans of FISA or of what is happening.

However, it is disingenuous not to acknowledge that what is happening now is incrementally better than warrant-less wiretapping where there is absolutely no paper trail and zero ability to hold anyone accountable after the fact. It does not indicate "Love of authoritarianism" to acknowledge these facts. You behave as if it somehow lessens the arguments to push past what is happening now if you acknowledge the incremental improvement.

Instead of appeals to emotion, ad hominem attacks, straw men and various other fallacious and disingenuous arguments, you might want to start with facts and acknowledgement of them.

[rhett o rick]

72. OK, let's look at the facts. Our government has used warrant-less wiretaps.

Now you say this is "incrementally better". How is a blank warrant authorizing what was illegal before, better?

And I hope you dont say that it's just data that they promise not to use unless it's needed. "It's needed" is code for whenever THEY decide it's needed.

This is an "incremental" step as you state, but toward stronger authoritarian rule, which, apparently does have it's appeal to some.

[stevenleser]

75. Not 'now', I have been saying it would be incrementally better for six years.

Why is a blank warrant better than the NSA being able to decide on their own who to wiretap with no paper trail and no ability to know who they wiretapped 1 year, 3 years, 10 years down the road? Do you really need me to lay that out there for you? OK.

1. With FISA, a judge actually has to look at and sign off on the request for the "search". Sure, in practice most requests are granted. That judge still has to put their name to the acceptance.

2. With FISA, congressional committees from both the House and Senate have the ability to gain access to the warrants and look them over to see if they make sense and are supported. That provides congressional oversight to what the Executive branch (via DOJ request for the warrant) and Judicial Branch (sign off on the warrant) has done. Now you have three branches of government involved in oversight of what with warrantless wiretapping was just one agency of one branch.

3. Because of 1 and 2, anyone attempting to wiretap or gain access to records or perfom any kind of a search for frivolous reasons has to fear that they will be held accountable for that request.

So no, it is not a step toward authoritarian rule, it is a step away from it. The entire reason we have separation of powers and elected officials in both the executive and legislative branches of the government is to provide the people, through their elected representatives, access to the actions of their government. It's the exact opposite of a step toward authoritarianism.

[rhett o rick]

80. Are you saying the data collection discussed in the OP is under the FISA laws?

If the OP is correct, it looks to me like the government is gathering blanket data via surveillance that is not specifically authorized by a judge. Data that can later be used "if needed". Am I wrong about that?

[stevenleser]

82. Yes, a FISA warrant was issued to collect this data. Greenwald's article says that outright

Greenwald's article which prompted this latest outcry says that plainly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order

.
.
.
The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19.

Under the terms of the blanket order, the numbers of both parties on a call are handed over, as is location data, call duration, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls. The contents of the conversation itself are not covered.
.
.
.

[rhett o rick]

89. I am confused. I was aware of what Greenwald said.

But why bother with FISA if a judge can grant a warrant for unlimited data collection without specific probable cause?

And wouldnt you agree that this statement: "The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing." is a step closer to the ultimate authoritarian state?

[stevenleser]

96. If you view it in a vacuum, perhaps...

if on the other hand, you view it with the knowledge that before this President, the guy before him was letting the FBI and NSA do as much domestic spying as they wanted without going before any judge or letting anyone have any oversight, let alone people in other branches of government, it's a step in the other direction, away from authoritarianism and fascism.

Listen, I will support the repeal of FISA and a Constitutional Amendment strengthening the fourth amendment so that this cannot happen because that is what is required if you note what I found here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2967017

Note that as the post below mine there notes, FISA was proposed and signed into law by Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2967021

Neither of those two men strike me as authoritarian or fascist.

[SHRED]

51. NEWSFLASH

Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple, Verizon, Sprint...etc...have been sharing your personal information with each other for years now.

[blkmusclmachine]

54. You just don't understand 11-Dimensional Rope-a-Dope!!

[SleeplessinSoCal]

57. I'm so ready to get to the jobs bill that I can't stand it. This is just

a huge waste of limited time. J. Edgar Hoover and all that proceeded and followed have been on our tails and the tails of the rich and powerful for about 100 years that we know of. We can debate and complain about who did it and why and is it legal, but it will happen no matter what.

If a guy like Chris Christie gets in the White House with the same laws in place, I'll be horrified. So I want it fixed. I just don't want the guy that inherited the program to be the fall guy. Not when we have what we have in Washington today.

[Blue State Bandit]

59. Amen.

[markiv]

74. and all those jobs will go to 'guest workers' brought in with the immigration bill

because we have a 'desparate shortage of workers' for those jobs in the jobs bill

[Politicalboi]

62. If you think Benghazi investigation is bad

Could you imagine had Obama stopped the spying, and then Boston happened, who do you think they would blame? The GOP love this, and would have Obama's ass if he tried to "fix" it.

[TheKentuckian]

121. How is it not worse that Boston happened despite scrapping the fourth?

Lame excuse and excuse only.

Obama was hired precisely to fix shit like this not perpetuate it. What a fucking crock!

[rhett o rick]

64. As I understand it, FISA was intended to allow the Govment to spy on citizens

if a judge was convinced BEFOREHAND that is was appropriate. And only in an emergence situation could the Govmnt spy w/o the judges pre-approval but the judge had to agree after the fact.

This looks like the Govment wants to do the spying on everyone but not "use the data" unless they "needed" to.

A bad analogy would be that the Govmnt comes into your home and catalogs everything you own, takes photos of everything but seals it up and "doesnt look at it" until there is a crime in you neighborhood.

[rhett o rick]

66. Creeping Fascism per Naomi Wolf

From a talk by Naomi Wolf author of "The End of America: Letter of Warning To A Young Patriot" given October 11, 2007 at Kane Hall on the University of Washington campus:

Illegal search, illegal seizure, secret prisons, torture, state-sponsored murder, illegal wiretapping, manipulation of elections, etc. are at the extreme end as democracy devolves into fascism.

See Wiki article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User egrey1/Creeping_fascism#cite_note-NW1-2

[Puzzledtraveller]

68. And some of us here are driving the wagons that complete the circle

I wonder just how far their loyalty would actually take them.

[rhett o rick]

76. Bob Altemeyer calls it authoritarian behavior.

To me it's just bully behavior. The big bully likes to dominate those that are weaker in some way. The big bully always has followers. Mr. Altemeyer says these followers or enablers are also authoritarians. They are also bullies, just follower bullies that emulate the leader. The leader bully can turn on the followers at any time and they know it. However, they depend on and enjoy the comfort of being with the big bully.

There is no bigger bully than the govmnt of the USofA.

[kentuck]

69. I guarantee you.

That if a Republican is elected in 2016, some of the apologists here will be shitting their pants about this very issue.

[stevenleser]

73. Nope. Same opinion in 2007 as now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022958940

[markiv]

71. Obama is good, Bush is bad I trust Obama

and with good reason. Obama is donkey brand, donkey is my friend

Bush, is elephant brand, and I am afraid of elephant brand. Donkey brand protects me from elephant brand

Donkey is my friend, just like Tony the Tiger

[blm]

77. I'm just surprised that some of you think it hasn't been happening since 2002. "IF" it was Bush????

It WAS Bush - he was doing it illegally until 2006 when GOP congress wrote a bill to cover his ass on it. It's been INSTITUTIONALIZED since then, so, the gathering outrage on this now is just knee-jerk and reactionary, driven by ignorance, partisanship and 10 years TOO LATE.

[premium]

78. I'm truly flabbergasted at how many DU'ers are ok with this

or try to justify this because a FISA court, which, in itself, is secret, ergo, we, the citizens, never get to see the reasoning behind approval of warrants, OK'd a warrant. All FISA is, is a rubber stamp for the govt. to spy on Americans, and, oh, BTW isn't FISA supposed to deal with Foreign Intelligence, as in Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, not domestic intelligence. Nowhere does it say domestic spying on American.

My opinion, the NSA should be, either abolished or brought under strict control.

[stevenleser]

83. Name a DUer who is 'OK' with this. I don't know of any.

The only thing I see is people who say they still don't like it, but that it is incrementally better than warrant-less wiretapping.

[premium]

85. You, for one.

You seem to think it's ok because it was done "legally" because a FISA court ok'd it.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong and I'll apologize.

[stevenleser]

86. In virtually every post I have said I don't like it and am not a fan of FISA

Thinking it is 'OK' is a very different concept from thinking that this is incrementally better than warrantless wiretapping.

[premium]

87. Fair enough.

I do apologize, I just think that too many people are willing to accept the govt. reasoning on these, IMHO, unconstitutional warrants by a secret court, ughh.
The next generation, Dem and Repub, seem to be willing to accept more and more erosion of our freedoms in favor of security, and we all know what that will eventually lead to.
Look, I'm no tin foil hat lunatic who thinks black helicopters are going to appear above my house in the near future, but I do worry about the direction our country is taking as far as secrecy and this phony war on terrorism.

[jeff47]

105. Well, how much are we talking about Congress cutting food stamps?

There's a lot of us who suspect this is being pushed as a "big deal" now to cover for other activities. After all, this is something that started well over 8 years ago. And Team Obama requires far more safeguards than Team Bush. How come it's "shocking" now?

Well, there's a few other things going on. Like cutting food stamps. What an amazing coincidence.

[LanternWaste]

81. It appears that you are labeling anyone who disagrees with your premise as

It appears that you are labeling anyone who disagrees with your premise as either a kool-aid drinker or an authoritarian, and labeling any premise which invalidates yours merely as 'spin'.

Out of curiosity, why is that?

[Daniel537]

84. Obama is just another scumbag criminal.

Enough of the sugar-coating. Same goes for about 98% of congress who have no problem with this. What, don't like to face reality? You morons, keep voting for anybody with a D after their name and see where that gets you.

[fredamae]

88. Many Were Outraged when BushCo

did it--Many more were outraged when Obama Continued it--but they were called "Obama Bashers" and dismissed, banned and otherwise "shunned". But they were largely correct.
Now we may be learning it's not only as Bad as it was under Bush--But Greatly Expanded and much worse.
Yes, we were warned alright. A long time ago.

I always made excuses for "my dems"-Always. I "rationalized away" actions I disagreed with--like voting for NAFTA/CAFTA/DOMA/FCC Deregulation/Patriot Act/FISA/USPS/renewals of the above/Bank Bailouts/Tax Cut Extensions/Education Cuts/Student Loan Rates/SocSecurity/Medicare/Head Start/Veterans/Keystone/Fracking/Oil Spill Disasters/Nuke Plants/Infrastucture/Worker Safety & Rights/Voting Rights/WAGE EQUALITY/Allowing the Senate Minority to control the Majority/SocSec Cuts/SAP/The blatant and Willful harm to Us and our economy, accomplished by the GOP all the while watching "dumb-founded" as the Democrats stood by and FKG WATCHED as it happened with Nary a word of criticism--acting as IF there was NOTHING they could Do--Imo along with Many others? I consider what the GOP and Select Dems have done IS Economic Treason because the consequences were/are Known and Is Intended-Sadly there are may more etcs....
I fully and blindly trusted Dems because they are Dems--Ignorant I was to the point of being "blind stupid" for there were Many who tried to educate me--but I didn't lisen and when I couldn't ignore the obvious......I too left the Dem Party several weeks ago after 54 Years. It felt/feels every bit as bad as getting a divorce. Silly, I know-but I had so much faith in a "stand up for the little guy-defend the under-dog" political party and now realize that Dem Party No Longer exists.
IMO

[BainsBane]

93. How can you look around this site and not think people are outraged?

[LostOne4Ever]

99. Im as outraged about it now

As I was when it was passed during Bush...enough to scream.

That said, if you think its bad under Obama, it would be 10x as worse under either Romney or McCain.

[muntrv]

101. Let's call out John Boehner and demand a yes or no vote on

repealing the Patriot Act.

[LovingA2andMI]

106. WOW Thanks for all the Recs!

I'm glad that at least 79 other individuals believe these actions that where revealed to us of late.... is WRONG! Minding our Data is WRONG. Spying on our internet transactions are WRONG. Building a data-mining NSA facility in Utah with our tax dollars without telling us this facility will hold all our phone and internet transaction data, is WRONG!

Free-Thinking, Common-Sense, Civil-Liberties Supporting Americans....do exist! Thanks, again!

[hamster]

107. I know some people are upset

But as I've said before, we need to have President Barack Obama's back. The Republicans drove the car in to the ditch and now they want the car back. President Barack Obama knows what he's doing. He's got them where he wants them. This is chess, not checkers. I have President Barack Obama's back.

[Agschmid]

109. ...

I'm tracking this on my posts, just like the NSA.

[840high]

108. k/r

[arely staircase]

110. It did happen under Bush

nt

[sabrina 1]

112. It did happen under Bush, and you are correct, we WERE outraged.

No more excuses this is about this COUNTRY.

Today Obama admitted that had 'kept Bush policies' as if we did not know. Don't anyone try to tell me anymore that he has not continued Bush's policies. He told the country today himself that he has. This is not what we worked for, is it? Nor did we work to get Republicans appointed back into powerful positions AFTER we threw them out.

Time to move forward and start thinking about what we do now. 'Elect more Democrats', well we did that and apparently it was not enough. So we have to change that to something like 'Elect more actual Progressive Democrats. Do not support the Third Way whose policies are so in line with the Neocons. This is why people like Ari Fleischer are publicly supporting this President for continuing Bush's policies. They feel vindicated now.

Watching Fleischer last night made me feel sick. Liar, traitor, coward, everything Democrats despised, he is now giving us the finger and letting us know how powerful they still are despite all our work.

[KoKo]

115. "They feel vindicated now."

Ari Fleischer...and didn't Cheney come out last week praising Obama?

It truly is disgusting.

[shcrane71]

118. What do you mean "IF" this happened under Bush. This DID happen under Bush.

Gitmo started under Bush. Two financed wars happened under Bush. The housing crisis broke under Bush. And the NSA spying on US citizens started under Bush. All of these things continued under Obama. Why are you surprised?