This is what hurts my brain a little bit.

[WilliamPitt]

For years and years and years, a chorus of voices was raised against George W. Bush's so-called "War on Terror." It's a fraud, a scam, a way to push the wars, a way to screw our rights, a way to make money, etc. Here on DU, one could not swing one's dead cat by the tail without striking a thread making this argument, filled with many people agreeing vehemently.

In the last several days, with all the NSA revelations, a lot of those same voices from all those years have defended the NSA and the whole operation by claiming, in essence, "The NSA needs to do this for the 'War on Terror.'" Not just on DU, mind you, but everywhere.

So I guess the "War on Terror" is all legit and stuff now.

Strange days indeed.

Most peculiar, momma.

Hoo.

[Marrah_G]

1. I agree Will

[TheDebbieDee]

109. My biggest beef with the * admin's wire-tap program was that it was warrantless.

Basically * had his AG call these phone companies and say, "The President wants you to break the law and tap in on your customer's phonecons. You won't get in trouble for doing it because it's the DOJ that would have to prosecute you - that's me and I'm telling you I won't prosecute. " I also think the * admin went warrantless because they were afraid the FISA courts would say no because the phones they wanted to tap belonged to Democratic higher-ups.

At least the Obamaa Admin went to the trouble of getting a FISA warrant.

Also, how much privacy should one expect from communication that results from sending a microwave signal through the air?

One last thing - if the NSA is listening to my boring-ass phonecons, then this nation is in BIG trouble!!!!!!

[rhett o rick]

145. The difference between Bush's surveillance and Pres Obama's is that

rubber stamped blanket warrant. That is a joke. Read the 4th amendment where is says, "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." The warrant Pres Obama got is worthless.

You ask "how much privacy should one expect from communication that results from sending a microwave signal through the air?"
How sad that you are so willing to give up your privacy so easily. Privacy of your emails and phone calls. It they arent private then not only can the government listen in, then Macy's can listen in, or Walmart, or your mother in law. We should fight to keep every bit of privacy we can.

Your "one last thing" - You dont care if you are surveilled because you dont do anything wrong. That means you dont see the need for the 4th Amendment because only bad people would be affected by government searches and seizures. I am so glad the founders didnt think that way. I hope you care that Exxon, GE, Microsoft, shouldnt be allowed to surveil you.

[Myrina]

149. Don't you see the bad mojo in that approach?

Bush: "We are going to do this"
Everyone else: "Sir it's illegal"
Bush: "So what? Do it anyway."
Fast forward to 2009.
Obama: "We are going to do this"
Everyone else: "Sir it's illegal"
Obama: "Ok, let's do it anyway, tweak some terminology & say we'll get warrants ... so ... it's legal"


If something is WRONG, it's wrong.
That they're in the situation to change a law to make it legal still doesn't make it right.

Fracking for instance. Cheney lobbied for it, came up with some bogus studies that claimed it was safe, got around the EPA regulations, and now it's allowed. Is it safe and ok? Hell no, it's STILL as wrong as it was 10 years ago.

[sabrina 1]

166. We live in a democracy, I have high expectations of my government not violating my rights. And when

they do, which is bound to happen once in a while, I don't just throw up my hands and accept it. THIS is when we are supposed to act. If not now, when? Wait until it gets even worse? We know what happens when people wait until it's too late, so no thank you, now is the time to speak out.

[SkyDaddy7]

162. Seriously?

We did not learn anything NEW other than the name, PRISM!! The rest of the stuff has been known for so long "NSA Wiretapping" has its own damn Wikipedia page!! LOL!!

Sorry, but all this MISGUIDED OUTRAGE is just that when compared to the civil rights violations that happen on a daily basis by state & local cops!! State & Local police violate more civil rights in one day that the NSA WILL EVER DO!! WHY?? There is no one policing the police!!!!

yet here we are with our collective panties in a wad!! SAD!!

[Marrah_G]

163. You and I disagree on this

[DCKit]

165. What y'all ^ said.

And you said it well.

[Solly Mack]

2. Dude!

K&R

[hlthe2b]

3. Yes, indeed... Very disconcerting to see... n/t

[kentuck]

4. My brain hurts too...

I think it just shows how effective our propaganda can be when they want it to be/

[WilliamPitt]

7. ...as well as a towering testament

to the awesome power of the My Team/Their Team phenomenon in politics.

[kentuck]

27. True dat...

It's rather depressing to see that.

[zeemike]

37. Should not be that surprising to us

Hi school sports are based on that principle of "school spirit"
And there are a significant number of people that stopped their development when they graduated from it.

[GoneFishin]

112. Boom.

Interesting.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

54. As I have posted before, more people care about sports

than politics. They care more about something that won't affect their lives in anyway and have no interest in something that could profoundly change their lives.

[Skittles]

140. I COULD KICK ROARING CRAB ASS

JUST SAYIN'

[tavalon]

100. I hate that almost more than I hate Rahm Emanuel

[William769]

5. Kick & recommended.

[leftstreet]

6. Seems legit

[WilliamPitt]

8. OMG

[lame54]

12. Truth in advertising...

[mindwalker_i]

18. That' hairlarious

[lame54]

10. Swinging dead cats is against DU rules

[mindwalker_i]

20. In all fairness

If you swing a live cat, it becomes a universal solvent.

[longship]

25. But swinging Schrödinger cats is obligatory.

Indeterminacy factors out the ethical issues.

The last week or so you couldn't swing a Schrödinger cat without hitting a flame war around here.

Myself, I would prefer thoughtful and respectful discussion based more on facts and less on personal attacks and suppositions.

Do I like this NSA stuff?
Nope!

Do I like the chair throwing here at DU?
Nope!

[Maynar]

113. A man carrying a cat

by its tail will learn something he can learn no other way.

I heard that a smart person once said that.

[longship]

120. Indubitably wise, he was. nt

[el_bryanto]

11. In fairness there are also plenty denouncing the program

I guess DU looks different depending on what side of the fence you are on (in this issue) - but I see plenty of posts condemning those who are ok with the PRISM Program as sell-outs and fascist-enablers, and I see plenty of posts condemning those who are opposed to the PRISM program as effectively-pro-Republican.

Bryant

[Maedhros]

43. Invective aside,

the argument that one is supportive of authoritarian government if one is supportive of the PRISM program has more merit than the argument that opposing the PRISM program is a partisan political attack on the President.

[el_bryanto]

47. I agree, that if you oppose the PRISM program, you are certainly right

[Just Saying]

13. It's not that it's legit so much as its not news that this is going on.

Or shouldn't be. It's the law of the land and as I recall Obama has supported continuing the program. I'm still confused about what the whistle was blown on. A 12 year old program? Was something illegal done? I understand hating the Patriot Act but its still law at this point, right?

I do think we need to use intelligence gathering rather than war to combat terrorists. We continue to walk a line between being free and wanting to protected. Can we bring shampoo on airplanes yet?

[NRaleighLiberal]

14. indeed. n/t

[randome]

15. I don't think people are arguing in FAVOR of eternal vigilance for evil terrorists.

We're saying that if that is the NSA's job, then they appear to be doing it well.

From what we know.

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

[Skidmore]

28. This. Get the FISA law and Patriot Act repealed, amended, or

ruled unconstitutional. Otherwise nothing changes and the gnashing of teeth and practices continue. We are still a civilized nation based on law the last time I heard. There are mechanisms and procedures for effecting such change and they are not limited to railing at the heavens in thr internet.

[Moostache]

144. Amen.

The Patriot Act is the most odious piece of legislation passed in the last 15 years. Without a full repeal of it, we are in our own version of Star Trek's Kobayashi Maru, the proverbial no-win scenario.

My greatest disappointments in the last 5+ years have been the inability of Harry Reid to realize the filibuster abuse of the right is preventable by his own action (currently inaction allowing it to persist) and the inability to get Gitmo closed and the ground of the prison salted with quick lime. Those are the only two things I would put ahead of repealing the Patriot Act at this time.

[tavalon]

102. Really,

By data mining everyone's information? It would seem to me that they are doing their job badly, if that's their way of doing it.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

16. Dude -

we're not in Kansas anymore, if ya catch my drift.

We saw this very same from GOPers during the Bush years. Folks so steadfastly partisan, so invested in a certain world/political view that no amount of evidence, persuasion, confronting will make them change their minds. Will, there are still people who think Michelle Bachmann is a brain trust and that the country would have been better off if Sarah Palin had run and won the last election. Do you honestly think that type of mental rigidity/delusion is limited to the other side?

[GoneFishin]

115. I admit to thinking that was a Republican Rightie trait until BO became POTUS.

I had no idea that blind allegiance existed on the left.

[Skittles]

139. in all fairness

Last edited Wed Jun 12, 2013, 02:52 PM - Edit history (1)

I think a lot of it is an overwhelming, understandable desire to see the first black president succeed - I want that too, heck, all true Democrats do - but the difference is I'm not willing to put on blinders in an effort to convince myself EVERYTHING is roses

[GoneFishin]

143. Yes. I was pretty happy when he was first elected.

[RobinA]

156. I Second That

I did think the "If my guy says it, it's OK" was a Right thing. Apparently not. I truly did not think you could be against warrantless data collection one time and OK with it the next.

[Junkdrawer]

17. Here: I'll strain that brain a bit more:

Are we watching the Outing or the Rollout of the Panopticon... err I mean PRISM?

Why The NSA’s Secret Online Surveillance Should Scare You



The reaction to the National Security Agency (NSA)’s secret online spying program, PRISM, has been polarized between seething outrage and some variant on “what did you expect?” Some have gone so far as to say this program helps open the door to fascism, while others have downplayed it as in line with the way that we already let corporations get ahold of our personal data.

That second reaction illustrates precisely why this program is so troubling. The more we accept perpetual government and corporate surveillance as the norm, the more we change our actions and behavior to fit that expectation — subtly but inexorably corrupting the liberal ideal that each person should be free to live life as they choose without fear of anyone else interfering with it.

Put differently, George Orwell isn’t who you should be reading to understand the dangers inherent to the NSA’s dragnet. You’d be better off turning to famous French social theorist Michel Foucault.

...

A citizenry that’s constantly on guard for secret, unaccountable surveillance is one that’s constantly being remade along the lines the state would prefer. Foucault illustrated this point by reference to a hypothetical prison called the Panopticon. Designed by utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham, the Panopticon is a prison where all cells can be seen from a central tower shielded such that the guards can see out but the prisoners can’t see in. The prisoners in the Panopticon could thus never know whether they were being surveilled, meaning that they have to, if they want to avoid running the risk of severe punishment, assume that they were being watched at all times. Thus, the Panopticon functioned as an effective tool of social control even when it wasn’t being staffed by a single guard.

....

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/06/07/2120141/why-the-nsas-secret-online-surveillance-should-scare-you/

Now, consider this from DemocracyNow this morning:

....

AMY GOODMAN: What’s wrong with that?

TIM SHORROCK: What’s wrong with that is that it’s a for-profit operation. Many times, you have—inside these agencies, you have contractors overseeing other contractors, contractors, you know, giving advice to the agency about how to set its policies, what kind of technology to buy. And, of course, they have relationships with all the companies that they work with or that they suggest to the leaders of U.S. intelligence.

And I think, you know, a terrible example of this is, you know, a few months ago, I wrote a cover story for The Nation magazine about the NSA whistleblowers that you’ve had on this show a few times—Tom Drake, Bill Binney and the other two—and, you know, they blew the whistle on a huge project called Trailblazer that was contracted out to SAIC that was a complete failure. And this project was designed, from the beginning, by Booz Allen, Northrop Grumman and a couple other corporations who advised the NSA about how to acquire this project, and then decided amongst themselves to give it to SAIC, and then SAIC promised the skies and never produced anything, and the project was finally canceled in 2005.
....

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/11/digital_blackwater_how_the_nsa_gives

So those NSA whistleblowers were prosecuted because they let out a terrible secret: Trailblazer (which sounds to me like PRISM's predecessor) DIDN'T WORK.

[suffragette]

38. + 1,000

This would be a great OP.

[Junkdrawer]

65. Done

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022994688

[frylock]

95. knr'd

[KoKo]

39. Interesting Info...thanks!

[JDPriestly]

129. Thanks so much. Excellent post.

[Cleita]

19. It's seems like our Constitution has become no more useful than as a

bird cage liner these days. Because it's the Democrats who are in violation of it this time, it seems to be okay.

I give up.

[A Simple Game]

21. The thing about this war on terror that gets me is

if you take away one catastrophic incident on 9/11 and the two wars that followed it, all you have for terrorism amounts to a pimple on an elephants butt.

We would have been better off just ignoring what happened on 9/11, much better off. I firmly believe we caused more terrorism after the 9/11 incident than all of other the terrorists combined. Afghanistan and Iraq did nothing to us, nothing at all.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

57. I totally agree.

[SomethingFishy]

87. Thom Hartmann put it like this:

"We are doing this to save less people than are killed falling in the bathtub every year".

When you look at it as a cost to benefit ratio you wonder why we aren't spending the money to cure cancer..

Authoritarianism and violence are not the cure for terrorism, they are the cause....

[SomeGuyInEagan]

161. "Authoritarianism and violence are not the cure for terrorism" but they are profitable industries ..

... for some folks with lots of influence in D.C.

War is a racket, this is a racket on steroids.

Always follow the money.

[JI7]

22. because things like the Color coded Alerts were obviously fake and more for political

reasons to help Bush.

i don't think anyone had a problem with trying to prevent terrorism but the Bush administration was not doing that.

Obama is not Bush. you might disagree with things he does but he did doing it because he thinks it will help to prevent attacks and not because he could use it for his own political gain .

[tavalon]

103. Some of us took the long view that to prevent terrorism,

you feed, cloth and give comfort to the world and you ask the important question "why?" Boy, did that piss off a lot of Americans in 2001, when a handful of people like me were suggesting it.

[Major Hogwash]

23. When was the Boston Marathon??

I'm thinking of running in next year's marathon -- even though I have NEVER run a marathon in my whole frickin' life -- in support of the people of Boston!!

[mike dub]

35. Go for it, Major (to go further off-topic)

but hop to it: as you're probably aware, you'll need to run a certified, Qualifying marathon before November (when Boston 2014 registration opens) in order to get in. And the qualifying times are ROUGH. I'm a decent runner, and just qualifying for Boston was quite the task.

[Major Hogwash]

82. I didn't know that. Thanks for the information.

Now all I have to do is get registered for a qualifying marathon in the next 4 months, lose 40 pounds, buy a pair of running shoes, and quit smoking 2 packs a day -- and I'm in like Flynn!!!

[geek tragedy]

24. There is considerable ground between "the war on terror is the greatest challenge

our nation has ever faced" and "terrorism isn't a real problem" mentalities.

[OKNancy]

31. exactly

I was one of the people who denounced Bush. But, I didn't trust him. I do trust Obama. It's as simple as that.
At first I thought the treats were overblown, but we have seen enough incidents that it's out there. Obviously the President has seen some disturbing evidence as well. Plots have been thwarted, a few have not been.

I do think we need to know about it and talk about it, but I don't fear "the future of our country".
That's ridiculous. I do fear the ultra-right, what the Koch brothers are doing and what is happening to public education.
Those subjects worry me more than the NSA.

[bvar22]

74. Its all OK because YOU "trust Obama"!!????

That is a stunning statement.
You know, Obama won't be president forever.
A Republican will sit in the Oval Office again, perhaps as soon as 2016,
and that Republican might have someone as crazy as Sarah Palin one heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

[font size=3]
It is NOT about The Person.
It IS about BAD and Dangerous Policy.[/font]

[chervilant]

96. Do you sometimes feel as though

you are talking to a brick wall? I just don't get the blind allegiance to a politician of any ilk.

[rhett o rick]

107. I think that people need to be able to trust someone. Pres Obama has a nice smile and a nice family.

But I cant over look all the Bush republicans he has surrounded himself with. I didnt like Bushboy and I dont like his gang. I dont understand how the apologists can justify all the conservatives that he has advising him.

And for me the last straw was/is Penny Pritzker. How we loved to hate Mit Romney, but how does he differ from Ms. Pritzker other than she claims she is a Democrat. If she is a Democrat, then Mit Romney could change his party and the crazies would love him.

Brick wall? Yes.

Clapper is a Bush gang member. Just sayin.

[Enthusiast]

142. Shit....

I think Pritzker is even worse than Romney. If that is possible. Then there is the Geithner and Larry Summers. You know the rest.

Brick wall...

[tavalon]

104. Do you trust the next President and the President after that? Lather, rinse, repeat

This is wrong, no matter who is at the helm.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

116. Right. And the middle ground doesn't include the largest spy program in history.

[intheflow]

26. Thank you, Will!

Not only seeing many old-time DUers defending this program they so vehemently opposed under Bush, but also a hellova lot of people who joined since Obama was elected calling those of us who still oppose it trolls, undemocratic, and two-faced. If my position stays the same even as the politicians change, does that make me a two-faced hypocrite? I don't think so! Does it matter if Snowden is a Rand Paul supporter if he's telling the truth about the subversion of US liberties? I guess to many people, truth is subjective, the fourth amendment is a unrealistic fantasy brought forth by the founders out of La-La Ponyland, and lies are okay if your guy is doing it.

[timdog44]

50. Your one statement is the tell all.

It does not matter if he is a Rand Paul supporter. It matters if he is telling the truth. Is he telling the truth? He is getting something out of this other than thinking he is saint. The goodness of his heart? Question of the week. And what do you suppose Glenn Greenwald is getting out of this?

Bush used his business to talk us into a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. He sat by while the towers were destroyed by terrorists that his spies knew about and did nothing about it, so he could go to war. It was a done deal.

So if we stop all the surveillance, like it seems a lot here want to do, and the Sears Tower is blown to kingdom come, Obama will be at fault for not stopping it. I did not ever trust Bush, or his dad, or his brothers. They were all crooks or idiots. I trust Obama. I still do not like surveillance, but I Trust Obama to do the right thing.

[intheflow]

132. Oy. Where do I start with this?

Here:

"I Trust Obama to do the right thing."

And millions trusted Hitler. Look, I like Obama, but he is not omnipotent, the government is a huge and runs like a complex perpetual motion machine, and there is big corporate money in military/security systems. He cannot control everything that happens in the US government. Corruption is rampant in all forms of government.

"I Trust Obama to do the right thing."

But you didn't trust Bush and you act as if no Republican will ever get elected again. By supporting the president on this, by giving up your own fourth amendment right to privacy, you seek to cease discussion and action to get this program overturned so that the next conservative won't use it to track you down as a political enemy of the state.

Finally, the whole Rand Paul supporter argument is bogus, assuming guilt by association. Again, hardly a democratic principle. For historical precedent of the absolute ridiculousness of broad-brush condemnation of whole swaths of people due to guilt by association, see: Salem witch trials, Japanese internment camps during WWII, McCarthyism and the HUAC.

[timdog44]

135. I can start by taking the last first.

I don't give a fig if he is a Rand Paul supporter. Never said that. So I am not painting with a wide brush. And I understand that historically the US did a lot, and still does a lot, of not so nice things. I am again not painting Snowden with this brush, nor did I ever, although I saw the attempts to do that. Wrong way to do things. My question is - what is Snowden's motive? As I said, do you think he had an epiphany and is coming out as some kind of saint? I think he did not have an epiphany and I think he is copycat mode. I think he got snowed by that traitor, Greenwald. And as you can tell, I don't think highly of Greenwald. I don't think he did an investigative lift of the finger in this story other than to take some low level spy wannabe and convince him to tell some sensational stuff.

I agree the government is huge and runs on its own inertia. Obama does not have much of the control that people attribute to him. If he said for some agency to do a certain thing, it would get done in its own time, and not Obama time. I think the comparison to Hitler is a little over the line and I don't think that is what is happening. I think there is not a lot of real information on this yet and with time we will find that what has been done, has been done legally and not as intrusively as everyone is crying about.

Surveillance is the necessary evil of our day. We need to pare down the agencies that can do this to a few, eliminate the mercenary spies (and I mean that in the most terrible way possible as I hate mercenaries). I think mercenaries are non allegiant beings who out only for the money. They have dropped out of the government to make consulting fees. Hateful. And then the surveillance needs to be put in some encrypted form that the government knows, so that corporation or other governments can't use against us.

In all this, I again say, I trust Obama and when Al Franken came out and said his piece I was more of a believer. I am not naive enough to believe this can not be used against us, but I also trust the ACLU to do the thing that they do - protect our constitutional rights by suing and testing their limits.

I truly understand what you are getting to, I think I am just in a different tack. I hope we are both right. If that is possible. I do listen to what you say. I have followed a lot of your posts. You make sense, and make me work hard at what I think. Thanks for that.

[intheflow]

178. I'm sorry.

I totally misread your original answer to me. I still don't agree with the surveillance state, but I'm certainly not helping civil discourse by misreading posts from sane people trying to have rational discussions. Peace, timdog.

[timdog44]

186. And peace to you.

You do not have to apologize, intheflow. We are having civil discourse. Sometimes it takes a couple posts for us to get to the same page, at least discussion wise. I'm sure we will run into each other again.

[SammyWinstonJack]

29. rec

[Matariki]

30. Damn straight. We need to focus on ISSUES.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

32. Bernie Sanders is troubled by this and everyone knows what a RW tool he is! nt

[Maedhros]

46. Along with my Senators, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley.

Hard to characterize either of them as "right wing."

[JoeyT]

94. And they've been joined by Grayson.

On the other hand, Boehner thinks it's necessary and good, so I'm torn.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right."

Thomas Paine

[tavalon]

105. Nice quote

[Uzair]

34. Never ending bullshit

Why are you equating Bush to Obama?

What, exactly, has Obama done that has even remotely crossed the line? Especially when comparing him to Bush, the guy who started illegal wars and tortured people and illegally WIRETAPPED people, which Obama DID NOT DO.

Seriously, guys. This is getting ridiculous. The media creates fake scandal after fake scandal and you guys eat it up.

[WilliamPitt]

36. Shortcut to Thinking 101

Try harder.

[Gore1FL]

44. If you are going to start the thread

You need to do better than using ad hominem attacks against those with whom you have a disagreement.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AdHominem

Suggesting that DUer "Uzair" needs a basic class in thinking might work in an insult contest, it doesn't advance the discussion, augment your argument, or address any of that person's questions, or points.

I'd be interested in seeing a more informed and civil response from you to Uzair concernign the topic at hand.

Thanks.

[Skittles]

99. remember when Barney Frank alluded to a table leg?

that's what his response meant

[Gore1FL]

158. Barney Frank's response was warranted.

The person he said it too was being inflammatory and using contradicting labels to describe Obama in a strident manner.

The user above made a specific and verified distinction, and was dismissed unnecessarily in an obnoxious way. It would have been far better for the OP to address the concerns rather than to call someone stupid without further input. If he is unable to do that, there is really no point in starting the OP in the first place.

[Skittles]

159. "equating Obama to Bush"

indicates someone who thinks certain powers are OK under presidents they like but OH NOES if it's a republican.......THAT is what is UTTER BULLSHIT, as they so eloquently put it, and absolutely VINDICATES what Mr. Pitt said

[Gore1FL]

168. I don't think that is what he did.

I'm against the program. But this issue is one of many that seems to be aimed at discrediting Obama as if this wasn't al in place (or that he didn't add safeguards to what Bush had.

I agree with everyone who thinks the patriot act is a joke and that collecting the data as the NSA is demonstrates a conflict with the 4th Amendment.

I also agree with those who find it problematic that this is being floated as a problem with abuse by the Obama administration rather than as a poor policy put into place over a decade ago.

Perhaps that's hair splitting, but it doesn't reflect a lack of intelligence or a lack of thinking. If those points can't be answered in any other way than questioning the intelligence of the poster, then I have to wonder what other parts of the argument the OP is unwilling or unable to support.

I don't have your take of the original question. I don't see the argument indicate that "certain powers are OK under presidents they like but OH NOES if it's a republican." I took it as "why did it take you twelve years to get upset about this, and why are you even more critical of the person who actually put some (though an insufficient amount) braking on it policy?"

[Skittles]

169. it's hair splitting

if people could understand the issue is the direction America is taking and NOT specifically Obama's legacy, they would better understand both the problems AND the potential problems

[Gore1FL]

175. I agree with that

but the story is spun often as anti-Obama. The lack of specificity tends to "dragnet" people who generally agree that there is a privacy conflict, but would prefer that N.S.A. not be the replacement for I.R.S., D.O.J, Ben.Gha.Zi, etc.

This isn't to say that criticism doesn't belong with the Obama administration. All criticism does not belong there. Nor does most criticism.

IMO, this OP presents an all or nothing dichotomy. It didn't have to. Instead of acknowledging this intellectually when Uzair brought the point up, The OP simply insulted him. It was uncalled for. It was also unnecessary, because the real answer was this:


"You are correct. Obama inherited a bad program concocted by the Bush administration. He has not abused it like his predecessor. However, there is still questionable activity going on, and Obama is not blameless. Ultimately, the policy is bad. Whether or not the power is abused more or less by different leaders, they should not have the power in the first place."


Will is an adult and accomplished writer. I shouldn't have to pen example responses for him, or criticize his civility. He's better than that.

[Romulus Quirinus]

183. You think William Rivers Pitt is out to discredit the President?

Are you out of your mind?

[Gore1FL]

185. Did I say that?

I said he was unnecessarily rude to a DUer when he could have easily clarified his point. I am not sure how that equates to "out to discredit the President."

To answer your question: No. I am not out of my mind.

[SammyWinstonJack]

41. "The media creates fake scandal" What's fake about any of this?

Starting illegal wars vs continuing illegal wars..........hmmm.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

64. Are you serious?

If so, please point out the "illegality" in the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), which last time I checked was passed by Congress and signed by the President.

One can say "that was a very bad idea", or "the people who passed that should be voted out of office", without descending into blatant falsehoods like "Starting illegal wars" and "Continuing illegal wars".

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[HangOnKids]

68. The Reality Based Community Canard

You appear to be a bit rusty.

[SomethingFishy]

89. So when intelligence is "cherry picked" and facts are just made up

that makes the war legal because there was a vote on it? Discrimination against gays is "legal". Slavery was "legal". Keeping women from voting was "legal". Forcing a black man to drink from a different water fountain than a white man was "legal". Lynching was "legal". If everyone followed "the law" the US wouldn't even be a country.

The question here should be ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS? The war on terror has been one debacle after another, one lie after another, hundreds of thousands are dead because of false intelligence and an invasion of a country that was barely a threat to their neighbors let alone to us and you have the fucking gall to sit there and claim you are part of the "Reality Based Community"? It may have been "a very bad idea" to you, but to the DEAD it was a matter of life and death.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

137. When a "vote on it" is passed by lawful authority... that makes it legal.

That's what legal means.

I mean seriously, do I have to explain this to you like you're a third-grader?

I don't particularly like Bush's war any more that you do, but let me be clear: throwing around blatant falsehoods about "illegal war" doesn't make arguments any stronger. Especially when the same people then go on to smear President Obama with them.

And yes. Democrats are called the "Reality Based Community" for a reason. Unlike Republicans, we don't have a culture of just making shit up.

Remember that.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Romulus Quirinus]

184. right on. n t

[tavalon]

106. Actually, he's accusing you of treating politics like a team sport

And since your team is "winning" right now, you are happy. Reread and maybe read some of the comments. This is so not about comparing Bush and Obama, it's comparing the behavior of the same people under those two regimes. It's talking about hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy.

[bvar22]

124. "What, exactly, has Obama done that has even remotely crossed the line?"

Well, lets start with the secret Kill List and Pre-Emptive Drone Bombings in nations that haven't attacked us.
Most rational people would consider sending an armed aircraft into their territory,
and dropping bombs that kill their citizens (some of them innocent women & children) based on suspicion of being a terrorist an Act of War.
Can you imagine the furor if another nation did THAT to us?

Bush NEVER went THAT far.
Would you have supported Bush is HE had started this program?

Just as a refresher in case you "forgot",
here is Candidate Obama in 2007.

[font size=3]“The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” [/font]---Senator Obama, 12-20-2007

Have you been blinded by the light?


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.

[NealK]

176. Candidate Obama...

I miss that guy.

[bvar22]

177. THAT guy would have made a great President!

Renegotiation NAFTA
Labeling GMO foods
A Public Option
Raising the CAP on the Payroll Tax
Walking the UNION line in his comfortable shoes
Restoring TRANSPARENCY & ACCOUNTABILITY to our Government
Restoring ACCOUNTABILITY to Wall Street
Closing GITMO

Yep. THAT guy would have made a fine President.

[JDPriestly]

130. What has Obama done.

I've explained this so many times. I'm really getting tired of having to re-explain and re-explain.

This program probably was conceived and partially created before Obama became president. It is a project of our overly paranoid national security administration.

Why is it dangerous to our country?

Because when people are under surveillance, they begin to notice it and they change their behavior. They become hesitant to do what I am doing now: criticize their government.

Reporters consider carefully whether they dare call someone with a story that is negative about the government or people who are close to the government (whether Monsanto's products harm your health is still uncertain, but Monsanto has a lot of positive contacts and power in the government, so think Monsanto as an example here) much less report news that will embarrass the government or cause it to be criticized.

When you ask people what they think about political issues, they will just turn away in silence.

Then one of your friends says, "Remember so-and-so. She was really smart and I like her, but her dad is on the 'Do not call' list so she will never get a good job."

How do I know about these things? Because I know what it was like in Eastern Europe when they had surveillance up the wazoo. That's how people acted.

And many people really wanted to leave. In fact, lots did. And sometimes families got together and decided who would leave and would sacrifice and stay to take care of mom and dad. In fact, some people wanted to leave so badly that if they knew how to fly airplanes, they stole them and flew to the West.

Do you think that couldn't happen here? Just let the government continue this kind of surveillance of phone records and you will find out. Once you find out, it will be too late for you.

Think this over. Please.

[Apophis]

133. Fake scandal?

[Romulus Quirinus]

182. I guess force feeding and solitary confinement don't count. nt

[Malik Agar]

40. Could all of this stuff give rise to a 3rd party?

Yes I know 3rd parties are unsuccessful, but I'm relatively young and naive. This entire NSA spy scandal cuts across party lines and has created some very strange bedfellows. Who would have ever thought that Michael Moore and Glenn Beck would be on the same side or such a divisive issue? Bernie Sanders and Ron/Rand Paul are on the same team. Is it plausible that some mutant alliance party develops in order to vote out the people trampling the Constitution?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

48. You mean a liberal version of the Tea Party?

[BillyRibs]

51. National Third Parties have been

dead in the water for years. Once the House deadlocked itself (with the Congressional Impasse of 1911) as to how many people are to be in a district, the fix was in. So today I ask all People, 1)How the hell can you represent an average of 800,000 people!?
2)why are the 525,000 people in Rode island worth the same as the 1,250,000 people in Montana!? one Representative.
We as a Nation are the second worst represented Democracy in the world. second only to India. Washington himself Said, "The smaller the constituency the less likely the chance for corruption to take root and grow." The sooner we rectify this the better we will all be.

[leftstreet]

58. The People need to rise. The 'parties' will follow n/t

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

75. "The parties will follow". Sort of like they started to with Occupy.

Yeah I remember how that went.
As for the people, yep, I agree they really do need to rise up off their asses and start caring about what affects their lives more than sports and entertainment, but is that really going to happen?
Most don't even know what's going on in their own town, let alone the country or the world.
A big non-violent general strike that would stop business as usual, run by well organized aware groups could work, but where's the energy for that to happen?
Any thoughts?

[leftstreet]

78. Occupy was never that kind of a movement

It didn't spring people-up from traditional working class solidarity issues like labor disputes, rent strikes, etc

It was invented by an advertising agency, never moved from its vague 'middle class' message, and politicians jumped to denounce or endorse it without knowing anything about it.

Yet it was still fortunate to get the following it did. So that does say something.

[Laelth]

62. The Immigration Bill being debated in the Senate is also cutting across party lines.

It is a strange time, indeed. No clue what the future may hold, however.



-Laelth

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

79. Both parties are run by corporations

why would a 3rd be any different?
It would have to be run by very aware and effective groups, something that is sadly lacking at the present.

[liberal_at_heart]

181. It has for me.

[uppityperson]

42. What hurts my brain is people equating those who recognize this is not new with saying it's ok.

Now, trash thread, again.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. The same voices? Are you sure?

[George Gently]

122. Yeah --- that one hurt my brain, too.

The same voices howling then are howling now.

Only now a lot of 'em are howling like they were absent that day.

[jtuck004]

49. I suspect Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terror groups don't drink champagne, but if

what many have told us is true, that they hate our freedoms, they may well be celebrating how effective they have been at getting us to rid ourselves of them, these freedoms we say are so important that we sent people to die for them.

I bet even they are shocked at how many new supporters they have in this country.

I think future patriotic speeches will be very different, maybe not ring out as proudly, as we shovel the dirt over the broken bodies of people who died to protect the right of the government to enrich banks on the backs of working people, students, the sick, and those in poverty, while snooping and spying on all we do.

Go U.S.A.

[Javaman]

52. Shush you! What did I tell you about pointing out hypocrisy???

Don't make me come back there!!!

[Drale]

53. It is strange days but

What this "Hero" released was not heroic at all. Everyone knew it was happening already. It was the equivilent of him releasing documents saying that the Japanese attacked Pearl harbor.

[benld74]

55. I was most likely one of those voices, the reason I haven't spoken up until now,,

is this,

I know that once something starts at the Federal Level, it cannot be stopped, period.
I dont like it. I can raise holy hockey sticks about it. I can write my Congress Critters about it. I can take my Obama stickers off my vehicle. I can return my Democratic Card. I can join the opposition against it. I could march against it.
But can I have that much affect on it?
In reality?
Really?
Well, I'm a realist more than anything else.
I root for the underdogs in everything.
I am against this.
but,,,

[WillyT]

56. K & R !!!

[apples and oranges]

59. Are you sure they were the same people? The democratic party is a huge tent

There's a libertarian wing, occupy wing, progressive wing, liberal pragmatist wing, and centrist wing (example, Hillary Clinton wanting to bomb Iran). The different factions have different priorities and are more vocal at different times. It's more likely that the people who are more in acceptance or resigned to what the NSA is doing didn't weigh in on the earlier debates about Bush.

Also, I haven't seen anyone supportive of the program, just some posters reminding others that the revelations aren't new and that we should direct our anger in the right direction.

[Phlem]

60. K&R!

Thanks William

-p

[KoKo]

61. Agree...

But it's a hopeful change that we have many more sites we have now to get more Progressive/Dem Information instead of what goes on here on DU:

Truth Out/TruthDig, Alternet, Nation of Change, The Real News with Paul Jay plus the ROKU Box where I can now watch Democracy Now and RT America in my own time. Plus on ROKU there's the real BBC, German and Irish News, Al Jazerra, Press TV, ASIA TV and many other foreign News in English.

"RT America" has excellent Left News with many fine guests (American Activists) who are allowed ample time to speak in interviews. Kevin Gostalzo's reporting on Bradley Manning Trial and interviews with Julian Assange and other Whistle Blowers. Peter Lavelle has an excellent interview show called "Crosstalk" with American and International Viewpoints all given equal time. Usually three different viewpoints with time to hear viewpoints long given little time here in USA.

International News has been a wonderful break from the MSM here in the US which is so insular and controlled.

The way things are going on DU it will become irrelevant soon if it continues to be "Fight Club." It was the "Community" here that kept many of us coming back. After 12 years on this site...I felt it was like a family....disfunctional at times...but filled with interesting people and points of view from all walks of life. Not so much at all any more.

[MisterP]

85. you mean what happened to the fight clubs at the end, everyone chasing a phantom?

[KoKo]

86. Chasing a Phantom.......maybe...

[99th_Monkey]

63. "At least he's OUR guy who's doing it" ... nicely, with kid gloves & smooth speeches

so now it's all good. What's to complain about?

[tkmorris]

66. It's pass interference when they do it. It's good defense when your team does it.

Sadly that's what it comes down to for an awful lot of people. Issues, ideas, philosophies on what constitutes good governance, none of these matter to many people. It's just a game for them, a thing to care about simply in order to keep from being crushingly bored. It's the Yankees versus the Red Sox, all day every day.

[SheilaT]

67. Well said, Will.

The entire War on Terror, the entire justification for almost everything that has happened since September 11, 2001, is a complete crock.

Notice how well the eavesdropping saved us from some lunatic doing something like, oh, I don't know, setting off a couple of bombs at the Boston Marathon? Oh, wait. That happened.

The only "plots" that are ever uncovered seem to be the ones that undercover FBI agents lure people into.

We are slowly, but surely, approaching East Germany status, where half of the population is spying on the other half.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

80. Well said as well.

[democrank]

69. It`s The Head Nodders Club.

So George W. Bushie, it`s frightening. Just nod no matter what. Even if it`s illegal. Even if it`s immoral. Even if it`s unconstitutional. Just nod.

[hfojvt]

70. well the same thing happened with the Bush tax cuts

suddenly making 85% of them permanent was a huge progressive victory for the people.

But you are not talking about the same people.

Many of the people who agreed vehemently on DU in the past are gone now. They are not the same ones now defending it.

Others who are now defending it were perhaps silent for fear of getting flamed by the majority, but now that they have a sizable contingent of supporters they feel braver to speak their minds.

For myself, I thought some of the shrieking during the Bush administration was overwrought. I got called a Bush-defender for saying so. I got mocked for scoffing at the notion of fascism under Bush.

Really there was a certain partisan vehemence back in the day where people were throwing everything at Bush, just because they hated HIM. Not because of principle or because they hated the policy, but because they hated HIM.

Republicans are now doing the same thing to Obama. It's kinda the Gate syndrome. Since August 8, 1974 every dedicated member of the opposition has been searching for the fountain of Gate. The scandal that will force the President they hate, that they never voted for, to resign in disgrace (at least temporary disgrace. It lasted, what, maybe 3 years for Nixon? Okay, maybe longer, he was not asked to speak at the 1980 convention or 1984 convention.)

[Generic Other]

71. I am still yelling

I keep seeing old DUers checking in to yell. Pre-Obama that's all we ever did. Yell. And we didn't take kindly to centrist apologists excusing this patriot act crap that allowed them and anyone else to abuse our right to privacy. Most of those who felt that way then feel that way now. They just aren't being heard.

No, that's wrong. I have heard a lot of DUers screaming about it actually. But it is hard to scream when people keep shushing us. Through Obama's whole term, we have been being cautioned not to second guess, question, criticize, disagree with or challenge Obama. To give him a chance. If there are things we wish he'd done differently, our opinions have been dismissed. We've had arguments with people whose politics we basically agree with. A lot of us don't post as much as we used to. There's nothing safe to talk about. We come across as disloyal, angry, on the attack whenever we open our mouths. And the other side comes across as ideologues who seem to want only to purge and punish others for unorthodox thinking.

Don't you think there has been a lull in vigorous debate because of this self-imposed vow of silence? Some might say it has not seemed silent that there has been constant bickering and maybe this is so. It certainly has distracted people from the actual issues. Divided us too. DU divided the day Bush walked out the door and Obama walked in. We've kind of been fighting ever since. But make no mistake, we are not all agreed that the ship of state is sailing in the right direction. Not at all.

Many of us believe we have a serious leadership problem. Our politicians are all largely controlled by powerful outside interests. And our government is run by a shadow government of agencies whose actions are mostly covert.

So what do we do about it?

[boilerbabe]

72. exactly , it's hypocritical and SICKENING and everybody knows their names.

what a sorry bunch.

[pitchforx]

73. There are a lot of smart people here.

Me? Not so much. But I am trying hard to get my brain around this subject.
I do know that humans have been tracked, watched and eavesdropped since the beginning of time, Friends, enemies and animals with good noses have always been able to find and follow us. When we walk we leave footprints, when we talk others can hear us. We leave droppings. Governments of all types thru history have opened mail and wiretapped and spied on their citizens. As better ways to communicate came along so did better ways of spying. As we agree to leave large electronic footprints in the electromagnetic snow we have little hope or expectation of privacy. Complete privacy from governments, corporations and people with bad intentions is something we've never had. Passports and tax forms and social security business are all ways of the govt locating us.
The crux of the matter it seems is INTENT. If someone is tracking me for the sole purpose of giving me a million dollars and a kiss, I will not complain. But government intentions can be hard to fathom. And they change. Governments change. I trust this President I voted for, but not the last one. I may not trust the next one. The spying will continue nonetheless. If you trust the government implicitly now and for the future this spying is not a terrible thing. But if you fear that someday the government might act with bad intentions it is frightening. And now my head hurts too.

[KoKo]

77. You raise interesting questions. (eom)

[treestar]

119. Good points

And DU is now ranting as if the government only spies on "innocent citizens" which would be a waste of their time. Just maybe some of the time they are really spying on people who intend to do harm. Or spying on other spies (reminds me of the comedies about Russian and American spies spying on each other).

[JDPriestly]

134. The government probably spies on people who oppose their

wars, people who travel to China or have contact with people in China, people who "occupy" or "occupied," people who oppose fracking, people who oppose mining the tops off mountains, people who oppose drones -- and that includes a lot of people on DU.

I could be wrong, but those could be people who would likely be or have been at some point under surveillance.

[treestar]

150. Do you really know that

It would be wrong, but why do you assume all government agents do wrong, or that the government does wrong all the time? It's no better than right wingers claiming every welfare recipient is a fraud.

J. Edgar Hoover did such things. But that doesn't mean every FBI director is corrupt. And nobody has really pointed to a case of someone really suffering over it - we all have First Amendment rights and can say things that are as crazy as bat manure and keep doing it. If they are monitoring Fred Phelps somehow, it doesn't seem to stop him.

The only case I can think of now is Michelle Bachmann, maybe her prosecution could come from some sort of underhand spying. Then again, maybe that was not necessary. She's enough of a moron to have been easy to catch, not requiring data mining. And then if she's guilty, it's not just political persecution.

All of those protests you mention go on. The complaints about what the cops did to occupy - the cops didn't need spying to do that - the people were out there protesting.

[awoke_in_2003]

81. The Patriot Act...

Wrong in 2001, wrong in 2013.

[pitchforx]

83. abso-effin-lutely!

in a perfect world i think and hope that Obama would have thrown it out the moment he got in to office.
By that time the Patriot Act was no longer just a law or a policy, it had grown into an infrastructure with deep corporate and bureaucratic roots, and the political landscape was against him on the issue, what w/ blue dogs etc... He folded.

[TransitJohn]

84. We've always been at war with East Asia.

Good post, Will.

[Saviolo]

88. And to all those saying "You don't need to worry...

...if you've done nothing wrong."

Who gets to decide what's "wrong?" At what times do they get to change that decision arbitrarily? What are you doing right now that someone might consider coercive... subversive... treasonous?

You're posting on a political discussion board (or reading a political discussion board at least). I can only imagine you have political conversations with friends or family. Do you call your senator? Your city councilor?

It's hard to play the game when you don't know the rules.

[Number23]

90. You mean "people" like Senator Al Franken?

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/al-franken-defends-nsa-surveillance-this-is-not

Look, I hear what you're saying. Every post I've made on this topic has shown my dismay that the Patriot Act was ever made policy. But it was.

And I'm sure your concern is genuine, as is mine. But I'd be even more concerned about being on the same side as the wildlings in GD on this or any issue.

[WilliamPitt]

97. "I'd be even more concerned about being on the same side as the wildlings in GD on this or any issue

"

Cuz that's my metric.

[Number23]

101. It's fine that you missed my point. But I have no idea why you'd be nasty about it as well

Wrong is fine. Nasty and wrong is another issue entirely.

[WilliamPitt]

117. Awfully sensitive for 13k posts.

[Number23]

126. Tone is always a consideration for good writers. Minimizes the chance of misunderstandings

[HangOnKids]

153. Quoting you is nasty and wrong?

Really? Odd that.

[Number23]

170. The face palm smiley was what I was talking to WILL PITT about, thanks

Emphasis on WILL PITT. Again, thanks.

[HangOnKids]

171. If you don't want anyone to reply to your posts on a PUBLIC Board

Maybe you should send a PM. Thanks to you too!

[Number23]

172. Again to WILL PITT. Thanks

[HangOnKids]

173. Your last post was to me, so I replied

Thanks.

[n2doc]

91. Politics over principles

And it cuts across all affiliations:


Even independents. Hell, criticize the repubs all day long, but they changed their opinions on spying the least with changes in administration.

[Canuckistanian]

92. "many people agreeing vehemently"

Yup, that's DU!

[Douglas Carpenter]

93. mind boggling, At least when the Republicans are in power Democrats believe in the Constitution

[ybbor]

98. Having not read any of the previous comments...

I, too, am amazed at all of the people who are all too fine with saying this is all well and good. It is total BS and we are slowly but steadily giving away all of our Liberties because of the fear of the ever present boogieman. It is just another way for the monied folk to get their hands deeper into our politicians well greased pockets. Funny how we have no money for healthcare, education, FOOD for the poor, but we have an endless supply of $ for those private firms to protect us (read: their interests), feed our soldiers, spy on us, ... We have become a nation of such weak people more concerned with whose dancing with the stars, or what trouble (insert talentless "star" here) is in to give a damn of the way our rights are being run roughshod over. Truly sad times we live in. Grow a pair people and stand up for our/your rights! If we don't we won't have any to protect.

[MissDeeds]

108. I'm right there with you

K&R

[Amonester]

110. I suggest we all go back to using carrier pigeons to communicate.

It would reduce to 0.000001% the odds of being unconstitutionally spied upon.

Life would be peaceful, and fun again.

But seriously, I never said I support that sh*t, only that it's highly utopic to think it will ever be stopped.

And that if Obama was to be effective at stopping it unilaterally, he would be attacked by you know who as being weak on terra!!111!!1!911!!911 24/7 until November 2014.

These effers want to win the Senate just to impeach him because they can't stand a black family in the WH.

Remember 2010?? Death panels and all theiR otheR B$??

[LittleGirl]

111. I guess I should get rid of my shredder now

right? I mean, come on...why shred your files at home?

No need to answer. Just making the point.

[wandy]

114. To be fair, we are in part to blame........

For the past five years we have taken our eyes off the NSA, the patriot act the "War on Terror" et all.
We have been lending our support to this........
http://obamaachievements.org/list

And far too many of those accomplishments were won in the face of obstructionism rarely seen in this country.

Sheesh. How many things do you think we can fix at once.
If this is the next dragon to fight, so be it.

[treestar]

118. It's a matter of where the balance is

the NSA just does the job, there's no point in supporting or attacking it.

We let those laws pass during the Bush administration, thus they are still on the books.

[Zorra]

121. It certainly appears that far too many people have assimilated the Third Way/GOP meme that

[Logical]

123. Great Post William Pitt! n-t

[felix_numinous]

125. Mine hurts too

because every time these issues of unchecked power get denied and delayed, they get passed on to the next administration.

On and on, until it becomes the new normal. Our country has too short an attention span--what was wrong during GWB is still wrong for the same reasons.

Electing good Representatives is AS important as making sure that core issues are not dropped from one administration to the next. Because obviously the mission creep to the right is going forward no matter who is in the White House.

We have to learn to stay as strongly focused on preventing this creep to the right as those who are working to advance it.

[MuseRider]

127. Hurts the brain and also the heart

and makes me worry for the world I will leave my children and you, your beautiful daughter.

My sons are paying attention, at least they should be able to figure out what is going on before it all comes down.

What a mess.

[AAO]

128. The war on terror is complete and utter hogwash. It's the war on the US Constitution.

[haele]

131. The only problem I have with this situation is "why now?"

Will, these "secrets" have been pretty open, and most of us agree that it's wrong no matter who does it. Some of us are even still working to get these projects gone.

My primary concern is that the only reason there's been a bro-ha-ha of a leak is that there's no "President Romney" and his administrative toadies to keep the Bush-era NSA policies untouched through Congress and a packed Judiciary. The Sequester and the budget games have been shining the spotlight on how much all programs cost; I seriously doubt Snowden - who had apparently been having qualms (and probably voiced them) since 2005 would have been encouraged to whistle-blow if his cohorts wouldn't have been worried that their gravy train was being looked at and started supporting him in speaking out.
There are a lot of idealists who don't understand or won't acknowledge the massive amounts of manipulation in the private sector that goes on to "get the contract, keep it funded and make sure there's a follow-on" - they only see the job they're doing, and not how that job came to be and is continuing. And the higher-ups in these contractor companies have a very good idea on what motivates the individuals they hire at critical or classified positions, especially someone who has been operating at that level in classified programs for close to ten years and had enough of a reputation to overcome just having a GED.
That this is a cynical ploy by people making shitloads of money off the NSA and other questionable areas of the Government that will keep the focus on the Administration and work to hamstring it rather than fixes for the policies.
The problem I see is not what has been going on, or that there was finally a sponsored whistle-blower, but the entrenchment of profiteering off the US Government that has been going on since Poppy Bush wedded his corporate buddies to the CIA to run drugs to pay for "intelligence" programs. And it makes me suspicious that there's a whistleblower now, when there have been movements in the various oversight committees to question the validity of expenditures, and the Executive Office has started making moves about getting Congress to modify or getting rid of some of the Bush-era National Security policies.

So, when do we stop pointing fingers and start looking at the real problem?
In the NSA/spying issue, the problem is the Private Sector/Public Sector revolving door and contractors doing work "for the government" on their own terms, making their own policies with no responsibility if something goes wrong - work that the Government should be directing policy and providing the workforce on.

The Fourth Amendment (and the First, and Tenth, and Fourteenth) will stand, so long as no one can make much of a profit off weakening it. The reason they are in trouble, is that there are a few people with lots of money making even more money making laws and changing the meaning of the Constitution for their benefit. And unfortunately, only those hypocrites in Congress can really make it less profitable to do so, because they hold the purse-strings.

Haele

[paulkienitz]

136. I personally haven't seen that flavor of hypocrisy...

...but it still blows my mind that polls report over 50% of Americans are okay with this.

Which shouldn't even matter, since it's unconstitutional on its face.

[Summer Hathaway]

138. Well, the good news is

that DU isn't RL.

But hey, who knew? All that GOP time and effort spent on convincing Americans that they should live in fear of the terrorists, when all they had to do to invoke fear was suggest that Obama was spying on EVERYONE - and let the sweat-flop chips fall where they may.

But, as I said, the good news is that DU isn't RL. In fact, it's not even close.

[michigandem58]

141. Obtuse much, Mr. Pitt?

NSA revelations = Bush war on terror? Really?

[cbdo2007]

146. I honestly don't know what to say....except where was the outrage 10 years ago

about this when we were outraged about it. Same issue. We can still blame Bush cause it was started under him, but yeah I don't understand all the people now acting like this is ok...on the other hand, I'm tired of fighting this and have been for 8 years.

[Hotler]

147. I long for the days of DU before it became DU2. It makes my head hurt also Will.

The spying on Americans isn't so much about protecting us against terrorism, but about protecting the PTB from us if and when we get truly pissed and rise up. Someone posted here awhile back that "there are so many light post and so much rope and it is not being used".

[Kablooie]

148. I see no problem with a variety of opinions.

Debating different views is healthier than everyone marching in lockstep. I welcome honest opinions that are different than mine as long as I retain the option of vociferously defending my own views.

[emulatorloo]

151. Your brain would hurt less if you could cure yourself of oversimplification and binary thinking.

There are a lot of opinions here, and they are perhaps more nuanced and subtle than you say they are.

[whatchamacallit]

152. PNAC Lives

and its agents still occupy high office.

[KittyWampus]

154. Bullshit. Most of us aren't "defending the NSA". We're pointing out that laws have been passed >

and there are ways to deal with these issues.

We also prefer FACTS. No conjecture.

[gtar100]

155. Sorry to hear this is happening on DU. So chalk me up as one dem

who is not ok with what has been done to us in the name of this war on terror. It's bullshit to be rah-rah for politicians because of their professed political persuasion. It's the issues that matter. And the Democratic Party should be defined by what it stands for based on its members, not allegiance to the personality of an elected representative.

[Demo_Chris]

157. B-But Bush lied or something!!!1 nt

[datasuspect]

160. obama made dubya's program legal

so it's okay now.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

164. Well, he did promise "change". And, transparency....oh, wait.

[stevenleser]

167. A couple of points

1. I objected to the term "war on terror" and "Global war on terror" because they were nebulous terms that could mean anything.
President Obama does not use those terms. He focuses on the actual terrorists.

2. I objected to the Iraq war because it was a war based on lies.
President Obama has not gone to war based on lies.

3. I objected to Bush's warrantless wiretapping because that violated the law (FISA).
President Obama has gone back to getting FISA warrants for foreign surveillance.

4. I objected to torture.
One of President Obama's first acts was to order an end to so called "Enhanced Interrogation"

5. I objected to Bush's refusal to budge on LGBT rights
President Obama integrated the military in terms of LGBT folks and has moved the needle on DOMA.

6. I objected to Bush stealing the first election and probably stealing the second.
President Obama was overwhelmingly legitimately elected both times.
.
.
.
etc.

So you will understand my objections to folks who tell me "You are in favor of Obama doing the same things Bush has done."

[GoneFishin]

174. I would be pissed off about this if Dennis Kucinich or Alan Grayson did it.

It is the principle of the thing.

It is not about the D or R.
It is not about the color of the team jerseys.
It doesn't matter if it short circuits my brain because a guy who I liked did something wrong.

It is the principle of the thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

179. The pew poll inside the latest Greenwald piece

Has your answer...it's flipped. Partisans are ok as long as it is their side doing it

[B2G]

180. Still waiting for the reasoning from the 64%