Poll: 57% of Americans fear government will use NSA data to target political opponents

[davidn3600]

There is little public support for the sweeping and unaccountable nature of the National Security Agency surveillance program along with concerns about how the data will be used.

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters nationwide believe it is likely the NSA data will be used by other government agencies to harass political opponents.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2013/57_fear_government_will_use_nsa_data_to_harass_political_opponents

[blm]

1. For 5 years, Obama has had ZERO leverage over the GOP. Or hasn't anyone noticed?

.

[1-Old-Man]

3. What's that got to do with NSA spying?

[kestrel91316]

8. NSA has something on him or Michelle and he knows it?

Nothing would surprise me anymore.

[treestar]

9. If it is to be used against political opponents

Then why wouldn't the Republicans be crushed - Obama, a Democrat, has the custody of the NSA. It spies on political opponents. So for now the Republicans would be the victims of this spying.

Actually it's all pretty silly. When it comes to spying on political opponents, it's easy, just get someone to go and join the opposition and pretend to be of it and report back. What good would all those phone records do in comparison to that?

[blm]

11. That if Obama HAD been spying on them, he'd HAVE more leverage over his 'enemies' as they

like to pretend they have been targeted. I have no doubt that Bushies have been using blackmail on GOPs and Dems since Poppy worked with Nixon. I highly doubt Obama or any Dem has the access to COMPLETE dossiers as Bushies do. I remember Poppy Bush wouldn't allow Jimmy Carter to see classified UFO files.

There IS a greater governing body in the background. Obama sure isn't the head of it.

[1-Old-Man]

2. And if other polling is to believed they approve of it anyway.

[woo me with science]

6. The (irrelevant) polling is actually all over the map,

which is to be expected given the shameless propaganda onslaught of the past few days.

CBS Poll: Most disapprove of government phone snooping of ordinary Americans
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57588748/most-disapprove-of-govt-phone-snooping-of-ordinary-americans/

The familiar, reliable defenders of everything corporate/authoritarian are the ones furiously and selectively posting polls, so of course the perception of results is skewed. The rest of us understand that this is an issue of Constitutionality, not something to be decided by polls. I wrote a whole OP about this despicable authoritarian propaganda tactic: trying to turn our fundamental Constitutional rights into a matter of debate.

Don't entertain this garbage.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981567

[Bluenorthwest]

7. I've not read a single one that even asks if people 'approve'.

The choices are 'to prevent terror attacks, is it acceptable or not acceptable'. Here are synonyms for 'acceptable':
Synonyms acceptable: all right, decent, fairish, fine, good, OK (or okay), passable, respectable, satisfactory, serviceable, tolerable.

'To prevent attack, would you tolerate X' is one hell of a long way from 'do you approve of massive collection of communications data by private companies paid billions to do so by the government, data about the phone calls placed by your own children for no provable reason at all?'

Take a look at the pew poll. 'Support' 'like' 'want' and 'approve' are words that are missing. Present is 'yes or no to acceptance' when preloaded with 'to save lives'.
The polling is not really honest, the language is very leading, very loaded and they change it from question to summation. They ask 'accept' then announce it means 'approve' and 'support' and 'desire' when that simply is not the case. They are afraid to ask the proper questions.

[RainDog]

4. Yes. And Republicans have a long track record of dirty tricks

and the private contractors who are handling this are aligned with Republicans, for the most part.

[CanonRay]

5. It doesn't necessarily have to be Obama

He may be pure at heart. What about his successor. Or the one after that. Or the next one. What capabilities will they have by then? Time to shut this crap down is right f'ing now, and I don't give a shit who's in the Oval Office.

[OilemFirchen]

10. Third time today. Third time ever!

Rasmussen Reports