HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » 'Obama's new NSA proposal...

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 11:23 AM

'Obama's new NSA proposal and Democratic partisan hackery,' by Glenn Greenwald

Source: The Intercept

I vividly recall the first time I realized just how mindlessly and uncritically supportive of President Obama many Democrats were willing to be. In April, 2009, two federal courts, in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, ruled that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) required the Pentagon to disclose dozens of graphic photos it possessed showing abuse of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Obama administration announced that, rather than contest or appeal those rulings, they would comply with the court orders and release all the photos. The ACLU praised that decision: “the fact that the Obama administration opted not to seek further review is a sign that it is committed to more transparency.”

... But then – just two weeks later – Obama completely reversed himself, announcing that he would do everything possible to block the court order and prevent it from taking effect. ... Now, obviously, the people who had been defending Obama’s original pro-transparency position (which included the ACLU, human rights groups, and civil liberties writers including me) changed course and criticized him.

... But that’s not what large numbers of Democrats did. Many of them first sided with Obama when his administration originally announced he’d release the photos. But then, with equal vigor, they also sided with Obama when – a mere two weeks later – he took the exact opposition position, the very anti-transparency view these Democrats had been attacking all along when voiced by Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney.

... We’re now about to have a similar lab experiment, this time in the context of the NSA. ... That puts hard-core Obama loyalists and pro-NSA Democrats – the ones that populate MSNBC – in an extremely difficult position. They have spent the last 10 months defending the NSA (i.e., defending Obama) by insisting that the NSA metadata program is both reasonable and necessary to Keep Us Safe™. But now Obama claims he wants to end that very same program. So what will they do?

Read more: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/03/25/obamas-new-nsa-proposal-democratic-partisan-hackery/

114 replies, 9287 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 114 replies Author Time Post
Reply 'Obama's new NSA proposal and Democratic partisan hackery,' by Glenn Greenwald (Original post)
Newsjock Mar 2014 OP
Blue_Tires Mar 2014 #1
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #19
randome Mar 2014 #20
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #33
randome Mar 2014 #38
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #40
Aerows Mar 2014 #94
lark Mar 2014 #47
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #21
Name removed Mar 2014 #22
JDPriestly Mar 2014 #67
frylock Mar 2014 #78
2banon Mar 2014 #2
msanthrope Mar 2014 #10
2banon Mar 2014 #15
bobduca Mar 2014 #110
LineReply .
ProSense Mar 2014 #3
msanthrope Mar 2014 #8
ProSense Mar 2014 #52
msanthrope Mar 2014 #65
Number23 Mar 2014 #88
Whisp Mar 2014 #90
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #23
lark Mar 2014 #48
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #61
lark Mar 2014 #106
SunsetDreams Mar 2014 #4
msanthrope Mar 2014 #6
SunsetDreams Mar 2014 #14
2banon Mar 2014 #16
msanthrope Mar 2014 #42
2banon Mar 2014 #46
msanthrope Mar 2014 #63
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #85
Cha Mar 2014 #86
msanthrope Mar 2014 #89
Cha Mar 2014 #91
msanthrope Mar 2014 #95
Cha Mar 2014 #97
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #24
SunsetDreams Mar 2014 #30
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #32
frylock Mar 2014 #80
msanthrope Mar 2014 #5
leftynyc Mar 2014 #7
msanthrope Mar 2014 #11
leftynyc Mar 2014 #28
Number23 Mar 2014 #87
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #9
msanthrope Mar 2014 #13
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #36
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #41
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #49
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #54
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #57
Vattel Mar 2014 #66
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #69
NOVA_Dem Mar 2014 #75
joshcryer Mar 2014 #53
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #70
joshcryer Mar 2014 #72
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #74
joshcryer Mar 2014 #76
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #84
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #25
joshcryer Mar 2014 #51
Cha Mar 2014 #92
SidDithers Mar 2014 #12
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #27
Name removed Mar 2014 #34
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #37
polichick Mar 2014 #17
JaneyVee Mar 2014 #18
one_voice Mar 2014 #26
Name removed Mar 2014 #29
leftynyc Mar 2014 #31
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #35
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #39
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #44
sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #64
saidsimplesimon Mar 2014 #58
JaneyVee Mar 2014 #62
Maedhros Mar 2014 #43
Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2014 #45
ProSense Mar 2014 #50
CJCRANE Mar 2014 #55
whatchamacallit Mar 2014 #56
Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #71
whatchamacallit Mar 2014 #73
Bobbie Jo Mar 2014 #77
Cha Mar 2014 #96
Number23 Mar 2014 #101
grasswire Mar 2014 #105
Number23 Mar 2014 #107
Cha Mar 2014 #113
randome Mar 2014 #111
Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #79
frylock Mar 2014 #81
Skip Intro Mar 2014 #99
Skip Intro Mar 2014 #98
SoapBox Mar 2014 #59
frylock Mar 2014 #82
uponit7771 Mar 2014 #60
Jamaal510 Mar 2014 #93
Number23 Mar 2014 #102
Oilwellian Mar 2014 #68
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Mar 2014 #83
woo me with science Mar 2014 #104
Skip Intro Mar 2014 #100
Douglas Carpenter Mar 2014 #103
bobduca Mar 2014 #109
woo me with science Mar 2014 #108
bobduca Mar 2014 #112
cprise Mar 2014 #114

Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:06 PM

1. Glenn is the definitive expert on hackery, so he'd recognize his own...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:56 PM

19. Do you support the President's proposal to end bulk phone records?

If so, were the posters who defended the bulk data collection wrong? All Greenwald is doing is point about the rank hypocrisy that will likely be on display by people who will defend anything the President proposes.

Everyone is attacking Greenwald instead instead of admitting that they are now flip-flopping on their past support of the NSA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:59 PM

20. No one is praising the President for this except in Greenwald's crooked view.

 

In fact, I think it's a bad idea. Better than the previous idea which was to have a neutral third party maintain the data but still a bad idea.

The records will still be maintained by telecoms just as they are now but when law enforcement needs to serve a warrant, they will need to serve it to every telecom in the country or devise a speedier system that will no doubt also have its shortcomings.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #20)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:09 PM

33. We haven't seen the coverage on MSNBC yet (if at all) and BOGers are busy attacking Greenwald

instead of addressing the issue of their support of NSA data collection activities.

Telecoms won't be required to keep the records longer than they normally would. How much trouble is it for the NSA to get a specific warrant for a telecom? It's not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #33)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:14 PM

38. We haven't seen the Democratic reaction, either, and Greenwald is telling us their reactions!

 

I'm no expert on these matters but I'm betting that if Law Enforcement has a legitimate need to look up the numbers of possible co-conspirators, they don't even have numbers. They wouldn't know the telecom company involved so they would need to serve their warrant at every telecom in the country!

I'm thinking it's a lot of trouble keeping the data dispersed this way, which is what the central storage method was devised to eliminate in the first place.

Will they devise some new, speedier way of searching every telecom's records? Maybe. It seems like a bad idea to me, though. Too many additional points of interception, hacking, etc.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #38)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:19 PM

40. Unless you know that local police serve warrants to every telecom in the USA you have no information

on the process.

Greenwald is predicting their response based on previous examples of when the President reversed course (torture photos).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #33)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:56 PM

94. I don't think Randome is a BOGer

 

Randome just defends the surveillance state with both barrels. Pretty good DUer, though, in other respects. Makes good posts when not posting about the NSA, CIA or other surveillance related activities.

The BOGers, well, I put them on ignore, and my DU experience is much nicer, friendlier and coherent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:43 PM

47. Yep. There are plenty of pretzel logic folks right here.

They are totally assured in the belief that Obama is the world's one perfect man and could never make a mistake. They even totally vilify anyone (Snowden, for example) that dare to criticize him or his policies or any of his appointments.

Unfortunately, hypocricy, although totally rampant among Repugs, is way too often a Democratic trait as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:02 PM

21. So what do you think about Obama's decision to end the meta data program altogether?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #1)


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 03:15 PM

67. If the shoe fits, wear it! The very individuals who attack Greenwald's blog piece are the ones

who march goosestep after goosestep to the command of whomever-they-feel-is-in-charge-at-the-moment, now Obama. They are the sheepie who follow their leader off a cliff if necessary to demonstrate their loyalty.

Loyalty to what? To a person. To a strong man. To someone with whom they identify as the leader. And why? Could it be because they are insecure, do not think things through for themselves and feel safest when tramping mindlessly in the to them large footsteps of the "leader"? My answer to that question? Yes.

The Democratic Party is a big tent. We Democrats have lots of disagreements. We flourish on new ideas, ferment and creativity. Traditionally, ours has been a movement in which people think for themselves.

Remember the great ideas that formed policy in the past -- the peace movement, the women's movement, the civil rights movement, the sexual revolution, most recently under Obama, the health care rights movement and never to be forgotten, the New Deal and before that, the labor movement which eventually found a home in the Democratic Party. All these movements began as ideas sponsored by a dissident, at first unpopular even shocking and very small group within the liberal party (not always called Democrat). Each of those movements became popular enough among voters to make it to the mainstream. None of them were thought up by a party leader. Rather they were the brainchildren of intellectuals, workers, women, families of seriously ill people, and African-Americans. Minorities. The excluded. The disappointed. The underpaid. Those deprived of human rights,

But, for some strange reason, perhaps a reaction to the truly absurd vilification of Obama by the right wing, some of the very people who have profited the most from the fertile, changeable, wide span of the big tent of the liberal movement (now called the Democratic Party) seem to think that Obama must be followed even when he is clearly wrong and at odds with our Constitution.

Greenwald is right. There is something very strange going on when Democrats goosestep to the beat of a Democratic president. People are not thinking for themselves. They are either lazy followers out of habit or following out of fear of something. Is Obama such a threat that the goose-steppers need to be so obedient?

Not for me. I keep my thinking independent.

Thank you, Edward Snowden, and all who assisted you. You told us what we need to know and not a day to soon.

I had a strange experience. One day I googled the name of an old boyfriend from college. I dated him a few months. He was tall and swashbuckling, very handsome (at least I thought then) and an extreme radical. Really extreme. I was a minister's daughter who was brought up by pacifists who cared about the poor and followed Jesus' teachings as well as they could. I was on the debate team in high school and loved nothing more than to argue politics. He was the perfect date for me because we utterly disagreed about the role of violence in politics. We argued and argued and finally he found someone who agreed with him. End of story.

But i was curious about what had happened to him. He was such a loudmouth and had such controversial ideas. So I googled him.

I can't tell you whether it was one year or two or when it was, but I went to visit a friend (we were in our 50s and 60s) who had worked for a defense contractor. We had dinner at her house and she introduced my husband and me to a "guest." A friend from her work she said. He asked me, questioned me, about my relationship with this guy I dated when I was in college. It was rather funny because he seemed to think I should be embarrassed to discuss this in front of my husband. It amazed me because my google search on my boyfriend's name turned up absolutely nothing. I am still puzzled by this event, but the thought has crossed my mind that my search signaled something to someone. Perhaps I am completely paranoid. But this old boyfriend was not a historical figure. I don't think his name was ever mentioned in a newspaper. I have no idea what happened to him. How did my friend's "friend" know anything about him?

Does anyone have any plausible explanations for this strange experience? It really happened. I have a living witness in my husband.

The NSA surveillance of your every Google search, your every e-mail, your every phone call, your every Mastercard transaction, your personal records could reap you a visit from a stranger one day. Beware.

I'm not saying that is what happened to me. I'm just saying . . . .

We shall see what Obama's proposed bill looks like. I'm not optimistic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 05:26 PM

78. this article is about people like you, so it's understandable why you'd be so defensive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:15 PM

2. I don't have satellite or cable..

 

so I don't monitor msnbc. or any other cable snooze channels. but I'd venture a guess that MSNBC "leftists" hosts will IGNORE the subject. "nothing to see here".

If I'm wrong, I'd love to be corrected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2banon (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:30 PM

10. I'm guessing the news that PBO is pushing NSA reforms that are exactly what GG wanted will be news.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #10)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:42 PM

15. perhaps so...

 

which would be 2 angles on the story, and would be news in itself. Would love to see/here the video clips posted if/when that happens....!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2banon (Reply #2)

Thu Mar 27, 2014, 09:53 AM

110. correct, the official TV "leftists" wont touch this.

Maintaining the illusion of democracy is hard work!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:16 PM

3. .



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:29 PM

8. You've got to read the whole article...it's the funniest thing GG's ever written. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #8)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:53 PM

52. Even more funny,

he tweeted an article suggesting that this action just opened the door for immunity.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #52)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:50 PM

65. Snowden isn't getting immunity...but may get a federal plea, after he talks. You know...the federal

 

grand jury currently sitting would love to hear from Moscow Eddie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #8)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:00 PM

88. I can't make it out. He spends the first (feels like) 20 paragraphs going on about another issue

It's as if he's making a case about something and he will damn well use whatever it takes to make that case, no matter if his supporting evidence has absolutely nothing at all to do with the subject at hand.

That puts hard-core Obama loyalists and pro-NSA Democrats – the ones that populate MSNBC – in an extremely difficult position. They have spent the last 10 months defending the NSA (i.e., defending Obama) by insisting that the NSA metadata program is both reasonable and necessary to Keep Us Safe™. But now Obama claims he wants to end that very same program. So what will they do?

If they had even an iota of integrity or intellectual honesty, they would instantly and aggressively condemn Obama. After all, he’s now claiming to want to end a program that they have been arguing for months is vital in Keeping Us Safe™. Wouldn’t every rational person, by definition, criticize a political leader who wants to abolish a program that they believe is necessary to stop terrorism and preserve national security?


So he wants people to argue AGAINST something that he thinks is a good idea??? It really seems as though his problems with Meta data et al have always been secondary to his problems with this president. He goes out of his way every chance he gets to reinforce that perception.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #88)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:47 PM

90. goodness, but that guy is an asshole of the first order! yikes.

 

If they had even an iota of integrity or intellectual honesty, they would instantly and aggressively condemn Obama.

Who the heck does this wanker think he is? Lots of us pegged him right from the beginning - he is proving us right every time he opens his angry and irrational fits on his little keyboard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:04 PM

23. Do you agree with the President deciding to end the meta data program?

I'm very glad he has decided to do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #23)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:49 PM

48. Where's the actual action?

He "decided" to do this but hasn't done it - why? Is this another single payer boondoggle? Obama is great at taking positions and then not following thru at all. No, I'm not happy he's "decicided" to do this. Will be overwhelmed with gratitude and surprise if he actually does it. I'm also not holding my breath.

Why are you so happy about this when nothing at all has been done to stop the travesty which has been ongoing under his administration, so far?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #48)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:22 PM

61. Because it is an acknowledgement of what WE have been saying all along. That these invasions

of the Constitutional rights of Americans WERE WRONG. It CAN pass, IF the people strongly support its passage, especially in an election year.

But just the acknowledgement from the WH supports all those of us who have been told 'that the Snowden Revelations were old news'. The WH doesn't agree with them, apparently, which will come as a shock to them! Let's see if THEY stick to THEIR claims that this was 'old news'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #61)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 01:10 PM

106. You are certainly more optimistic than I am.

It will almost certainly NEVER pass in the House. Are you kidding me? Those yahoos would vote that the sky wasn't blue if Obama came out with a "blue sky" pronouncement. The President knows they will never agree with him, this seems to be just another boondoggle (ala single payer). If he really wanted this, he'd just make the pronouncement and be done. This is his way of being for it yet against it at the same time. Seen this play before.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:21 PM

4. Oh yay more division

pitting Democrat against Democrat.


... We’re now about to have a similar lab experiment, this time in the context of the NSA. ... That puts hard-core Obama loyalists and pro-NSA Democrats – the ones that populate MSNBC – in an extremely difficult position. They have spent the last 10 months defending the NSA (i.e., defending Obama) by insisting that the NSA metadata program is both reasonable and necessary to Keep Us Safe™. But now Obama claims he wants to end that very same program. So what will they do?


It's too hard writing an article seeking support for ending the NSA metadata program. It's much more fun to attack the very people whose support one would think that Glenn would be seeking. Not only attack them but pit Democrat vs Democrat. The fact of the matter is NSA metadata program needs to end.

If Glen really supports getting rid of the metadata program, I would think that he wouldn't be chiming something along the lines.."oh wait, you were for it before you were against it."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:28 PM

6. Precisely...Glenn's pissed because PBO is doing exactly what Glenn called for him to do!

 

If you end metadata, you pretty much end Glenn's whining about same....and thus, cut his revenue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:42 PM

14. It's simply crazy

Sowing division is more lucrative I guess

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:47 PM

16. as we have seen for several years, "talk" of reform is not evidence of actual reform.

 

a take away point is the pattern of talking reform one day, and flipping on it's head that which was proposed/promised on a different day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2banon (Reply #16)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:28 PM

42. I thought Glen's sources were impeccable?? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #42)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:42 PM

46. ???

 

My comment isn't a rebuke of Greenwald's commentary. I was initially responding to the point which GG posed on the question of MSNBC's attention to this issue. Somehow that point seems to be ignored here, albeit admittedly minor in the overall larger question as to whether or not lip service to ending the program as being touted, will in fact be actualized.

Obama does have the authority and position of responsibility to end it with a stroke of a pen. Personally, I think it's rather telling that he hasn't chosen to.

He'll be able to say: Gosh, I tried but darn it, Congress refused to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2banon (Reply #46)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:36 PM

63. President Obama cannot override Section 215, nor the FISA legislation with a stroke of a pen.

 

Congress must do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 08:11 PM

85. On the contrary, Glenn appears to be thrilled that the president is now in agreement with him.

His comments are aimed at those who blindly supported and defended the indefensible assuming that was his opinion. So where will those who have been claiming meta data collection and storage was NEEDED to 'keep us safe' go now?

That is what he is addressing, NOT the issue, the minority who blindly follow. They must be devastated by this and since the same small circle have been bashing Greenwald and Snowden, it is vindication for them from the person that same group never disagrees with.

It's a form of schadenfreude which he has every right to point out, considering the lies they have told about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 08:29 PM

86. I figured he would be Pissssssed. Coming out of the woodwork like clockwork..

Don't mess with his fucking book release. "Thanks Obama, you @##$^&*)_*^%$@#!!!111"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #86)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:41 PM

89. That book release was pushed from today to mid-May...Thanks Obama! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #89)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:51 PM

91. Really? I'm sure they(eddie&glenn) have some Big Ol' LEAKS

from Russia planned to co-ordinate to make the book as big as an explosion as possible. They're so fucking predictable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #91)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:57 PM

95. 3/25 was the original date...it's now pushed to 5/13. Why? Rumor has it that it needed rewrites

 

because it is factually thin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #95)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 10:15 PM

97. "..it is factually thin.".. Shocking..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:05 PM

24. Do you support this decision by the President?

I do! Thrilled he is taking that position, which is the right thing to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #24)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:08 PM

30. Like I said...

"The fact of the matter is NSA metadata program needs to end." Not sure how I can be more clear

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:08 PM

32. "Pro NSA Democrats" my Aunt Fanny....

 

these guys...both Snowden and GG are Libertarians....they think they have found the perfect wedge issue....

What a farce they both are...I saw right through them from the start. This wasn't about spying for them AT ALL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 05:41 PM

80. i see it more as pitting "Democrats" against traditional democratic principles..

of course, I'm not a Democrat, just a far-left emoprog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:26 PM

5. So Glenn is throwing a tantrum because Obama's proposed reform does exactly what Glenn wanted?

 

What?????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:28 PM

7. Glenn is flinging poo

 

because he can't defend his silence on russia's behavior so he's deflecting. It's boringly predictable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftynyc (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:32 PM

11. He's actually mad that the President proposed to end bulk collection.

 

I find this article hysterically funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #11)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:06 PM

28. Because that would mean

 

he may have to report on other countries and their deficiencies instead of pretending the US is the only one who spies on other countries. His whining is tiresome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftynyc (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 08:54 PM

87. Now THAT is a very interesting theory

Glenn is flinging poo because he can't defend his silence on russia's behavior so he's deflecting.

Because otherwise, this article make no sense whatsoever. The man screamed that Meta Data was bad and didn't thwart any attacks on the U.S. Obama reviews the program and says "okay, let's get rid of Meta Data" and somehow, some way, GG is STILL cussing and spitting at the president.

Deflecting as you noted makes this make a bit more sense. Not MUCH more, but a bit more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:30 PM

9. Glenn has one of these ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #9)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:38 PM

13. GG's book was scheduled for release today...wonder why it pushed to May? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #9)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:12 PM

36. Moving goalposts is the exact opposite of what was said.

Greenwald specifically states that the proposal would end the bulk data collection program.

Do you support the presidents decision? Were you wrong in your previous support of the program?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #36)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:21 PM

41. I've always said the program needed to be reigned in.

I just don't run around in circles screaming with my hair on fire about it. So I can see how that fact would go unnoticed.

Some of the folks screaming the loudest tend to be unaware of existing laws. They think the telecommunications metadata belongs to them and not the telecommunications companies.

They think the FISA court was created yesterday, and have no idea why it was created in the first place.

They think the government is listening to their every word.

They claim we live in a police state.

The program needed to be reigned in ... but much of the hyperventilating and outrage about it has been overblown.

Glenn likes to feed that.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #41)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:49 PM

49. So you stated the bulk data program was unconstitutional?

Metadata doesn't belong the to the gov't (without cause) IMO. Telecoms don't have the authority to toss you in jail or take your life.

Glenn was hero when he doing it to Bush and a scoundrel b/c he's consistent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #49)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:00 PM

54. Now you've changed terms.

I did not say I agreed that program was unconstitutional. The supreme court would have to make that determination. I said I agreed the program should be reigned in.

Under current law, it is constitutional. As long as the warrants are going through the FISA court, its constitutional. And there have been warrants approved by the FISA court to obtain the telecom data.

You should know that when Bush was in office, he was bypassing the FISA court, and he was acting in an unconstitutional capacity.

The Obama administration has never bypassed the FISA court. They have acted within the existing laws.

This is a good example of one of my prior points ... people who don't actually know what laws exist, apparently have no idea that the Bush administration and the Obama administration have acted quite differently with regard to this program.

I think Glen does know this, and he actively works to obscure this reality.

The data belongs to the telecoms. The government has access and obtained copies, via warrants authorized by the FISA courts. That's constitutional under current law.

The President is proposing a stricter process for how the government obtains copies. That a good thing. The current laws are too broad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #54)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:13 PM

57. That's where we disagree. "Legal" and "Constitutional" are different.

What Bush did was illegal AND unconstitutional. What Obama is doing is legal and unconstitutional. The only difference is that Obama got a rubber stamp "general" warrant for every cell phone user in the country.

Under the current law it is "legal" but that current law is a violation of the 4th amendment.

Using your standard lots of previously approved horrible decisions by the Supreme Court would be fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #57)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 03:00 PM

66. Thank you for the clarity here. He makes a common mistake about the law.

 

He seems to think that something is constitutional until the Supreme Court says otherwise.

I disagree with you though that the current program is legal. It clearly violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #57)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:00 PM

69. The Supreme Court determines what is unconstitutional, not you or I.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #69)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:56 PM

75. The supreme court changes along with what they consider constitutional.

Separate but Equal was once constitutional.
Money is speech is currently constitutional.

What is constitutional is matter of interpretation depending on the composition of judges deciding the case.

And without the leaks by Snowden the courts have ducked the question of constitutionality. Now that standing can be established the issue of constitutionality is currently being decided.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NOVA_Dem (Reply #36)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:55 PM

53. No, it just leaves it up to the telecoms.

As opposed to the government. If data is necessary they simply have to get the telecoms to provide it but they would need a warrant first.

Bulk collection remains.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #53)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:02 PM

70. The data belongs to the telecoms ... they use it to run their business.

Or, when you call and want to dispute a charge, how should that work?

They've always kept the records on who calls who, when, and for how long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #70)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:27 PM

72. Sure.

But I can dislike the telecoms acquiring that data. I'd give up it's usefulness in many scenarios to not have corporations building data sets on me.

(as far as your scenario, it wouldn't matter as I am more of a pay up front type of person)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #72)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:54 PM

74. They also use it for capacity planning.

It's how they decide when to upgrade equipment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #74)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:59 PM

76. Statistics can be anonymous...

You could encrypt the entire internet and still do load balancing and knowing where to upgrade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #76)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 07:40 PM

84. its also part of their billing records.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:05 PM

25. Do YOU support the President's decision?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:50 PM

51. Funnier than that!

In theory this changes nothing! Except! Now the telecoms get to decide if they will spy for the government!

Exactly what a pro-Citizens United hack would want.

Just more proof that the Snowden revelations were not ground breaking news and nothing changes. The fact that GG appears to be slowly disengaging and trying to change the narrative just underscores it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:53 PM

92. Of course he is and right on cue, too. How dare Obama mess with gg's narrative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:33 PM

12. Greenwald. LOL...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #12)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:06 PM

27. I'm thrilled with the President's decision, and support it fully. How about you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #27)


Response to Name removed (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:12 PM

37. It's hard to know. Several people in the thread have not addressed the President's decision.

Which is why I am asking. Perhaps because up to now, they have been defending the meta data collection. I imagine they still agree with that and now disagree with the president. I disagree with it of course, it is a huge violation of the 4th Amendment, so naturally I am delighted that the President agrees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 12:54 PM

18. Jeez, can't someone believe in the need for NSA while

 

Also believing in the need for NSA reforms?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:06 PM

26. To some it's black and white...

you're either with us or against us.

Same thing with the ACA. You can't think it's a good thing while also knowing that it still needs work.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:08 PM

31. Not and continue to think

 

Glenn is the best thing to ever happen to journalism. That would require suspending reality and pretending the US is the only country that collects data.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:10 PM

35. NO because then they cannot use it as a wedge issue to "Divide and Conquer" the Democrats...

 

the hero worshipers fell for it hook line and sinker! This is what happens when you lie down with Libertarian dogs.....Welcome to the cutthroat world of politics!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #35)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:14 PM

39. So, do you support meta data collection, airc you did defend it, or do you support the President's

decision to end it? I am thrilled to learn of this decision since I always opposed it as a 4th Amendment violation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #39)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:35 PM

44. You don't do nuance do you?

 

divide and conquer works on you....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #44)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:48 PM

64. There is no nuance to this. Either our constitutional rights mean something or they don't.

To me, they have always meant something and I am glad to see they mean something to so many others including the administration.

Don't know why it is such a difficult question to answer frankly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:17 PM

58. Jeez, JaneyVee, the NSA sucked the life blood from

"Rule of Law" for so long we now defend the unconstitutional and illegal acts against all citizens of this earth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saidsimplesimon (Reply #58)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:32 PM

62. Your post proves my point...

 

Did you read my entire post? One can believe in the need for counter-terrorism while also believing in the need to reform it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:28 PM

43. I applaud President Obama's efforts to curtail the NSA, and urge him to take even stronger measures.

 

It's funny how the cloud of ODS lifts from my vision when he actually follows through on policies I support. If he keeps it up, my ODS may disappear forever.

However, Greenwald's prediction is likely to come true:

If they had even an iota of integrity or intellectual honesty, they would instantly and aggressively condemn Obama. After all, he’s now claiming to want to end a program that they have been arguing for months is vital in Keeping Us Safe™. Wouldn’t every rational person, by definition, criticize a political leader who wants to abolish a program that they believe is necessary to stop terrorism and preserve national security?

But that’s not what will happen. After spending months praising the NSA for responsibly overseeing this critical program, they will now hail Obama for trying to end it. When he secretly bulk collects the calling data on all Americans, it shows he’s a pragmatic and strong leader who Keeps Us Safe™; when he tries to end the very same program, it shows he’s flexible and devoted to our civil liberties — just as he was right to release the torture photos and also right to suppress them. The Leader is right when he does X, and he’s equally right when he does Not X. That’s the defining attribute of the mindset of a partisan hack, an authoritarian, and the standard MSNBC host.


We've seen this exact behavior recently with respect to the conflict in Syria: those of us calling for a diplomatic response were jeered as "Assad lovers" who cared nothing for the suffering of children, right up until the White House abandoned its banging of the war drums and decided to take the diplomatic approach. Then diplomacy magically became the solution - in fact, it had been the solution all along, despite the intense advocacy for armed intervention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:39 PM

45. Yep. They blow with the boss's whim.

 

Yesterday, they claimed the NSA's doings were benign and necessary. Now that the boss says it's not, they applaud him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 01:49 PM

50. Carter: Snowden's leaks 'good for Americans to know'

Carter: Snowden's leaks 'good for Americans to know'

Susan Page

NEW YORK -- Former president Jimmy Carter defended the disclosures by fugitive NSA contractor Edward Snowden on Monday, saying revelations that U.S. intelligence agencies were collecting meta-data of Americans' phone calls and e-mails have been "probably constructive in the long run."

<...>

Does he view Snowden, now granted asylum in Russia, as a hero or a traitor?

"There's no doubt that he broke the law and that he would be susceptible, in my opinion, to prosecution if he came back here under the law," he said. "But I think it's good for Americans to know the kinds of things that have been revealed by him and others -- and that is that since 9/11 we've gone too far in intrusion on the privacy that Americans ought to enjoy as a right of citizenship."

Carter cautioned that he didn't have information about whether some of the disclosures "may have hurt our security or individuals that work in security," adding, "If I knew that, then I may feel differently." And he said Snowden shouldn't be immune from prosecution for his actions.

"I think it's inevitable that he should be prosecuted and I think he would be prosecuted" if he returned to the United States, the former president said. "But I don't think he ought to be executed as a traitor or any kind of extreme punishment like that."

- more -

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/24/usa-today-capital-download-jimmy-carter-edward-snowden-probably-constructive/6822425/





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:00 PM

55. Um...is this issue all about Democrats?

Last I checked there's at least one other party involved in American politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:03 PM

56. Fuck yeah Greenwald!

Fuck [strike]yeah[/strike] his detractors!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #56)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:18 PM

71. Grrenwald the racist Libertarian?

You keep good company.


Fuck that tool Greenwald, he's a ratfucker and you fell for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #71)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 04:50 PM

73. If anyone fell for something

it's the Boglodytes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #73)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 05:24 PM

77. What does that even mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #77)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 10:12 PM

96. It's whining about the

BOG(the Barack Obama Group) again because they think it's an insult.

This coming from the glenn greenwald club of ..

Glenn Greenwald Once Again Proves He is a Hate-Oozing Douche


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/20/1188423/-Glenn-Greenwald-Once-Again-Proves-He-is-a-Hate-Oozing-Douche

Report Indicates Snowden/Greenwald Lied About Key Claims


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/09/1229963/-Report-Indicates-Snowden-Greenwald-Lied-About-Key-Claims

Glenn Greenwald has Lost his Mind (either that or he’s just a greedy desperate liar trying to protect his brand)

Sibel Edmonds famously challenged Mr. Greenwald recently pointing out his financial interests in this little project which are considerable. A 250 million dollar “news” project hangs in the balance for Mr. Greenwald as long as he clings onto his “leaks” and manages to weather this most recent storm with his tattered brand credibility intact.

The irony of Mr. Greenwald’s claims goes beyond bold, reaching for the psychotic.

As he claims to be working to expose these programs on our behalf, what he is actually doing is preparing the libertarians and the progressives (groups he simultaneously pretends to represent because these are the two factions most responsible for the defeat of CISPA) to accept the same reforms that were handily defeated a year and a half ago, CISPA, and which are being presented this very day as “fixes” to the Snowden psyop.

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/glenn-greenwald-has-lost-his-mind-either-that-or-hes-just-a-desperate-liar/

BFP Breaking News- Omidyar’s PayPal Corporation Said To Be Implicated in Withheld NSA Documents

I would be outraged and highly vocal if I were in Edward Snowden’s shoes. For a journalist whom I had placed my trust in to go and withhold documents meant for the public?! For the journalist to make fortune and fame based on my sacrifices and disclosure?! Forming a lucrative business partnership with entities who have direct conflicts of interest?! No. That wouldn’t have been acceptable.”

https://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12/11/bfp-breaking-news-omidyars-paypal-corporation-said-to-be-implicated-in-withheld-nsa-documents/

Yeah, I don't think Eddie gives a shite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #96)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 12:22 AM

101. Holy Shit, they are TEARING HIM UP at Kos

The fact that seems to enrage Greenwald no end is that this is a widely-held assessment of Barack Obama's Presidency, and even more prominent on the global stage than domestically. That for people around the world, even in many Muslim countries where Greenwald seems to desperately want to believe the President is hated and feared, Barack Obama is in reality admired and general views of the United States have improved worldwide because of his Presidency. Frankly, the only people whose moral assessments of Obama resemble Greenwald's are the Taliban and the Tea Party.


Hot damn!!! Rarely has one sentence encompassed so much hard truth. I am in awe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #101)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 01:02 PM

105. you do realize....

....that you have just called good Democrats here (who voted twice for Obama) who criticize him TALIBAN and TEA PARTY??

Outrageous. Just outrageous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #105)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 06:49 PM

107. What's outrageous is your decision to relay your inability to properly process that sentence into

me calling the "good Democrats" here Taliban and Tea party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #101)

Thu Mar 27, 2014, 08:47 PM

113. "Frankly, the only people whose moral assessments of Obama resemble Greenwald's are the Taliban and

the Tea Party." The hair on firebaggers live in their own little world of lies and hate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #96)

Thu Mar 27, 2014, 10:04 AM

111. Those are good links. Thanks!

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #73)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 05:32 PM

79. Yeah, those dirty Mexicans taking our jobs!

Seriously, fuck Glenn Greenwald.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #71)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 05:47 PM

81. racist Libertarian?

got links?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #81)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 10:22 PM

99. Oh, you asked earlier. He's got no links, then. Love a fact-based conversation, lol. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #71)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 10:21 PM

98. Racist? That's a new one. Link? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:19 PM

59. Blah, blah, blah...

You've got NO credibility any more, Mr. Brazilian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoapBox (Reply #59)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 05:52 PM

82. unlike the very people the article is about..

you guys are all about credibility, whether it's singing the praises of bulk data collection, or praising Obama for "ending" the bulk data collection. why that is the very essence of credibility, is it not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:21 PM

60. MORE PROOF it was about Obama and NOT... NOT the 4th freakin amendment!!! Obama is a smart cookie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #60)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 09:56 PM

93. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #60)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 12:33 AM

102. Exactly. And Greenwald hasn't done anything but prove his (many) detractors correct

It was always about Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 03:57 PM

68. So what happens to all of the other types of spying on Americans?

Collecting metadata isn't the only thing the NSA is doing to us. I'm skeptical of everything a politician says at this point in time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 06:58 PM

83. These are the people who flip-flopped on Gitmo, too, when...

 

Poll: Democrats Flip Flop on Gitmo to Support Obama

In November 2009, after Obama vowed to close Guantanamo, 59 percent of Democrats approved of the decision, according to Pew.

Then in February 2012, a Washington Post/ABC News poll, cited by Pew, showed that roughly the same percentage of Democrats approved of keeping the institution open, at 61 percent.

- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/poll-democrats-flip-flop-gitmo-support-obama#sthash.5TeHlAdT.dpuf


These are the people who screamed bloody murder when Bush was in office but look the other way now that Obama is in office. I suppose the reasoning goes, "Well, if (certain policy) is wrong, it's OK because I trust Obama won't abuse it like Bush or McCain."

These people suck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #83)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 08:19 AM

104. Yup. Some disgusting headlines these days

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue Mar 25, 2014, 10:26 PM

100. Obama says NSA not spying on Americans. How, then, can he be both able to

give that assurance, and position himself as outside the loop of what was going on?

I'm sorry, I wish he wasn't full of it, but it sure seems like he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Wed Mar 26, 2014, 04:56 AM

103. Greenwald is one of those loons who thinks just because something is wrong under a Republican

Administration it is also wrong under a Democratic Administration. How on earth do you reason with someone who thinks like that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Reply #103)

Thu Mar 27, 2014, 09:50 AM

109. You dont reason with loons

You stifle their loony dissent with emoticons like this:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Mar 27, 2014, 08:06 AM

108. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Thu Mar 27, 2014, 10:31 AM

112. "So what will they do?"

Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2014, 11:36 AM - Edit history (1)

Greenwald gives the loyalists too much credit, he seems to think they understand any of the positions they advocate for.

They don't, and that's why its so easy to turn on a dime and support any policy. Just give them a few hours to collect the blue links and select their dishonest rehtorical attack plan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newsjock (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:03 PM

114. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread