Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was literally based around HOPE and CHANGE.
Were you around in 2008? The level of projection of everyone’s fantasies of the perfect liberal President onto this guy was delusional. For some people, the cognitive dissonance of the past five years effectively being Bush’s third and fourth terms has led them to spin more and more ridiculous attempts to explain away and justify the reality.
Like extraordinary rendition and torture, which were halted.
Yet, there are plenty of people here telling you that they abhor both measures.
But you go on and keep painting with that big assed brush, they work just fine if you only want a room in one color.
What the hell are you going on about?
Can you not read the quoted portion again? It was your quote, right?
I am with you. Who are all of you people that think that the NSA doesn’t do this? Newsflash! The sky is blue, water is wet, and the NSA is tracking your phone records!
Personally, the part I find the most interesting is that someone leaked Top Secret material to a news agency. When was the last time THAT happened? The Pentagon Papers?
Bradley Manning only leaked Secret, and look at where he has been.
Anyone who thinks the past five years have “effectively been Bush’s third and fourth terms” hasn’t been paying attention. Obama’s antiterrorism policies have (sadly) been very similar to Bush’s; the resemblance ends there.
I wouldn’t go that far, but it’s true that very little has changed under Obama. As far as things that are actually under the president’s control, Obama ended Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and that’s pretty much it.
They don’t torture people any more (or at least, they claim that they don’t. I’ll bet this still goes on at various “black sites” that are less conspicuous than Guantanamo Bay) but they are assassinating people at an unprecedented rate, which frankly I don’t consider to be any sort of improvement.
Meanwhile, the recent scandals seem to be demonstrating that out government is getting increasingly secretive and unaccountable. I really doubt that this was the “Change” people were hoping for when they voted for Obama.
Are you suggesting that nothing has changed since Obama has taken office? Or did you take that campaign slogan to mean that literally every aspect of the federal government would be altered in some way? Or was something specific that Obama said that led you to believe that he would change this practice? Because when I voted for him I was pretty sure I disagreed with his policy about this, but John McCain wasn’t offering any alternatives.
The black sites were closed down in 2009. I’ve said this before, but you would think people who are really concerned about these issues would pay attention to stuff like this.
He’s persecuted more whistleblowers than every previous President put together, but I’m sure that’s not what you had in mind.
If we want to stop things like this, then we need to repeal the Patriot act. Unfortunately, repealing laws is the domain of Congress, not of the President, and the Republicans are doing their best to guarantee that Congress can do nothing.
Did you mean prosecuted?
I’m not overly concerned about the government requesting phone records; I think at times it can be warranted. What does concern me is that it appears to be done in secret. Is there good reason that requests to FISA can’t be required to be public?
There’s a pretty large middle ground between nothing has changed and everything has changed. So no. What I’m saying is, when a candidate is running on a platform of hope and change, and when he is quoted attacking Bush’s surveillance policies and championing the privacy rights of American citizens, it’s understandable that people might be shocked to know they’re being spied on like they were under Bush. This is, after all, the first proof we have that NSA phone data collection is happening under Obama. It’s a big deal, and I would be surprised if the DoJ isn’t already looking for a whistleblower to send to jail.
I agree with you, but the key word is “warranted.” Perhaps if the government suspected every Verizon customer of terrorism, this would be justified. But they don’t – they suspect every Verizon customer of future terrorism. And the reason policies are kept secret is always: we can’t tell you, because it would endanger the lives of Americans.
Well, they probably can’t request records for certain individuals because that could tip off the suspects, so I’m OK with a blanket request. I just think it’s less likely for the government to use it for wrong purposes if we know that they’re doing it.
You should read your own link.
[QUOTE=Barack Obama]
We don’t expect the President to give the American people every detail about a classified surveillance program. But we do expect him to place such a program within the rule of law, and to allow members of the other two coequal branches of government - Congress and the Judiciary - to have the ability to monitor and oversee such a program.
[/QUOTE]
Cut to today
Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said the program was used in the last few years to stop a terrorist attack in the United States. He gave no details, but said the program operates under rigorous judicial and congressional oversight.
I’m still not going to defend it, but you’re conveniently misremembering facts. Try again.
Actually, in April 2009, the NSA admitted to “overcollecting” domestic wiretaps beyond that permitted by law. Apparently “new safeguards” were put in place to make sure it would never happen again, although I admit I’ve got no idea what that overcollection was, nor what safeguards were put in place.
Anyone who believs this is a moron. That’s all I have to say.
I mean, seriously… do they think people are that STUPID?