Obama continues warrantless wiretaps

[Willravel]

Remember when a few people were pissed that Obama voted to support the new version of FISA that provided retroactive immunity to telecoms involved in spying on their customers? Turns out we were right.

msnbc.com Video Player

msnbc.com Video Player

It's nice that we have a president that doesn't dig holes in the white house lawn anymore, but I refuse to replace one corrupt leader for another. I'm not upset, I'm fucking livid.

Thoughts?

[samcol]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Remember when a few people were pissed that Obama voted to support the new version of FISA that provided retroactive immunity to telecoms involved in spying on their customers? Turns out we were right.

msnbc.com Video Player

It's nice that we have a president that doesn't dig holes in the white house lawn anymore, but I refuse to replace one corrupt leader for another. I'm not upset, I'm fucking livid.

Thoughts?

I am no fan of the guy but actually was hoping he would root out Bush style corruption. However, I haven't see many results. In most cases it seems he's doing nothing to stop it and in other it seems he's actively taking steps continuing it.

Glad you brought this up.

It's nice that Olberman covered this considering how much dirt he reported on about Bush. I was hoping he would have things like this about Obama as well. Sometimes I get the feeling he wishes he could say more, but is hamstrung by corporate media. Same goes for Dobbs at times.

[Terrell]

He needs to end warrantless wiretapping. It's wrong for Bush to do it, it's wrong for Obama to do it IMO. I'm disappointed in him on this issue.

[Derwood]

Here's hoping that he'll reverse his position on this.

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by Willravel

It's nice that we have a president that doesn't dig holes in the white house lawn anymore, but I refuse to replace one corrupt leader for another. I'm not upset, I'm fucking livid.

Thoughts?

We wanted "change" but none of us demanded Obama tell us what or how he was going to change things. And what things he wasn't going to change.

If you are livid do something about it instead of just saying "I'm livid."

Originally Posted by samcol

I am no fan of the guy but actually was hoping he would root out Bush style corruption. However, I haven't see many results. In most cases it seems he's doing nothing to stop it and in other it seems he's actively taking steps continuing it.

Glad you brought this up.

I was hoping also, but, all one had to do was look at his friends and how he would throw them under buses and do all he could to distance himself from them. Character DOES matter.

Originally Posted by Terrell

He needs to end warrantless wiretapping. It's wrong for Bush to do it, it's wrong for Obama to do it IMO. I'm disappointed in him on this issue.

Well.... he ain't gonna because he knows that it's just not terrorists that are his regimes #1 threat anymore.... it's the people, the masses that are going to eventually get fed up and revolt.

Which brings me to quote Pete Townshend..... this song represents what is going on and our VERY NEAR future...............

Won't Get Fooled Again

We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!

I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
Though I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?

There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Are now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

And if any of you are familiar with the KINKS Preservation Pts 1&2..... you'd know Obama had to have been listening to that and planning the be Flash.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by pan6467

We wanted "change" but none of us demanded Obama tell us what or how he was going to change things. And what things he wasn't going to change.

I didn't want "change", change is a completely meaningless buzzword, I wanted capable leadership. I didn't just want Bush gone (or rotting in federal, pound you in the ass prison), I wanted someone actually capable of fulfilling the job of president without breaking some of the most serious and important laws governing our country.

For a fucking constitutional law teacher, Obama seems to be missing something pretty basic. By the time I'd graduated from middle school I understood the necessity for warrants, probable cause, etc.

Originally Posted by pan6467

If you are livid do something about it instead of just saying "I'm livid."

Like what? Voting obviously doesn't work. When I support people that could actually improve things, they're lucky to get 2% of the vote while getting marginalized by both sides. Protesting definitely doesn't work when it's for anything bigger than a neighborhood issue. Writing my senator doesn't work. "Thank you for your concern." My congresswoman actually listens, but she's ignored even more than I am. Boycotting international corporations is like attacking the death star with a grain of rice. My government isn't just broke, it's in the deepest debt in the history of our species by leaps and bounds, and my state isn't far behind. I'm screaming to increase taxes and cut spending, but it's not "politically convenient" to do either. They have to get reelected to do even less shit, after all!

There's literally nothing, short of breaking a lot of laws, I can do.

What is it that you're doing?

[dksuddeth]

not surprised, in fact predicted, that he would not relinquish powers that were grabbed by previous administrations, no matter how facially unconstitutional.

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by Willravel

What is it that you're doing?

Tea parties. Sure as some say they may not mean anything but, I'm sure when those Addams boys planned theirs no one took them very seriously.

If you wake enough people up, and there are many waking up now that the new boss truly is becoming the same if not worse than the old boss. If people go to these tea parties start writing letters to the editor, start joining their local political parties and demand that they be heard and for true changes that hold government accountable, the press will listen, the parties will have no other choice than to listen because if the Dems lose the House in 2 years Obama won't get anything done, and that is becoming more and more of a strong possibility.

We organize sit-ins and demonstrations. We become radicals like they were in the 60's.

We still have voices, we can still demand changes.

And if those things don't work, well not to sound pessimistic but this country will be doomed. The only thing we'll truly be able to do at the end of the day then is pick up arms and take Washington by force. Our military will not fire on their own, hopefully. If people storm Washington... whether peacefully or in arms.... government will have no choice but to listen.

If we complain, stay asleep, etc and do nothing then we are as guilty as those fucks in Washington because we know what they are doing is wrong and not representative of the people and we allowed it.

Better to stand and fight for your beliefs and hope someone may hear you and fight beside you for what is right, than to die a complacent coward or an accomplice to scared of losing what little is left him and pass on even worse to your kids and grandkids.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by pan6467

Better to stand and fight for your beliefs and hope someone may hear you and fight beside you for what is right, than to die a complacent coward or an accomplice to scared of losing what little is left him and pass on even worse to your kids and grandkids.

"We must all hang together, or, assuredly, we shall all hang separately." Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

not surprised, in fact predicted, that he would not relinquish powers that were grabbed by previous administrations, no matter how facially unconstitutional.

No one relinquishes power once the door has been opened and no one did anything to truly stop it. Look at the Income tax, welfare, the telephone tax, "sin taxes" on alcohol, tobacco and so on.

Once we give government power, they take more and more.

Healthcare.... make it unaffordable and the people will want government to help them and give government power over that part of their lives.

Gun control.... give government power to make laws on guns then usurp rights of ownership slowly and over time.

Abortion...... give government the power to control who can or can't, give government control

Gay Marriage.... allow government to dictate what marriage is and who can become married to whom.... give government control

The above 4 are issues that either side you are on you are asking for government to take control. The above 4 have been issues as long as I can remember, nothing in there truly changes except government's control whether usurped overnight or in time.... BUT those issues provide the greatest smokescreens so that people don't truly see how they are being stolen from, how they are losing more and more rights and ownership of the country, how they are in essence being led to the gallows. It also helps when the ultra rich control both parties and almost all the media (Clear Channel, Disney, Microsoft, GE, Westinghouse, and so on). Local papers, radio stations television news.... it's all controlled by the same people who control the political parties..... in doing so they can control what media gets out and keep the masses in a haze.

But people are waking, the internet has helped... they don't control the internet yet..... but once they do, then there will never be an organized nationwide resistance.

But what do I know....

---------- Post added at 02:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:37 AM ----------

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

"We must all hang together, or, assuredly, we shall all hang separately." Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

What did he know, he flew a kite in an electrical storm.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by pan6467

What did he know, he flew a kite in an electrical storm.

just one old man in a bunch of old men who wrote something two centuries ago when they had no clue how life would be today.

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

just one old man in a bunch of old men who wrote something two centuries ago when they had no clue how life would be today.

Senile, old, slave owning white anglo protestant, men who were wrong. Why, Obama even told us that..... he said that paper was imperfect.

Who would have known, 200 years of it's life and survival, that it was so imperfect and flawed and only Obama can fix it.

I find it funny the issues like the OP were the Dems cry for power grabbing and how unConstitutional those power grabs were..... yet they remain silent and seemingly approve of Obama doing exactly what Bush did.... grab all the power he possibly can and never once blink or apologize for taking rights away.

[samcol]

It would be nice to get the opinion of people who agreed with Bush on this subject now that Obama is doing it. Likewise from the people who were against wiretapping when Bush was doing it and now support and/or voted for Obama.

[Cimarron29414]

You mean that Obama did something considered "Stateist" or Tyrannical. Come on.

[Rekna]

I think it was wrong with Bush did it and I think it is wrong now.

[dksuddeth]

I decried it when Bush did it and my opinion hasn't changed with Obama, but I didn't expect Obama to stop doing it either.

[Baraka_Guru]

It's not just a continuation; it's a bit worse:

[...] The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Adminstration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes. [...]

(emphasis in original)

In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New Arguments Are Worse Than Bush's | Electronic Frontier Foundation

I don't know what to make of this other than it being a bridge from the last administration. I think a lot of this is merely tied to the joke that is the GWOT. I hope to see some indications that the Obama admin. is moving away from that in its entirety. The wiretapping issue I hope will die with that. There are already far too many people victimized by travesties of justice (and peace). The last thing we need right now is four more years of it.

I wonder how the other elements of "Homeland Security" will play out in this administration.

[Derwood]

To play devil's advocate for a minute, this seems like an issue that sounds great and noble on the campaign trail, but suddenly changes when you step into the White House and are privy to all of the classified information. What if the Pentagon came to Obama and showed that these wiretaps stopped dozens of potential terrorist acts on US Soil? Would that change YOUR mind?

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by pan6467

Tea parties. Sure as some say they may not mean anything but, I'm sure when those Addams boys planned theirs no one took them very seriously.

I finally got word from someone that attended one of those. They're conservative circle-jerks. They're Palin rallies without Palin. Even if you could rally enough conservatives, the crap that is said there would only further alienate liberals and whether conservatives like it nor not they absolutely need the liberals if you want to enact change. Right now liberals outnumber conservatives.

Originally Posted by pan6467

If you wake enough people up,

February 15, 2003, international protests involving what ended up being millions of people around the world, as many as a million in NYC alone, against the Iraq war received little MSM coverage and didn't change a thing. It was by far the largest protest in history and it was entirely useless.

Originally Posted by pan6467

We organize sit-ins and demonstrations. We become radicals like they were in the 60's.

I've been in more of those than I can count. They've only worked for local issues.

Originally Posted by pan6467

And if those things don't work, well not to sound pessimistic but this country will be doomed. The only thing we'll truly be able to do at the end of the day then is pick up arms and take Washington by force. Our military will not fire on their own, hopefully. If people storm Washington... whether peacefully or in arms.... government will have no choice but to listen.

If we complain, stay asleep, etc and do nothing then we are as guilty as those fucks in Washington because we know what they are doing is wrong and not representative of the people and we allowed it.

Better to stand and fight for your beliefs and hope someone may hear you and fight beside you for what is right, than to die a complacent coward or an accomplice to scared of losing what little is left him and pass on even worse to your kids and grandkids.

You're not fighting for anything if you're not fighting smart. What are you doing that stands even the faintest chance?

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by Derwood

To play devil's advocate for a minute, this seems like an issue that sounds great and noble on the campaign trail, but suddenly changes when you step into the White House and are privy to all of the classified information. What if the Pentagon came to Obama and showed that these wiretaps stopped dozens of potential terrorist acts on US Soil? Would that change YOUR mind?

If that were the case, I would be open with the people and tell them. My belief is that while it may have worked at first, the terrorists and organized boogeymen have now found new ways to communicate (which happens) so the wiretaps and surveillance they are using now are there for other purposes. To possibly take out the people who speak out.... eventually.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by Derwood

To play devil's advocate for a minute, this seems like an issue that sounds great and noble on the campaign trail, but suddenly changes when you step into the White House and are privy to all of the classified information. What if the Pentagon came to Obama and showed that these wiretaps stopped dozens of potential terrorist acts on US Soil? Would that change YOUR mind?

Did you have this mindset when the program was introduced and run by Bushco?

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

Did you have this mindset when the program was introduced and run by Bushco?

To be fair, a lot of people did. It makes sense to you and me that warrantless wiretapping is a fundamental attack on privacy, and that privacy is a necessary right for liberty, but there are those that value safety so highly they'll even take the illusion. We can certainly fault their logic, but you can't hold someone's fear against them in the climate we've been in for the past 60 years. Cold war, terrorism; a boogeyman around every corner.

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by Willravel

I finally got word from someone that attended one of those. They're conservative circle-jerks. They're Palin rallies without Palin. Even if you could rally enough conservatives, the crap that is said there would only further alienate liberals and whether conservatives like it nor not they absolutely need the liberals if you want to enact change. Right now liberals outnumber conservatives.

See the people I know going are much like myself , more fiscally conservative and socially liberal who understand micromanaging people's lives is not what government should do, and that spending has to be justified and programs streamlined and made more effective, throwing money at them but not changing the bureaucracy is not the answer.

February 15, 2003, international protests involving what ended up being millions of people around the world, as many as a million in NYC alone, against the Iraq war received little MSM coverage and didn't change a thing. It was by far the largest protest in history and it was entirely useless.

If you did it just for MSM coverage and done solely for 1 day, it was for the wrong reason and it failed. If you protest to have government hear you and you continue the protest to make people aware of what is going on then, people will hear.

I've been in more of those than I can count. They've only worked for local issues.

There's no reason they can't work in higher government, just needs better organization.

You're not fighting for anything if you're not fighting smart. What are you doing that stands even the faintest chance?

What's fighting smart? To me it's standing up for my beliefs and finding ways to change what I believe to be wrong. I just know if I believe all that I do will have no affect, then I won't do anything. It's all a question of being true to myself.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by pan6467

See the people I know going are much like myself , more fiscally conservative and socially liberal who understand micromanaging people's lives is not what government should do, and that spending has to be justified and programs streamlined and made more effective, throwing money at them but not changing the bureaucracy is not the answer.

Most of the people at the rally were former Bush supporters and people that voted for McCain. If you supported either of these men for their economic policy, you're not a fiscal conservative. You're not even a fiscal liberal. But that's not the point.

Tea parties will be impotent as long as they're ideology rallies. You need a singular goal, something to be shared with your brothers and sisters on the left, like ending wiretapping. We liberals simply aren't going to get on board with neoliberalism because we've seen that it's all talk when neoliberals get into office. Lower taxes on the rich and spend tons on the military is just as much micromanaging as any social program a liberal might put in place.

Originally Posted by pan6467

If you did it just for MSM coverage and done solely for 1 day, it was for the wrong reason and it failed. If you protest to have government hear you and you continue the protest to make people aware of what is going on then, people will hear.

We did it to demonstrate a united voice against the war, but the fact is that media outlets underestimated the numbers of protesters by leaps and bounds. I was in San Francisco, and there had to be something like 350,000 protesters on the street. Most media outlets said there were 50,000. There were over a million people on the streets in NYC, and the newspapers and media said something like 250,000. If people knew just how big the protests were, the odds of them taking the movement seriously might have had a bigger affect. All in all there were likely 10s of millions of people around the planet and several million in the US protesting that day, trying desperately to change the course we were on.

It did nothing.

Originally Posted by pan6467

There's no reason they can't work in higher government, just needs better organization.

There's no reason? What about free speech zones?

Originally Posted by pan6467

What's fighting smart? To me it's standing up for my beliefs and finding ways to change what I believe to be wrong. I just know if I believe all that I do will have no affect, then I won't do anything. It's all a question of being true to myself.

Fighting smart means no more bullshit protests that don't stand a chance of success. Fighting smart means employing methods that have succeeded in the past and stand a reasonable chance of succeeding now.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by Willravel

What about free speech zones?

what about them? they are not constitutional. ignore them. if you have 4,000 people at a protest OUTSIDE the BS free speech zone, what the hell are the local police going to do? arrest everybody?

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Most of the people at the rally were former Bush supporters and people that voted for McCain. If you supported either of these men for their economic policy, you're not a fiscal conservative. You're not even a fiscal liberal. But that's not the point.

McCain and Bush's economic policies were failed trickle down overtures that in short term worked for Reagan but long term cannot work and would only continue the path to destruction. Obama's on the same path.

Tea parties will be impotent as long as they're ideology rallies. You need a singular goal, something to be shared with your brothers and sisters on the left, like ending wiretapping. We liberals simply aren't going to get on board with neoliberalism because we've seen that it's all talk when neoliberals get into office. Lower taxes on the rich and spend tons on the military is just as much micromanaging as any social program a liberal might put in place.

I'll have conservative friends there that are anti-abortion, pro capital punishment and so on... doesn't mean I support those views. Right now government is corrupt, taxes are out of control as is spending... Obama sees a problem he throws money at it and changes nothing... but he expected the car companies to change policy but he won't change policies and make them less accessible to middle America.

We did it to demonstrate a united voice against the war, but the fact is that media outlets underestimated the numbers of protesters by leaps and bounds. I was in San Francisco, and there had to be something like 350,000 protesters on the street. Most media outlets said there were 50,000. There were over a million people on the streets in NYC, and the newspapers and media said something like 250,000. If people knew just how big the protests were, the odds of them taking the movement seriously might have had a bigger affect. All in all there were likely 10s of millions of people around the planet and several million in the US protesting that day, trying desperately to change the course we were on.

It did nothing.

Then the millions that were out need to speak out, not just shake their head after that one day and say, "aw well".

There's no reason? What about free speech zones?

What about them? If enough people feel the way you do about a certain issue and you organize, get word out and demonstrate government will have no choice but to listen.

Fighting smart means no more bullshit protests that don't stand a chance of success. Fighting smart means employing methods that have succeeded in the past and stand a reasonable chance of succeeding now.

What do you suggest?

Personally, I think after the tea parties people should form convoys to Washington, picking up people in other cities along the way. San Fran to St.Louis to DC and so on. I'd use vacation days, sick days to join the convoy and to help organize this areas.

To those fearful they wouldn't have jobs to return to because the work they'd miss, look at it this way, if we don't do it now while we have the chance, then the job you have may not be there much longer anyway and the luxuries and lifestyle you have now may not exist in a year or 2 and then it maybe too late to do anything.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

what about them? they are not constitutional. ignore them. if you have 4,000 people at a protest OUTSIDE the BS free speech zone, what the hell are the local police going to do? arrest everybody?

Speaking from experience, they grab the loudest, beat him or her, and then arrest him or her. A few hours later, the video shows up on youtube and finds it's way to reddit, where it's seen by maybe 40,000 people. Complaints are called in, but by the time all is said and done, the loudest protester has been in jail for several days and is somehow facing assaulting an officer charges. Meinwhile, the police continue to antagonize the protesters, who are on the verge of losing their shit because a brave and innocent person was just beaten and arrested in front of them, and then someone in the protest does something stupid and the whole protest is marginalized as violent and is forgotten. And that's if we're lucky. If we're unlucky, tons of cops will show up suddenly out of nowhere in riot gear and will start to fire gas cannisters into the crowd and things will get really ugly.

[dippin]

I think this is unfortunate, and sad. But I saw this coming.

And I don't think there would be evidence of this kind of stuff actually stopping anything.

But one of the key features of national security states and this BS GWOT is that it is nearly politically impossible to revert them. First because no one wants to be responsible if they reduce the national security apparatus and something happens.

Secondly, because too many private interests end up supporting this crap. A lot of new GWOT measures are actually used more frequently to protect copyrights, harass immigrants, etc.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by pan6467

McCain and Bush's economic policies were failed trickle down overtures that in short term worked for Reagan but long term cannot work and would only continue the path to destruction. Obama's on the same path.

I don't think it's a good idea to get into an economic debate in a thread about warrantless wiretaps. All I was saying is that we need a unifying issue, and that isn't present at these tea parties. They are conservative.

Let me put it this way, knowing where I stand on a lot of issues, do you think I'd be comfortable with the message at a tea party?

Originally Posted by pan6467

I'll have conservative friends there that are anti-abortion, pro capital punishment and so on... doesn't mean I support those views. Right now government is corrupt, taxes are out of control as is spending... Obama sees a problem he throws money at it and changes nothing... but he expected the car companies to change policy but he won't change policies and make them less accessible to middle America.

I don't want this to turn into an "Obama is wrong on this therefore he's wrong on everything" thread. I don't exactly agree with the bail-outs, but that convo might be served better elsewhere.

Originally Posted by pan6467

Then the millions that were out need to speak out, not just shake their head after that one day and say, "aw well".

That protest was our trump card, our final attack on the death star. It was the culmination of some of the most incredible grass-roots movements of our time. And none of us stopped fighting after February 15th, we kept going, but most of us had jobs and school which meant that spending all day downtown simply wasn't viable. We went back to our local protests and grassroots media, but the lack of success with the protest was a huge defeat.

Originally Posted by pan6467

What do you suggest?

At this point, I can't really think of anything that fits between "active, but useless" and "illegal". You said above:

Originally Posted by pan6467

If you are livid do something about it instead of just saying "I'm livid."

I'd love to, but I'm out of ideas. I refuse to break the law, but I don't want to waste my time on a strategy that stands no chance of success.

[pan6467]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Speaking from experience, they grab the loudest, beat him or her, and then arrest him or her. A few hours later, the video shows up on youtube and finds it's way to reddit, where it's seen by maybe 40,000 people. Complaints are called in, but by the time all is said and done, the loudest protester has been in jail for several days and is somehow facing assaulting an officer charges. Meinwhile, the police continue to antagonize the protesters, who are on the verge of losing their shit because a brave and innocent person was just beaten and arrested in front of them, and then someone in the protest does something stupid and the whole protest is marginalized as violent and is forgotten. And that's if we're lucky. If we're unlucky, tons of cops will show up suddenly out of nowhere in riot gear and will start to fire gas cannisters into the crowd and things will get really ugly.

They faced that in the 60's and it added fuel to the fire, the protests didn't stop, they became stronger in the face of adversity.

I somehow believe that cops and the military all have families suffering because of the failed economic and government policies and they are less likely to do much. They may even join.

Podcast, have direct video to website coverage of your demonstrations... that way the people can see what is truly happening. Demand to be heard.

We're at a cross roads, it's either stand up and do or cower and die. We may never again have a chance to stand up in a year or 2.

[dippin]

Now, I would love to see the reaction of the crowd to an anti-GWOT speech at one of these tea parties. Considering that the major people pushing for them are people like Michele Malkin, Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck, all enthusiastic supporters of the GWOT.

[roachboy]

that's the problem---this idiotic "war on terror" which is self-evidently still floating about (afghanistan anyone?) as the obama administration tries to work it's way through the clusterfuck left behind by the bush people---and this idiocy has been institutionalized in the "department of heimat security"...

the bizarre thing is not that this wiretap policy has continued (i which oppose--but i opposed and still oppose everything about this "war on terror" nonsense)...the interesting thing is that obama has started making moves to take the united states off the endless cold war model---you know, the military keynesianism that the right has used since reagan as it's preferred mode of massive state intervention in the economy--but because the right supported this, somehow it wasn't "statism" or anything else (pick your conservative meme)--it was "national security"---one result of this is that the extent of the patronage system that's been tied to the bloated unnecessary procurement policies that are of a piece with the imaginary eternal cold war are starting to make their way to washington for a huge fight over money and--here's the obvious kicker--jobs.

i do not think these two things are unrelated: starting the process of dismantling the national security state--which has been around since the late 1940s---is happening in the name of a different type of warfare, which is now taken as paradigmatic--which is the "war on terror"...assymetrical conflict, unconventional war---not the stuff of empires.

so i wonder about this relationship.

but again: i oppose the wiretaps and the war in afghanistan and the nonsense of the "war on terror" that gave rise to it.

[pan6467]

Will,

You are a passionate, intelligent young man who I am proud to call friend.

Don't lose the passion. Tiring is what they want. They want people to believe what they do to speak out is going unheard and not changing anything.... they want people to become tired and thus shut up and sit down. But the longer you stand, the louder your voice grows, the more organized you become, the more people will follow, the more people come and follow and find their own voices.... the harder it becomes for government to say "shut up and sit down." The harder it becomes for government to do anything but listen.

Find that inner strength Will, use that passion and intelligence and find that voice in you that can't be worn down.

[Willravel]

I'm not tired at all, I've got the energy of a Kenyan soccer player, it's just about finding a constructive avenue for this drive and frustration. I'd like someone several measures smarter than I am to sit me down and tell me what I can do that stands a chance of changing things. For the time being, I'm okay with posting articles to reddit, putting videos on youtube, and continuing to write my representatives, but these things aren't even drops in the bucket. I want the hose.

[Cimarron29414]

I have several very liberal friends. In polling them today, they have all said what the (apparent) liberals on here are saying, "Yeah, this is sort of wrong and I'm pretty disappointed in this and, uh, I certainly hope he changes his mind on this eventually. But hey, he might know something we don't know..." These very same liberals (my friends) told me 6 months ago that they couldn't wait for Obama to win so Bush could be PROSECUTED for his illegal wiretaps. He should have been impeached for it, blah, blah, blah. I see an awful amount of wiggling in this thread too. Apparently, principles are tied to "R" and "D". Sorry, but I'm calling you guys out on this. Look back and truly recall the things you said regarding Bush doing it. THAT is exactly how you should feel about it now. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it.

[dippin]

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

I have several very liberal friends. In polling them today, they have all said what the (apparent) liberals on here are saying, "Yeah, this is sort of wrong and I'm pretty disappointed in this and, uh, I certainly hope he changes his mind on this eventually. But hey, he might know something we don't know..." These very same liberals (my friends) told me 6 months ago that they couldn't wait for Obama to win so Bush could be PROSECUTED for his illegal wiretaps. He should have been impeached for it, blah, blah, blah. I see an awful amount of wiggling in this thread too. Apparently, principles are tied to "R" and "D". Sorry, but I'm calling you guys out on this. Look back and truly recall the things you said regarding Bush doing it. THAT is exactly how you should feel about it now. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it.

Other than one person who said they might know something we don't, where do you see any sort of wiggling?

I mean, the people "blowing the whistle" on this are Olbermann, the daily kos, and other lefties...

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Speaking from experience, they grab the loudest, beat him or her, and then arrest him or her. A few hours later, the video shows up on youtube and finds it's way to reddit, where it's seen by maybe 40,000 people. Complaints are called in, but by the time all is said and done, the loudest protester has been in jail for several days and is somehow facing assaulting an officer charges. Meinwhile, the police continue to antagonize the protesters, who are on the verge of losing their shit because a brave and innocent person was just beaten and arrested in front of them, and then someone in the protest does something stupid and the whole protest is marginalized as violent and is forgotten. And that's if we're lucky. If we're unlucky, tons of cops will show up suddenly out of nowhere in riot gear and will start to fire gas cannisters into the crowd and things will get really ugly.

and since that happens everytime, what should you do to change it?

do NOT let that officer, or officers, make an example out of one of your own. That is how you get marginalized, by not showing any teeth. The first time that a police officer puts his hands on a protester, he should get mobbed and beaten, and then the others that jump in should get mobbed and beaten.

government bodies are not going to listen to you as long as you behave like little guinea pigs holding a damned sign. Once you threaten their base of power with your own, they will listen. Look at what happened after the BART shooting.

[roachboy]

what you seem to miss, cimmaron, even in what you relay of your own friend's positions is that first the wiretapping business did not happen in isolation but as part and parcel of the central "policy" of the bush administration--the loopy "war on terror". your friends appear to have opposed the entirety of that fictional "war" (the effects of which were in many ways all too real)...obama has self-evidently changed the situation--he has broken up the logic, such as it was, of the bushwar--starting to actively wind down the iraq debacle, moving to close guantanomo, explicitly rejecting the bushjustifications for torture, rejecting the compulsion to secrecy that the bush people derived from their "war"...on and on. i happen to think that much of what the bush administration did can and should be understood as criminal--but the likelihood of any action is, sadly, slim to none. such is the nature of criminal action if you're el jeffe for a time.

it is a real problem for me and almost everyone i know that obama has chosen to retain other aspects of the bushwar---to act as if there is sense in continuing the conflict in afghanistan for example, to act as if there is sense in maintaining the wiretapping business.

what you demand of those of us who are not on the right is a simple-minded black/white stand. personally, i don't consider the right to be relevant at this point, so see no need to take seriously any attempt coming from the conservative to impose anything on debate. so you can in this case see things as you like, but there's no particular reason for anyone who is not already in the same political camp to agree with the terms you'd like to set for it.

at the same time, this breaking up of the bushwar logic at the level of policy as maybe put folk in a it of an awkward position--by separating the more outrageous and/or absurd aspects of the "war on terror" from others, the administration has broken up the old frame. i don't think you'll find *anyone* who identifies themselves as even a little on the left who supports what the obama administration has decided to do on wiretaps. just do a basic search and you'll get ample evidence of it.

the point i tried to make above was that it seems to me that retaining this element of the "war on terror" nonsense should be thought about in the context of the administration's initial moves to attempt to dismantle to old, outmoded national security state--and so as a tactical thing connected to what appears to be its alternate plan for military strategy--and by extension procurement--which has to do with less conventional war--which is at the same time a wholesale rejection of the rumsfeld doctrine.

but i still oppose it.

[Cimarron29414]

Originally Posted by dippin

Other than one person who said they might know something we don't, where do you see any sort of wiggling?

I mean, the people "blowing the whistle" on this are Olbermann, the daily kos, and other lefties...

Do you know how many tirades I watched of Olbermann screaming at the camera for Mr. Bush to be impeached for this program? In the attached vid, Olbermann could be reporting that Obama picked out a name for his dog - he has that much emotion/indignation. That's about the level of indignation I'm getting from my liberal friends and the amount I'm detecting in posts here.

I certainly can't look back and know the way each one of the posters here reacted to the Bush administration's actions, but I would be dollars to doughnuts that it was a bit more vitriolic than what we are witnessing here.

[YaWhateva]

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

I have several very liberal friends. In polling them today, they have all said what the (apparent) liberals on here are saying, "Yeah, this is sort of wrong and I'm pretty disappointed in this and, uh, I certainly hope he changes his mind on this eventually. But hey, he might know something we don't know..." These very same liberals (my friends) told me 6 months ago that they couldn't wait for Obama to win so Bush could be PROSECUTED for his illegal wiretaps. He should have been impeached for it, blah, blah, blah. I see an awful amount of wiggling in this thread too. Apparently, principles are tied to "R" and "D". Sorry, but I'm calling you guys out on this. Look back and truly recall the things you said regarding Bush doing it. THAT is exactly how you should feel about it now. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it.

I feel that it was wrong when the Bush administration did it and I stand by that now with the Obama administration. If he doesn't change this stance in the immediate future I will be calling for his prosecution as well. This is completely unacceptable.

As for the protesting, I believe the government should bend to the will of the people, not the other way around. Look at France, their government is terrified of its citizens. That's how it should be.