Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find that calling out hypocrisy is due and legitimate when the OP calls the sitting President a "socialist turd wanna be dictator" while not mentioning the previous president who did the same thing and got a free pass from the right-wing.
Well, then, we're even. Bush 'got a free pass' from the right, as you say, and the current President is getting a 'free pass' from the left.
So either there's no hypocrisy on either side, or it's on both sides. (I did say that before:"...hypocrisy, of which there is plenty to go around in both parties")
Are you saying you're OK with what is going on now?
Are you saying that since a previous President did it it's OK that this one do that too?
Two wrongs make a right?
BTW, Bush didn't go nearly as far as this President has done, and the situation was quite a bit different back then too. And, it was approved by Congress but a large number of people on both sides of the aisle weren't real happy about it.
I find that calling out hypocrisy is due and legitimate when the OP calls the sitting President a "socialist turd wanna be dictator" while not mentioning the previous president who did the same thing and got a free pass from the right-wing.
And you are a hypocrite for attempting to say you are not giving a pass to Obama, merely because you adore him.
The topic, much as you try to claim it to be different is: Obama, Spying Programs Only "Modest" Invasion of Privacy.
Where is the mention of any other President?
You continue to lie about the topic. Is it because your head is buried or that you approve of losing privacy to illegal, unethical and immoral actions of the government?
Well, then, we're even. Bush 'got a free pass' from the right, as you say, and the current President is getting a 'free pass' from the left.
So either there's no hypocrisy on either side, or it's on both sides. (I did say that before:"...hypocrisy, of which there is plenty to go around in both parties")
Are you saying you're OK with what is going on now?
Are you saying that since a previous President did it it's OK that this one do that too?
Two wrongs make a right?
BTW, Bush didn't go nearly as far as this President has done, and the situation was quite a bit different back then too. And, it was approved by Congress but a large number of people on both sides of the aisle weren't real happy about it.
Creep over time. Give an inch and they take a yard. Each administration goes a little further than the previous one. And since it's all secret, none of us knows what they are doing.
In public they say our rights are not being violated.
Clapper told Congress the NSA was not collecting data on Americans.
This court order and PRISM show he lied.
Now Clapper says they are not reading our email and the President says it's just a "moderate" infringement on our rights.
The President of the United States is acknowledging that our rights have been breached by them.
But we shouldn't worry because it's for our own safety.
So pray tell then who is left to stand up about this condoned breach ?
If history is any predictor then we are going down a dangerous path and the uninformed are letting it happen.
Yep the admin is looking at you as it sees you as the greatest threat to America, not foreign terrorists whose back has been broken by the great Obama and his drones. The dragnet can't be wide enough for Holder and Obama and all its federal agencies. "we have looked and the enemy is us" has finally come true in Obamaworld
[/LEFT]
Yep the admin is looking at you as it sees you as the greatest threat to America, not foreign terrorists whose back has been broken by the great Obama and his drones. The dragnet can't be wide enough for Holder and Obama and all its federal agencies. "we have looked and the enemy is us" has finally come true in Obamaworld
[/LEFT]
That's really "the greatest threat to the Administration", they just don't say that.
Yep the admin is looking at you as it sees you as the greatest threat to America, not foreign terrorists whose back has been broken by the great Obama and his drones. The dragnet can't be wide enough for Holder and Obama and all its federal agencies. "we have looked and the enemy is us" has finally come true in Obamaworld
[/LEFT]
Here is a very good explanation of why having the metadata is very bad for our privacy;
"A Massachusetts Institute of Technology study a few years back found that reviewing people's social networking contacts alone was sufficient to determine their sexual orientation. Consider, metadata from email communications was sufficient to identify the mistress of then-CIA Director David Petraeus and then drive him out of office.
The "who," "when" and "how frequently" of communications are often more revealing than what is said or written. Calls between a reporter and a government whistleblower, for example, may reveal a relationship that can be incriminating all on its own.
Repeated calls to Alcoholics Anonymous, hotlines for gay teens, abortion clinics or a gambling bookie may tell you all you need to know about a person's problems. If a politician were revealed to have repeatedly called a phone sex hotline after 2:00 a.m., no one would need to know what was said on the call before drawing conclusions. In addition sophisticated data-mining technologies have compounded the privacy implications by allowing the government to analyze terabytes of metadata and reveal far more details about a person's life than ever before."
Creep over time. Give an inch and they take a yard. Each administration goes a little further than the previous one. And since it's all secret, none of us knows what they are doing.
In public they say our rights are not being violated.
Clapper told Congress the NSA was not collecting data on Americans.
This court order and PRISM show he lied.
Now Clapper says they are not reading our email and the President says it's just a "moderate" infringement on our rights.
The President of the United States is acknowledging that our rights have been breached by them.
But we shouldn't worry because it's for our own safety.
So pray tell then who is left to stand up about this condoned breach ?
If history is any predictor then we are going down a dangerous path and the uninformed are letting it happen.
Does it say anywhere in the Constitution anything about "moderate" infringement being ok? No? Hmmm...
Obama himself criticized Bush to no end, and then goes about expanding the very programs he won his election by opposing.
You and I have had our disagreements in the past, but you are oh so right. I can't disagree with this. You're just 100 percent right. Obama's doing the indefensible.
Here is a very good explanation of why having the metadata is very bad for our privacy;
"A Massachusetts Institute of Technology study a few years back found that reviewing people's social networking contacts alone was sufficient to determine their sexual orientation. Consider, metadata from email communications was sufficient to identify the mistress of then-CIA Director David Petraeus and then drive him out of office.
The "who," "when" and "how frequently" of communications are often more revealing than what is said or written. Calls between a reporter and a government whistleblower, for example, may reveal a relationship that can be incriminating all on its own.
Repeated calls to Alcoholics Anonymous, hotlines for gay teens, abortion clinics or a gambling bookie may tell you all you need to know about a person's problems. If a politician were revealed to have repeatedly called a phone sex hotline after 2:00 a.m., no one would need to know what was said on the call before drawing conclusions. In addition sophisticated data-mining technologies have compounded the privacy implications by allowing the government to analyze terabytes of metadata and reveal far more details about a person's life than ever before."
I don't need an explanation, though it's still appreciated. They're boiling the frog slowly. They're hoping that we just 'accept' this in the name of security. You have career bureaucrats in the public sector and private sector contractors that want to eat up tax payer spending in the 'national security' sector and they'll justify this sh*t any way they can. So yeah, they'll trot it out there and say "We're just collecting numbers". And if we're dumb enough to roll over and accept this, then they'll go back in secret and start collecting DNA and everything else they can. This is our individual liberty, dies.
I'm not saying that the U.S. is Nazi Germany - far from it at this point. However, I always try to remind people of one simple thing. Nazi Germany did not start out as a totalitarian government; it started out as a democracy. It became a totalitarian regime when people in that democracy foolishly voted away their liberties, one by one. And in the name of security and national honor, they simultaneously voted for an aggressive warmongering regime, which then, in turn, needed 'security' measures to keep the state functioning.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
sector and they'll justify this sh*t any way they can. So yeah, they'll trot it out there and say "We're just collecting numbers". And if we're dumb enough to roll over and accept this, then they'll go back in secret and start collecting DNA and everything else they can. This is our individual liberty, dies.