What can we all agree on?

[ProSense]

It seems to me the outrage is all about proving that President Obama is doing something wrong, not illegal, but controversial. This was the premise of the recent NYT editorial on the NSA issue: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022959738

When Bush was in office, we agreed he sucked, but we also agreed on concrete actions: ending the Iraq war, ending torture, ending illegal spying and enacting laws to end or prevent abuses.

Where are the editorials, petitions, members of Congress pushing, with a similar intensity, for shield laws, repealing the AUMF and fixing or repealing the controversial parts of FISA amendments/Patriot Act?

We all agree that certain things shouldn't be continued, but it seems that there is more focus on fanning outrage directed at the President, proving he's just as bad as Bush, than there is on pushing for solutions.

A USA Today editorial from 2006.

Congress keeps itself, public in the dark on surveillance

Updated 6/14/2006 9:58

With its wiretapping of international phone calls and collecting a database of domestic phone records, the Bush administration is busy watching for evildoers.

Unfortunately, spying on those who pose a threat is not easily separated from spying on everyone else, and no one is watching the Bush administration with equal attentiveness. Despite lots of rhetoric, Congress has offered little to fulfill its duty to act as a check on the executive branch.

Today, six months after The New YorkTimes disclosed that the National Security Agency has been wiretapping international phone calls of U.S. residents without court orders, and one month after USA TODAY revealed that the NSA has been compiling a huge database of domestic phone records, Congress is poised for its first action.

<...>

By explicitly stating that the president might have such authority, Congress not only would fail to guard its constituents' privacy, it would also deepen the risk. Its actions could influence the court's thinking on the legality of the wiretaps. (An earlier version of the bill would have retroactively shielded officials who carried out the program from prosecution, raising the question: If the program is perfectly legal, as the administration insists, why would anyone need amnesty?)...Fireworks between Congress and the White House might light up headlines. But the public remains largely in the dark about government snooping.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-06-14-our-view_x.htm

Here's a NYT editorial from 2009:

Editorial

The Eavesdropping Continues

<...>

In a disturbing article in The Times on Wednesday, James Risen and Eric Lichtblau said that Congressional investigations suggest that the National Security Agency continues to routinely collect Americans’ telephone calls and e-mail messages — perhaps by the millions.

<...>

President George W. Bush started violating that law shortly after 9/11 when he authorized the N.S.A. to conduct domestic wiretapping without first getting the required warrant. When that program was exposed by The Times in late 2004, the Bush team began pressuring Congress to give retroactive legal cover to the eavesdropping operation and to the telecommunications companies that participated in it.

That finally happened in the heat of the 2008 campaign. Congress expanded FISA and gave the companies blanket immunity less than a day after the bill was introduced. We doubt if many lawmakers read the legislation. President Obama, who was still a senator at the time, voted for it, even though he had been passionately denouncing illegal wiretapping for months.

<...>

We do not believe that Mr. Obama is deliberately violating Americans’ rights as Mr. Bush did, and it is to his credit that the government acknowledged part of the problem in April. But this nation’s civil liberties are not predicated on trusting individuals to wield their powers honorably. They are founded on laws.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/opinion/18thu1.html

We need less rhetoric and more action. If the President and Congress agree, have the debate and take action.

[Kath1]

1. Very well said.

I thought Bush was a horrible President and I couldn't wait for him to be out of office. I voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and I would vote for him again. I know the right wing would do anything to destroy this President and 2014 is just around the corner. I question the timing. I'd rather we work for fundamental change in policy rather than try to equate this President with Bush.

[Major Hogwash]

2. Obama doesn't have a wand, how's about that!!!

And if the people here don't like that fact, they can kiss my grits!

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

3. That our Dem leaders & the POTUS were quick to decry the extra scrutiny of the Tea Party FREAKS

but not come to the constitution's (see 4th amendment) or the American peoples defense and decry the extra scrutiny of ALL the American people.

What's up wit dat?

Can we all agree on that, so far?

[ProSense]

5. Why are you so focused on the "Tea Party FREAKS"

even as you mischaracterize the current situation?

[Cha]

6. It's something he read on the internets.

[boilerbabe]

7. yeah, the same place you get your info. nt

[Cha]

9. I very much doubt that.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

13. Because of the disparity of the reaction to them being scrutinized vs ALL the American people.

To me that seems very odd, and since that episode is still fresh in everyones minds it is useful to discuss the difference in the reactions to 2 different government programs designed to scrutinize Americans, and how one was handled in a predictable manner, as in that was unfair, yet this other one, which targets ALL Americans is not recognized as being unfair, or even against our constitution...

those different reactions seem inconsistant, even bizarre to me, and I suspect many other Americans feel the same, though I doubt that it would be within the bounds of permissible discussion by our overlords and controllers of the MSM so I thought it useful, as I often do, to bring it up on my Democratic discussion board to see what others thought.

I feel very lucky to have this discussion board where we are free to bring up, in public, in front of a large group of like minded, concerned individuals what is on our minds... though I fear of a day when that kind of thing may not even be permissible even at my online sanctuary, DU.

I hope that clears it up for you.

[Cha]

4. thanks for laying this out, ProSense..

We are shocked, shocked…

snip**

"The question is not should the resulting data exist. It does. And it forever will, to a greater and greater extent. And therefore, the present-day question can’t seriously be this: Should law enforcement in the legitimate pursuit of criminal activity pretend that such data does not exist. The question is more fundamental: Is government accessing the data for the legitimate public safety needs of the society, or are they accessing it in ways that abuse individual liberties and violate personal privacy — and in a manner that is unsupervised.

And to that, the Guardian and those who are wailing jeremiads about this pretend-discovery of
U.S. big data collection are noticeably silent. We don’t know of any actual abuse. No known illegal wiretaps, no indications of FISA-court approved intercepts of innocent Americans that occurred because weak probable cause was acceptable. Mark you, that stuff may be happening. As happens the case with all law enforcement capability, it will certainly happen at some point, if it hasn’t already. Any data asset that can be properly and legally invoked, can also be misused — particularly without careful oversight. But that of course has always been the case with electronic surveillance of any kind.

***snip

Much More..
http://davidsimon.com/we-are-shocked-shocked/

h/t http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/07/facts-always-win-over-feigned-outrage/ I Love It when I wake up in the morning and Barack Obama is President

We do not believe that Mr. Obama is deliberately violating Americans’ rights as Mr. Bush did, and it is to his credit that the government acknowledged part of the problem in April.

But, oh yeah "bush=President Obama"!!111.. for lazyass thinking, yeah.

[Liberal_in_LA]

8. kick

[sheshe2]

10. Kick and Rec!

Thanks ProSense!

The world has spun off it's axis......

[liberal_at_heart]

11. I'm done arguing about. There is nothing blue dogs can say to make us liberals feel better and there

is nothing us liberals can say to change the blue dogs minds. Each side's mind is made up. The question is when will we liberals have enough to be fed up enough to vote for a different party. I can't answer that question. Of course we want to keep the republicans out of office, but the blue dog dems are quickly catching up with the republicans as far as dislike among the liberals. I struggle with it myself. I have voted democratic every single time since I was 18, but I can tell you that will absolutely not be the case forever. There will come a day when I have had absolutely as much as I can stand. And on that day I will probably vote third party. And if blue dogs think there aren't lots of fed up liberals out there, they are sadly mistaken. The pressure is building in the volcano. Will it blow tomorrow or 10 years from now? I don't know, but I can tell you it will blow. And on that day the blue dog democratic politicians will have nobody to blame but themselves.

[Iliyah]

14. Vote your conscious and your heart.

I'm from Los Angeles and I just love what Gov Brown has done to turn our state around. I'm progressive via independent to Democratic and I don't think I'll change. As a radio host has constantly said, get involved and start in your town or city, keep the involvement going all the way to the top. When discussing about the two current parties, and a person is discontented with both, whatever group you feel is closest to your convictions get involved with them and make them stronger.

Cheers!

[1StrongBlackMan]

12. And more ...

I thought for sure President Obama invited that exact thing when we said (something to the effect of) "We have decisions to make ..."

[SunSeeker]

15. K & R

[JDPriestly]

16. No more tracking of innocent Americans. Please.

And most of us are innocent. They need to focus on the potential terrorists and leave the rest of us including their political opponents, reporters, attorneys and all of us retired folks who can barely understand the internet much less pose a danger to our country alone.

They are wasting a lot of effort on an absurdly broad program. And they are invading our privacy while they do it.

OK. So I'm active in my local Democratic Party activities. What if Republicans get in power? Will they be checking my e-mails to see who I contact and watching for the structure of my political contacts?

Now do you understand why I think this is a shockingly bad program?

Think about your own contacts. Who do you get e-mails from? To whom do you send them? Is there a pattern?

You probably think it is harmless. But what is someone on your list has a nervous breakdown and does something crazy? Does that link you to a terrorist network? The potential damage that this program could do is unbelievable.

I lived through the McCarthy era. I lived through the Civil Rights era and then the Viet Nam War protests. The history of political activism and its repression in this country is quite disturbing.

Obama is a good guy, and for that reason, he needs to put an end to this overly broad program. He promised to do it. Now is the time. It did not prevent the bombing in Boston. It is irrelevant to fighting terrorism. Its costs to our liberty outweigh the gains to our security. The program needs to be ended and now.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

20. "what if (sic) someone on your list has a nervous breakdown and does something crazy?"

Around here?

WAY too late.

[cheapdate]

17. In March of this year, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs standing

to challenge the FISA amendments in a case brought by the ACLU, Clapper v. Amnesty International. The court split 5-4 along conservative-liberal lines. I'm sure we can all agree that keeping the presidency out of Republican hands is vitally important to the makeup of the Supreme Court.

[Iliyah]

18. My father is a Vietnam Vet

Marine 1963 I think (17 years old) to 1967. Survived and coming home the plane stopped in San Fran where he got off and kissed the ground. At the airport there were numerous police department agencies waiting. OK that said, the Vietnam Vets were treated like shit.

OK, back tooooooo. Ahem, with the investigation, y'think a lot of the past happenings of the Patriot Act comes to light? As someone has stated, and I know this got to be nuts, the administration leaked it so the Patriot Act can be exposed and fixed or repealed, crazy huh. LOL

[Spitfire of ATJ]

19. We have the first President that was born after the 50's...

....and we are three years into the second decade of the 21st Century. Most of the young people are aware that Capitalism is a PROBLEM and not a solution and they are also aware that Europe and Japan has cooler stuff due to a bunch of old farts in this country who want to fight the Civil War all over again and then settle down in Pleasantville.

[Laelth]

21. Sadly, no solutions are being offered. Why not?

The fact that concrete solutions to these problems are not being offered is evidence of the fact that the leadership of the Democratic Party has no interest in fixing these alleged deficiencies. It is the fact that the Democratic Party appears, once again, to have abandoned its base that irks me, and I suspect that many Democrats share my concern over this haunting betrayal.

-Laelth

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. .

Where are the editorials, petitions, members of Congress pushing, with a similar intensity, for shield laws, repealing the AUMF and fixing or repealing the controversial parts of FISA amendments/Patriot Act?

Oh, I get it. Until we demand all that we have no right to demand the President not exploit the FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act for a strictly domestic operation.

We can call it the "Walk and Chew Gum Act of 2013."

[ProSense]

23. That makes no sense. n/t

[LWolf]

24. It depends on who "we" are.

I don't agree with you on this issue. I don't agree with you about Barack Obama. I never have. I never will.

I might agree with you on some issues, although what issues those might be is a bit problematic, since I am not a neoliberal and I put issues before party.

But why bother? What's the point?

[gulliver]

25. Yup. Let the democracy speak.

It did that before of course. But maybe it is changing its mind. I doubt it. But let's see. Have the debate.

[still_one]

26. Very well articulated. Many are upset on DU because he did not keep his promise

Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 02:30 PM - Edit history (1)

but the point you make is finding an actual remedy is where the focus should be

[whatchamacallit]

27. No matter what, you circle the wagons

Nothing is ever anything but poutrage. Yet there is no denying this country is changing, and not for the better.

[graham4anything]

28. It takes a village, AND it takes a great person to say "if you build it, they will come"

and President Obama has from day one said it.

He ain't no dictator. He needs a village.

I got his back.

(and anyone who doesn't could lead us right into President Paul Ryan 2015, after they win both congress, and then
impeach Biden and Obama and oust Bohner and voila President Paul Ryan 2015.

[Celldweller]

29. do your talking points come to you via fax or email?

Or hand delivered from across the hallway in the offices on Capitol Street?

[Lady Freedom Returns]

32. No, it is called looking at the whole story!

The Repukes are very happy at letting only a little information out to cause an uproar. If we all just wait a moment, do a little research, we could see more of the picture.

However, due to wanting to hide what they are up to on Capital Hill, we are getting bombarded by "scandal" after "scandal". That way, they get to pass things that we don't want. Case in point, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/jan-june13/foodstamps_06-06.html

While we are all spell bound by all these scandals, this is getting threw. And it is also under the disguise of a Farm Bill.

President Obama is busy answering questions, stuff Congress already knows, and is being held up from doing anything productive. News agencies, thanks to the Sales Depts. getting wind and pushing for them to hurry and air, are tied up with this stuff and not reporting other things.

The American people are falling for it, again, hook line and sinker. We, as a people, need to wake up, when we get bombarded with scandal, we need to look harder as to what else is going on on the Hill.

[MineralMan]

33. What are you implying?

Just come out and say it, if you dare.

Like a lot of people, I post what I think. On the other hand, I wear the same socks as lots of people do. I see them everywhere. I get my socks at Target. I have plenty of them just now.

My talking points, I think up all by myself.

[sabrina 1]

30. I agree. This is about something we should all agree on. We used to agree on

this, we railed against Bush when he was caught using the Telecoms to spy on the American people. We were outraged when Congress adjusted the existing law which he broke, retroactively, to save him from being a lawbreaker.

Were WE wrong and Bush right after all? Because if we are to believe that tracking the calls of every citizen is necessary to keep us safe, then we WERE wrong to oppose Bush. He WAS only trying to keep us safe.

So which is it, was Bush right after all? Was Ben Franklin wrong when he warned about giving up SOME freedoms in exchange for safety?

I think we do have to decide what it is we want. I personally have not changed my mind on the issues that I opposed when Bush was president.

If someone can convince me that Bush was right and that we just didn't understand, that without all this surveillance we are likely to be in grave danger, then I would like to hear that argument. But nothing I have heard so far has convinced me that we have to give up our rights to remain safe.

Rec'd for trying to have a rational discussion at least.

[olddots]

31. can we agree about the Military Industrial Complex ?

We have no Department of Peace in this country we have the defense department which used to be called the War Department but they cleaned up that name to make it sound warm and fuzzy .

The country we live in is not the country we chose to live in and with 300 million plus residents it will never be a country of "US"

[suston96]

34. Can we all agree on this........?

The people made the Constitution, and the people can unmake it.
It is the creature of their will, and lives only by their will.

Chief Justice John Marshall, 1821

If the leaders we elect or appoint fail to execute their oath to defend and protect us and our Constitution then we need to fix the Constitution to make it work in spite of the negligence of the people sworn to protect and defend it.

[dkf]

35. We should all be able to agree that Obama should let the courts review its constitutionality.

Right now they are using the "state secrets" privilege to keep the NSA surveillance from going to the regular court and keeping it in the FISA court which is already being accused of misinterpreting the law.