Strange how so many scandals developed all at once

[UCmeNdc]

Do you think GOP operatives are in action?

[busterbrown]

1. Yea, and some of us around here..

fall for their crap!

[watrwefitinfor]

17. Yep. And some of us around here..

are them.

[Lint Head]

26. Yep..

[brush]

30. You're so right

Something about the timing of this whole Snowden/NSA stuff doesn't quite seem right. Coming on the heels of all these other so called scandals makes me think that there may be others behind the scenes orchestrating the re-emergence of a this six-year-old story.

Now I'm certainly not in favor of a country spying on it's own citizens, and the Obama administration certainly should have replaced all the repug moles and ditched the Patriot Act crap left over from Cheney/Bush, but many of us here have posted before how repugs seem to gin up scandals in the second term of dem presidents to keep "shit" going so:

a. the administration is bogged down in trying to defend itself from scandal after scandal, month after month (we've
seen this movie before — it's called "Bill Clinton's Second Term&quot

b. nothing legislatively gets done about the economy or jobs

c. this in turn takes the spotlight off the repugs/party of "no" obstructionism

d. if the scandals can be extended long enough it helps the repugs in the mid-terms and maybe even 2016 when
Hillary is sure to be the favorite to win (maybe not if she/the dems can be stained enough by this)

Anyway, I say let's watch this closely and see how it plays out. Like I said, something smells about this whole "Snowden being a lone wolf-acting out of patriotism after only three months at this highly sensitive job thing" (wonder how he got the job in the first place, and then become "radicalized" in just 3 months).

If it turns out that his motives are entirely pure, fine, but let's get real, that's hardly ever the case.

[karynnj]

39. The timing of all of most of these is weird

The phone records issue was never hidden. It was debated on the floor of the House and Senate in 2007 - Chris Dodd made a big deal of trying to filibuster it. A vote was pushed through in August 2007. NOTHING that has come out on it is any different than what we head in 2007. As long as the government needs some justification to filter for a phone number, this is not all that different than being able to request phone records - which happened for decades. The BIG difference is that they could easily ask for the inbound calls to that number and could later expand to look at who the people in contact with the suspect call as well.

The internet leak is new, but not really a surprise. We already know that various companies are using the information we give them to select which ads we get, What I hope is that this leak leads to hearings and a conversation that seriously questions what is acceptable and what is not to most people. The entire issue of security vs privacy is pretty interesting. I know that I was impressed how quickly the British identified who placed the 7/7 bombs on British mass transportation. The reason - there are security cameras (not noticed by me) all over the place. Then, this year, we had pictures of the two Boston Massacre bombers on security camera from Lord and Taylor's along with video from camera phones that the city requested people to give them.

Though it feels weird to know that I have obviously been filmed often by security cameras, I like that after the fact, there is this rich source that can be used to look back to see crimes. Whatever uneasiness I feel is balanced by the fact that no one is really interested in the appearance of a very innocuous 63 year old woman shopping or getting on the subway - for all practical purposes no one is looking AND I do understand the value when something bad happens.

I suspect that these two issues and the IRS story which is really not a scandal but which makes the tea party feel victimized may be an attempt to separate young libertarians, who came of age hating Bush, away from thinking the Democrats acceptable. This does not mean that they want to push Rand Paul - or maybe a less controversial Libertarian/Conservative/tea party candidate for 2016. They may want to have the mirror image of the 2005 - 2007, where anger at the party in power meant they strongly and loudly supported the other party. Consider Snowden's support of Ron Paul and Obama (in 2008). There is actually more in common between a conservative Republican and a libertarian - as long as the Republican soft peddles the social issues.

Benghazi is more complicated. I think it is a major attempt to restore Republican dominance on national security. NOTE - I am speaking of the American perspective, not anything based on any objective metric. I think Obama 2012 was the first time that Democrats had a real advantage since the late 1960s. This is important as Democrats win most other categories. The other one that goes back and forth is the economy. Here, reality backs the Democrats at this point. Austerity has worked NOWHERE. The other factor here is the probable candidacy of Hillary Clinton. That may be the root of the brand new State Department issues.

I do disagree with you saying that this is like the second term of Bill Clinton. Most of the long list of "scandals" started in the first term - when Whitewater, "the missing Rose law records" (that showed nothing wrong when found, Vince Foster, Travelgate, and Paula Jones were ALL put out in the first term - and did not stop an easy re-election. One observation is that the Clinton "scandals" were almost all personal - where the current Obama ones are based on things done by the government. (There were plenty of past Obama ones that were personal - including his birth certificate.)

I would guess that part of the intent is to try to avoid what already is highly likely - that Obama will be seen as a great, significant President. Look how hard they worked to redefine Reagan over the last several decades. Obama, who will still be young when his term ends, stands to be a powerful AMERICAN (not just Democratic) statesman for decades. That may be why they are working not just for short term Republican gain, but trying to prevent there being a popular ex-President. Here, they may be out of luck -- all you need to consider is how popular Bill Clinton is.

[brush]

40. Good post

I enjoyed reading your well-reasoned thoughts. I may be remembering wrong but I thought Clinton's "scandals" continued on into his second term. Maybe it was just the hearings.

Anyway, good analysis.

What are your thoughts on Snowden? He seems more a pawn of Glenn Greenwald and others who want to regurgitate this 6-year-old story to damage Obama than a lone wolf hero out to expose wrong doing.

[karynnj]

41. Thanks - and you are right the scandals continued though

for the most part, once Monica actually stuck, they were obsessed with that. There were, of course, other "scandals" but I think they were more like the Obama ones -- such as the entire Elian Gongales issue, the attack on the Cole ( the counterpart of Benghazi ) and several others.

I don't really know what to think of Snowden. From what is known, I think he is way over his head at this point - and may be facing a real world he hasn't faced before. It sounds like he was a computer nerd, naturally talented with little formal education. He sounds like he is one of the people who are followers of Ron Paul. Maybe he read and liked Ayn Rand.

But, it may be more complex as he did join the army and later the CIA.He would have been a high school kid at the time of 911 and just out of school when the Iraq War started. It could have been that he initially bought everything the Bush administration did - and then by 2008 had become strongly disaffected - and because of that supported the alternative (Obama).

I think his 2012 support of Ron Paul and his passion to expose what he thought was diametrically against what he believed in led to what he did -- and he did have in Greenwald someone with a vested self interest to encourage him along. I suspect that he knew relatively little about the history of any of these programs or of any of the controls that limit the use of the data. Not to mention, Snowden, sitting at his terminal, likely had more easy ability to misuse the data - pulling records he had no authority to pull than President Obama, who would have had to have someone issue a request had. This in fact may have made him think the program more invasive than it really is.

Privacy is a weird issue as most of us have very voluntarily given up a huge amount of it by posting on boards, blogging, and - even more - on social media. Connecting with like minds and keeping in touch all reduce privacy, but give enough back that the trade off is acceptable. I look at the two issues through whether people voluntarily gave up their privacy. In the cases described they did.

On the phone records - I knew from the time I first got a phone line back in 1972 that AT&T collected the data that is now controversial when it went to the government. I knew that -with cause - they would give it to law enforcement - and never thought anything troubling about that. I don't know if in the boiler plate that I signed when I got a phone whether I consented to this if the phone company was asked, but had it have been there, I would have agreed with no hesitation. The content of the call (not given with the Verizon feed) would likewise be assumed to be private unless a court requested otherwise.

The internet is a bit different. I have known for years that anything I posted anywhere might last forever. True of when I posted in Usenet parents and travel groups - and true on facebook. I have always realized that my identity could become known on places where I posted with user names. In DU2 I included my town in the profile and if someone who knew me saw many of my posts - I could easily be recognized. So, in some ways, all of this is fair game. It is not just the government who could google my name and find some hits! With email, you could say that there is always the risk of it being forwarded - which is why other than ease that I use it for some contacts, but the best analogue to it is a private letter. Here the content can be said to be private.

[John2]

31. Yep,

you are right, with their usual accomplices, known as the corporate media. The media gives these scandals the legs. They don't investigate anything unless it is beneficial to their agendas. A good reporter would find out the truth and let it go. If not all, most of these scandals have no merit, and just are the same old baseless attacks from Republicans. They are trying to find an issue for the upcoming Elections. Any smart voter, would ignore it, and make the Republicans accept their medicine in the Elections.

[factsarenotfair]

2. They've had a coordinated plan since the Powell Memorandum in the late seventies.

And they've been carrying it out relentlessly since then. Maybe they don't sleep!!!!!

[tridim]

3. This ratfucker has been mighty quiet lately...

[JustAnotherGen]

5. Well there was a bomb threat

On the Princeton Campus today! Maybe?


He gives me the eebie jeebies.

[leftynyc]

32. Perhaps having to pay a $100,000 fine

upset his sugar daddies.

http://news.yahoo.com/one-james-okeefes-acorn-videos-costing-him-100-221716337.html

[JustAnotherGen]

4. Feels like a new kind of

Shock and Awe. Ar minimum - an awful lot of jello seems to be getting thrown at the wall to see what sticks.

[still_one]

6. For all but the last one, this has to do with greenwald's obsession

with Obama, and also the msm

Nothing like this was done during bush when the patriot act was conceived, and even though the Dems do not have a majority they hold him to a much higher standard than bush

I understand the criticism of the president with the NSA, but what I do not understand is the presentation of it is in a bubble for the most part

I suspect the reason for that is because the media bear a large portion of the blame for giving bush a free pass and they do not want to trash themselves, I also suspect there is a sublime racial component to it

[SharonAnn]

28. Remember all the pseudo scandals during Clinton's last term? The GOP operatives were

at work full-time. Read "The Hunting of the President". You'll find out how much money and how many people can be poured into this kind of "hunting".

And here we have some real issues, as opposed to "Whitewater". "Paula Jones", etc.

[CTyankee]

34. seems to me that greenwald is looking out for greenwald.

make it while you can...

[DJ13]

7. Wouldnt it have made more sense to gin these 'scandals' up last year instead of now?

Or did the GOP power brokers really hate Romney so much they held off until he lost?

[tridim]

8. I think they just figured out that their party is in a death spiral.

And are now implementing their scorched-earth policy.

[pnwmom]

11. +1. n/t

[Cha]

14. They tried.. Benghazi!!111

[LeftInTX]

24. They thought they would win

They tried a few scandals: Fast and Furious etc. Then at the last minute Benghazi came along and they really tried with that one, but it didn't work.

They could have possibly pushed up the IRS scandal sooner, but the IRS stuff could have backfired on them. They have 18 months until elections, so if a scandal backfires there will be time to sweep it under the rug. If a scandal sticks, then they'll keep talking about it ad naseum.

[CTyankee]

35. well, at this point, all they CAN do is dirty up Obama's legacy. Or try to.

pretty desperate, but if that's all you've got, then you use it...

[msongs]

9. since none of them are particularly scandalous, no nt

[davidpdx]

43. It doesn't matter if they are true, it's about perception

Did we ever see a retraction from ABC on the lies they printed? No. Will we ever see a retraction of the connection that is being implied between the White House and the IRS? No. When the next scandal comes out you better believe they will be repeated verbatim as if they happened.

[Enrique]

10. GOP supports the NSA program

the revelations have put them in the awkward position of defending Obama.

[pnwmom]

12. Not the tea party-ers or the Beck followers. They're using this against Obama. n/t

[Enrique]

13. but the GOP establishment supports it

the big boys. Boehner most recently.

[AlinPA]

15. We can hardly call Boehner a "big boy" now nor claim that he is part of the "GOP establishment". The

teabaggers are the mainstream GOP and are the GOP establishment. Paul and Cruz are the big boys of the GOP now.

[Enrique]

18. the same GOP establishment that made Mitt Romney their nominee

they yelled nonstop for two years about Obamacare, and then the GOP establishment got them to nominate the guy that invented it.

[AlinPA]

23. But Cruz and Paul are now the GOP leaders while McConnell and Boehner are only helpless figureheads

in the party. Even Rubio has a better standing with the GOP than McConnell and Boehner.

[Chan790]

36. Things like this get said a lot...

it doesn't make them more true. McConnell? Maybe, he's a sitting duck with his approval rating.

Boehner still has the means to crush those that oppose him as long as he can keep Cantor to his side. If Boehner wants something passed and Cruz, Rubio or Paul blew it up...they'd learn exactly how much seniority and influence carry the day in DC and how little they really have.

[Cali_Democrat]

16. Boehner is virtually powerless at this point.

He has no control over his caucus.

[Enrique]

19. yeah i heard about how the Tea Partiers were going to replace him as speaker

but then they didn't.

[Cali_Democrat]

20. But he's still powerless

The GOP caucus is like lord of the flies

[davidpdx]

44. I agree

And I'd be willing to wager that whether the Republicans keep their majority in the House or become the minority again, Boehner is going to step aside. Which means we'll be dealing with a bigger dick them him.

[sigmasix]

29. Baggers and becksters hate life itself

The teabaggers and glenn beck freedumb lovers hate this president without reason- why would anyone want to pretend that they are fair or even human?
Teabaggers aren't real Americans. Followers of glenn beck aren't real Americans either. The real question becomes; how do we clean America's right wing war on America up? And what should be done with the racist morons that keep destroying thier own country to spite black Americans and the POTUS.
Freedom is difficult to inculcate and nourish.
Freedumb is something Glenn Beck and other teabaggers want for America. It's pretty easy to describe and identify: we know it is an antiAmerican movement involving willful ignorance and racist stupidity.

[Recursion]

38. But Obama called for the "war on terror" to be wound down 2 weeks ago

My guess is this is a shot across his bow from some people who don't like that

[savalez]

21. You think?

May 17, 2013

"Conservative Advice To GOP: Don't Legislate, Focus On Scandals"

Heritage Action, the political activist offshoot of the conservative Heritage Foundation, has some advice for House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor: focus on the scandals plaguing the Obama administration and stay away from legislation that could "highlight major schisms" within the House Republican Conference.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/05/17/184824660/advice-to-gop-dont-legislate-focus-on-scandals

[watrwefitinfor]

22. .

[emulatorloo]

27. YES - Heritage Foundation laid it all out for all to see.

[davidpdx]

45. Yep, right out in open public

How could you be any more obvious? Send a blimp up and write it in the sky maybe.

People around here say, "oh it doesn't matter because none of it is true". Well I agree none of it is true (aside from this latest stuff with the NSA which is still not completely clear). Does it matter? Yes, it does. Perception and sound bites. That's exactly what most people hear.

[UCmeNdc]

47. Agree

[Rosa Luxemburg]

25. yes

[Sunlei]

33. enought that old murdock had to cut out the R cancer and spawn a new Rnews corp.(yesterday?)

all those on the 'old payroll' are getting 'romneyed' soon.

[Recursion]

37. Hmm... 2 weeks after Obama gives a speech calling for the AUMF to be overturned

Totally got to be a coincidence, you know?

[JoePhilly]

42. Its ScandalGate!!!

The GOP has no ideas, they lost the election, and so their current obstruction tactic is SCANDAL!!!!

The media is looking at a VERY SLOW news summer. Economy is improving. Wars winding down. How do we get eyeballs? SCANDAL!

And then there are the perpetually disgruntled. Obama needed to be primaried. Didn't happen. Obama was never going to get us out of Iraq, til he did. Never end DADT, til he did. And he hasn't cut SS yet as predicted. The outrage doesn't just make itself ... SCANDAL!

They will all get tired by July.

[davidpdx]

46. ScandleGate is right

Here on DU we have people that are falling for it too. Chicken little: "the sky is falling"