Congratulations to all Dems. especially the ones on D.U.

[busterbrown]

who have gone way over the top in pinning the current fucked up electronic Surveillance program to President Obama’s lapel.

Thanks for giving the Republican’s and their guaranteed nominee Chris Christie plenty of ammunition
to go after any Democrat who becomes our nominee for Pres in 2016..
Get this straight... this is not an Obama Administration problem but rather its a Democratic Party problem which will follow any Candidate running in the 2014 or 16 election..

Instead of cutting this story off at its head and calling the new allegations old news and just a repeat of Bush policies, Many on DU seemed to take viscous aim at our president as though they have been waiting patiently almost 5 years to nail him.

I’m calling this bunch, Humanists Libertarians.The type of person who believes govt. should be of some help to the needy but only to a defined limit.. Most of all should stay the fuck out of everything but policing our immediate borders.. Outraged at any and all CIA, National Security programs, because that could mean that they actually could by law investigate us..”U.S. Citizens”!! Outrageous!

Yea attack Obama and watch Christie’s Stock rise.. To be supported by all Republicans moderate or extreme, religious fundamentalists, Teabaggers, Xenophobes, Racists so called Libertarian Dems and
to be funded by Corporations, Wall street and Banks.. Oh I forgot, Two Scalia like Supreme Court Nominees.. This is some scary freaking stuff.. Makes the prism issue look like a petting zoo!

By the way have you notice that Bush’s approval ratings have risen ...I’m just saying,it seems to fit in somehow...but I guess one has to consider the source..
http://www.gallup.com/poll/163022/former-president-george-bush-image-ratings-improve.aspx

[morningfog]

1. Ohhh. Scare pimping over individual rights.

Weak ass sauce.

[derby378]

3. I don't believe it...

You and I actually agree on something.

[morningfog]

29. It was bound to happen eventually.

[Skittles]

7. it's all about Obama's image, dontcha know?

nothing else matters

[busterbrown]

12. Says nothing about Obama’s image.

Says plenty about perceived Democratic image in the upcoming elections..

[Skittles]

48. riiiiiiiiight

[Laelth]

115. Indeed it does say plenty about the Party's image.

I am quite concerned about the Democratic Party here. If the President doesn't get out in front of this thing and stand up for the rights of American citizens, the Republicans will pin this mess on him and it will probably hurt the Party.

He's better off (and we'll all be better off) if he comes out against spying and in favor of the Constitution.

-Laelth

[AndyA]

158. The reaction to the problem will make all the difference

If President Obama and the Democrats defend it, or say or do nothing about it, it will be a very poor reflection on all of them and yes, it will hurt them in future elections.

If they get out in front of it, deal with it, remind everyone that this all began under Bush, how difficult it is to throttle down things like this, it's wrong, we must be Constitutional, etc., then it will reflect positively on them and won't deteriorate their support.

But...whatever they do, they need to do it quickly, as the right is going to frame this in the best way possible for them and run with it. I think Obama has been slow to react in the past, he should know that isn't always best. He needs to get the facts, then move quickly.

[Laelth]

160. Hear, hear! n/t

-Laelth

[busterbrown]

163. I so agree with you..

They need to move on this Now..If they don’t the message will be controlled by the right wing during the campaigns... We all know how fast Lies travel...especially with a lazy MSM..

[cherokeeprogressive]

56. Screw our individual rights. We gotta make the most handsomest President in history look good.

THAT'S the kind of stuff we should be talking about.

[Aerows]

68. Scheduling Skittles

for an ass-kicking because Skittles dared to tell the truth

[Initech]

165. No it's about protecting Bush's image.

After all he's the 9/11 president. I'm sure the media and the billionaires couldn't give less of a shit about what happens to Obama's image.

[emulatorloo]

9. Agreed.

[Mojorabbit]

32. Pitiful isn't it? nt

[Aerows]

70. Absolutely pitiful n/t

[Aerows]

67. My first thoughts

It's ridiculous the lengths some will go to. I believe in civil rights, but I also believe in Constitutional rights. It isn't an either/or proposition.

[busterbrown]

97. This is what I mean..

I wonder if this same spike occurred in 2006?
http://www.latimes.com/features/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-nsa-surveillance-puts-george-orwells-1984-on-bestseller-lists-20130611,0,5672562.story

[Andy823]

2. Excellent points

I could not have said it better myself, thank you.

[Autumn]

4. I say, pin it on whoever it takes to put an end to it.

Obamas not going to be President forever. This needs to be ended.

[Aerows]

71. amen n/t

[Laelth]

116. I'd much rather it got pinned on the Republicans.

At this point, Obama still has a chance to take control of the issue. If he can merely come out against the spying and stand up for the Constitution, he can take this issue away from Republicans and position the Democratic Party for major gains in 2014 and beyond.

It's always safe to bet on the Constitution.

-Laelth

[Autumn]

124. I wanted it pinned right on Bushs back, but that didn't happen.

[Laelth]

125. So did I, of course.

I'd be happy, at this point, if it could be pinned on the Republican Party, but, in order to do that, President Obama must stand up for the people and for the Constitution.

It will take a lot of courage. I do not envy him.

-Laelth

[Abq_Sarah]

187. It's far too late for that

Who has been President since January of 2009? Who is one of the few people in Washington who actually knows what the NSA has been doing?

I'm not going to play the "President Obama didn't know" or the "President Obama couldn't do anything" game because I actually have enough respect for him NOT to to make him out to be the most incompetent and clueless man alive.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

5. Denied

Last I checked, I wasn't spying on innocents--the President was. Take your complaints to him, where they belong.

[reformist2]

6. Worrying about Obama's approval ratings is kind of low on my list of priorities.

[MotherPetrie]

8. If it happens on Obama's watch, he owns it. Just like Bush owned it before him.

[treestar]

28. LOL

Presidential Derangement Syndrome!

Only the Presidents act in law passage and government. Everything else is ignored.

[MotherPetrie]

36. So, it was only bad when it happened under BUSH. Got it.

[treestar]

39. It was the law under Bush and continues to be the law under Obama

and may well be the law under the next President!

There are other people besides the Presidents who help make the laws. New ones don't get to sweep it all aside. Or there would have been no welfare paid out during the Bush Administration.

Geez!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

85. OK, this time I know you're just joking

It's not compulsory for Obama to use FISA to its full extent, and in fact, it is immoral for him not to stop the NSA from spying on Americans with no probable cause. Obama also has a law at his disposal that allows him to kill US citizens if he feels they present enough of a danger. Although he shouldn't be doing that at all, he's obviously not pushing that law to its full extent.

I'll admit, I almost thought you were serious for a minute. I'm learning.

[Laelth]

117. Precisely.

As the Chief Executive, Obama could order the NSA to stop collecting the data. No Congressional approval required.

-Laelth

[napoleon_in_rags]

57. The OP ends saying that Bush's approval ratings have been rising.

That's what has me scratching my head in confusion here. Well yeah, this whole thing looks like a vindication of Bush's policies. Obama's credibility is leaking into Bush.

[marions ghost]

118. On Morning Ho (which I never watch)

they were promoting the "Bush looks better now " meme for the terminally stupid to lap up.



Edit: change Joe to Ho

[niyad]

10. as a matter of curiosity, how can one take "viscous" aim at something?

Last edited Tue Jun 11, 2013, 11:26 PM - Edit history (1)

[Aerows]

76. Oily proposition at that :D

But I'll suspend my disbelief.

[Jamastiene]

91. ...

[BainsBane]

11. Sure because we decide political elections right here

DU is all powerful.

[busterbrown]

13. Ah, The Libertarians are out tonight...

[BainsBane]

17. First time I've been called that

Everyday is an opportunity for something new here on DU.

Me thinks you have a inflated view of the importance of this website. You do know Obama isn't running in 2016, right? Additionally, the idea that Christie could get through a GOP primary strikes me as unlikely. It won't be a campaign issue unless the GOP candidate opposes such surveillance, which few do. Rand Paul is an exception.

[busterbrown]

21. It won’t be about the truth.. It will be about lie after lie which will last through the entire

cycle.. Takes 2 weeks to debunk the lies.. Especially since the bulk of today’s Media is incompetent..

[BainsBane]

45. You think the GOP needs us to make up lies?

[Aerows]

77. LMAO

Asking a Republican if they need to lie is like asking if a fish needs water.

[busterbrown]

18. Are we not reminded, that everything starts at the local level?

Internate anti Obama banter is in the long run great new for republicans..

Lets see... Many states are now receiving extra Medicaid dollars from the Fed... I am now on one of the programs which can save me from financial disaster...

Don’t most republicans promise to gut Obamacare?
What about Medicare and SS? Feel good about that?

[BainsBane]

25. because I object to wire tapping

doesn't make me a Republican. People seem to be unable to distinguish concern for a political issue from lack of support for Obama or the Democratic Party. Your position strikes me as just as absurd as those here calling for Obama's impeachment or declaring him to Hitler.

[busterbrown]

51. Please get this straight..

Although I do think this is an old story and I’d like very much for Obama to speak out on aspects of
wire tapping collection... This is not about Obama.. For me this about you guys making it easier for
a complete sweep of the House, Senate and White House by 2016 by republicans and then topping it off with two Scalia like appts. to the Supreme Court... Scary shit..

That is what this is about!!

[BainsBane]

54. If all you care about is a D or an R after someone's name

and not principal, that is meaningless. I'm not on the payroll of a political party. I care about the country, not the fortune of the political elite. Supporting the same policies Bush implemented as long as it's a Democrat in office at the time is hypocritical and renders politics nothing more than a meaningless contest between political elites.
That's an empty game that doesn't interest me.

[Aerows]

78. Well said n/t

[sigmasix]

92. but that isnt what is happening, is it?

These programs arent the same ones the Shrub used to hurt America- and you know this- Obama is using legal tools in our arsenal for defense of America. You know...judges and laws and stuff? Not one credible "journalist" is claiming the president is spying on Americans willy nilly, yet this is the claim being supported by right wing "news", corporate media outlets and courageous, non-thinking, freedumb lovers.
This silly notion that both parties are the same is another right wing talking point designed to reduce voter turn out and destroy American cohesion.
I havent recently heard of any democratic politician suggesting medicare to be a tool of satan or supporting rolling back voting rights. Doesn't it suck when the reality-based world won't support your "game"?

[Aerows]

110. The hell he is

It is "legal" only because they weasel-worded it to be legal. That doesn't make it right anymore than eating babies is the right thing to do even if they made dining on them "legal".

[BainsBane]

111. Actually it appears that the program has expanded under Obama

PRISM was developed and implemented under Obama.

And the documents released suggest that. The fact those are legitimate is made evident by the fact no one in the federal government has denied their authenticity and instead commented on what a breach of security their release is.

It is completely false that no "credible journalist" has reported on this. The Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and the Guardian are all respected publications. It has also been discussed on the Charlie Rose show, also a respected outlet. Sometimes reality doesn't fit your narrow partisan goals. Either you deal with that or just admit principal doesn't matter.

Reduce voter turnout. What a pathetic canard. I do not adhere to the notion that tribal identity is more important than civil liberties and principal.

I'm not going to refrain from speaking out against injustice because it doesn't suit the interests of some rich politicians. If we don't care about the country, we care about nothing and politics is an empty contest for power and access to wealth.

[marions ghost]

119. Nah

"legal" doesn't make it right.

Wow, you buy the whole "security means no privacy" line of thought.

That is so short-sighted it's in the realm of religious fundamentalism. Blind allegiance to a cult leader.

[busterbrown]

145. You’ll care plenty..

If the next right wing Christie Administration...backed by a Right wing Court, goes after your Medicare and S.S. and heads this Country down a road to complete domination by a corporate Oligarchy...

Amazing how you can not see past your own intellectual justifications..

Dis you hear Chris Hayes say that if he was a republican strategist, this would be a major theme
he would use in the upcoming elections?

[BainsBane]

148. What is your compulsion

To stifle free speech?

[busterbrown]

149. Compulsion of a balanced life..

Free Speech with the ability to take care of myself and family...Especially Heathcare..

[Skittles]

49. define "internate"

[Aerows]

79. I'm eager to hear what that means, too n/t

[Art_from_Ark]

90. I'm thinking it means "between two or more Nates"

But for the life of me, I can't figure out who these "Nates" are

[Jamastiene]

94. I think it goes along with "viscous."

Apparently, if we don't want to be spied on by our own government, it means we are viscously, internately criticizing President Obama.

[Aerows]

105. LMAO

viscously and internately.

[Jamastiene]

106. And now, descent.

Post 104 talking about descent. This thread is turning into one of those long fun threads.

[Aerows]

109. It's really sinking low

LOL. I don't have a dissenting opinion on that one

[busterbrown]

139. Got me on a spelling error.

Great work buddy! People like you are annoying...Take up space!!

[Skittles]

147. no

people who think civil liberties are trivial are annoying

[question everything]

14. What is stupid are all the posts and cartoons

across the media talking about the NSA "reading" one's e-mails.

It does not. The data are metadata - looking for trends, not for individual phone calls or emails. If it did, there would be a lot more invasion of privacy.

But it seems that so many are so sure that they understand the topic.

NSA activities are legal. Leaking the information is not.

[Aerows]

80. How about

Uh, no. You don't have probable cause to record everything a person does via personal communication. The government has never had that right, and never will, and a flimsy warrant that captures everybody's data "just because" isn't just cause. It's horseshit to call that a warrant.

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. you got McCain, Graham and Boehner and several other prominent Republicans defending the NSA

surveillance program and calling for Snowden's head on a pike. This is not an issue the Republicans are going to run on - because - How can every terrorist act from Boston to Benghazi be Obama's fault if Obama is overstepping on fighting terrorism? Pushing this story undermines the right-wing mime that Obama and the Democrats are terrorist sympathizer or at least soft on terrorism. Outside of limited circles like the Rand Paul wing - I doubt we will see many Republicans wanting to make much out of it. This scandal causes way too much cognitive dissonance for the right-wing mind.

[busterbrown]

19. Not by election time. Then it will reappear with some new twists...Guaranteed!

[Douglas Carpenter]

23. for at least 50 years it has been the Republican mime that Democrats are soft on fighting the enemy

(whoever that enemy happened to be at that moment) - They are not going to push the mime that Democrats are overstepping and that they are the card carrying ACLUers all worried about civil liberties.. That blows their entire self-image.

[Aerows]

112. I agree with you totally

but it's "meme" not mime. A mime is a person that is silent and makes boxes out of air. A meme is a trending theme.

[jstone]

16. Where is Ed Schultz?

Off subject, but Where is Ed Schultz?

He has missed all scheduled work for over a week now!

Will he next reappear on Al Jezeera America?

[question everything]

22. His show is now on weekend afternoons (nt)

[jstone]

100. Schultz is missing from radio and tv

Ed Schultz has not been on his radio program for the last 7 broadcasts
He ran out of guest hosts and had reruns on Mon and Tue

He was a no-show for both of his MSNBC weekend shows this weekend - guest host

No explanations

[marions ghost]

120. Vacation?

---

[jstone]

189. Ed Shultz is sill missing from ALL programs

Schultz has missed another audio board at his morning 8 in a row
He also, in less than a month on a new show, missed the WHOLE WEEKEND.

NO EXPLANATIONS AT ALL -- TOTAL SILENCE

Is he negotiation with Al Jazeera America?

Is he having a Limbaugh druggie problem?

Mental breakdown?

Speak up Ed and tell your audience

Why the silence?

[Apophis]

20. What a stupid OP.

Trash.

[busterbrown]

24. Explain why this does not help Republican nominees in 2014 and 2016..

[reformist2]

27. Who cares??? By your line of reasoning, we would never discuss government corruption ever again.

[treestar]

26. Or 2014

The libertarians are industriously trying to get us to forget all about that. Of course an R Congress is not going to repeal these laws. So if they really cared, they'd be working for a more D Congress. The ODS is obvious, Obama could sign a repeal and there is nothing to say he wanted. I don't think they care a whit about the issues.

[busterbrown]

30. I don’t think Obama could sign a repeal..

[treestar]

44. He might. He sounded open on the question

Unlike these ridiculous reactions, he's not rabidly in favor of it. Not like Republicans would be:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251310274

Now, having said all that, you'll remember when I made that speech a couple of weeks ago about the need for us to shift out of a perpetual "war mindset", I specifically said that one of the things we are going to have to discuss and debate is how are we striking this balance between the need to keep the American people safe and our concerns about privacy. Because, there are some trade-offs involved. I welcome this debate. And I think its healthy for our democracy, I think its a sign of maturity. Because probably 5 years ago, 6 years ago, we might not have been having this debate. And I think its interesting that theres some folks on the left but also some folks on the right who are now worried about it... who weren't very worried about it when it was a Republican President. I think thats good that we are having this discussion. But I think its important for everybody to understand, and I think the American people to understand, that there are some trade-offs involved.

[mick063]

31. If this is what it takes to chase pseudo Republicans out of the Democratic leadership

Then that is what it takes.


A few years of Tea Party rule will have folks clamoring for a real Democrat soon enough.

Obama brought us Mitt's cabinet, Nixon's transparency, Reagan's economic vision, and W's surveillance.

I'm not going to cry over missing out on the chance to bring in another like him.

We could do a lot worse than Christie and that is speaking for both parties.

[busterbrown]

34. You heard it here first!!

“We could do a lot worse than Christie and that is speaking for both parties”

WTF.... At least your honest!!

Guess you don’t care about the repeal of the A.H.A.... Or S.S. or Medicare..

[Andy823]

46. Yep I heard it

But I don't believe it. Any damned republican that gets into office is going to take this country right back to the Bush days. Nothing like taking two step forward and 20 back!

I have read a lot of stuff in the last week here, but "We could do worse than Christie" has got to take the cake. I read in another thread that a bunch of democrats are backing him for his run for governor and that really sounded insane, but as far as I am concerned any democrat that runs would be better than Christie! Christie is smart, cunning and dangerous as hell. He is kissing up to all the right people and pulling a con job on anyone who will listen. From the above comment it seems he has already got supporters here!

[marions ghost]

121. Ditto that

watch out for the Christie pushers...

[Andy823]

134. Not just Christie pushers

There is a poll on the board asking who you stand behind, President Obama or Rand Paul. Last time I looked 5 people had picked Rand, and I am sure there are many more of them here. There have been a lot of new posters in the last few weeks, and some of their comments are so obvious, anti Obama, anyone can see just what they are doing, yet they are still here, and are still stirring up trouble on a daily basis.

The right wing trolls are here to stay, and their job is simple, divide people, stir up shit, and make the democrats look as messed up and divided as the republicans are. They want people to stay home next year, it worked for them in 2010 and they are using the same tactics again.

[marions ghost]

146. Yep

I've noticed the Rand Paul contingent also. They're taking advantage of the critique of Obama on this NSA thing and they'll be pushing their candidates anyway they can as 2014 gets closer. On the other hand you have to allow for genuine critique of Obama from Dems. Telling the diff is not too hard.

We just have to keep playing whack-a-mole.

[LondonReign2]

167. Pointing to possibly the stupidest poll in DU history

as a point in your favor isn't going to help you.

[sadbear]

42. After 8 years of the worst president in history, we got Obama.

After a few years of Tea Party rule, the "folks" would be happy to get W back in office.

[Aerows]

82. I wouldn't go that far

I'm pissed about the spying, but that doesn't mean I ever want a Republican at the reins.

You are out of your mind if you want that kind of destruction for your nation - I sure as hell don't.

[rhett o rick]

33. The president has made his own bed. He has repeatedly embraced and extended the Patriot Act.

If that helps Christie, then the blame is with Pres Obama not those that are against the Act.

Some are saying that his use of the Patriot Act far exceeds the wildest dreams of Bush and those that wrote the Patriot Act.

Think about how crazy it is to blame those that want to curtail the Constitutional violations of the current domestic spying, for any damage it may do to Democrats. If Democrats want to do well in 2016, they ought to stop acting like Republicans and dump the damn Patriot Act and domestic spying.

There is an old saying that people will choose a Republican over a Democrat that acts like a Republican.

[busterbrown]

35. Then the Republicans quickly claim that Democrats are once again weak on

National Security Issues... You guys are just playing into their hands..

I’m at war with these pricks and will not give them an inch!!

[bowens43]

155. How sad that you value partisan politics over freedom

[LondonReign2]

168. Indeed

This concept that violations of the Constitution are okay as long as my team is winning are nauseating

[Just Saying]

37. EXACTLY

It's not that this is right necessarily but that the law allowing this was passed by CONGRESS back in 2001! This is nothing new. And I've seen several articles saying Obama pushed to extend this years ago. How is this a scandal? How do you blow the whistle on a law that's been around over a decade?

[G_j]

38. unrec

maybe take a break from complaining about other peoples opinions, and come on down to NC and see what it's like on the front lines of the REAL battle with the GOP!

[marions ghost]

122. yeah

[Marrah_G]

40. I bet your opinion would change if it was a republican in the WH

[busterbrown]

50. When was the last time a republican did anything about our healthcare situation.

When was the last freaking time a Republican tried to do anything at all to push back with a Dept Of
Consumer Affairs..Or attempted a Stimulus Program to help the economy.. All those fuckers did was
destroy 5 million Public Sector Jobs..

Tell me the last time a Republican President did anything positive for this Country...

You have Republican’s in the House that are stating that “obama should be called out for spending too much money on Climate Change Programs... From fucking Oklahoma no less.

Damn right I’d call out a Republican on anything.. They suck..

[Marrah_G]

52. So transparent

[busterbrown]

53. That I think Republican’s inherently are slowly but surely destroying the country..?

Sure you shouldn’t be on World Net Daily?

Yea, I’m giving in on this one because.I’m not giving these guys an inch!!

[Notafraidtoo]

41. I agree many have gone over the top but

I like Obama but i hate the policy and have for Seven years,I would be a hypocrite to change my mind about it now not that i would want to. I also think if a Republican candidate is against the snooping the Dem will be against it too,If the republican candidate is for it the Dem will be for it too just because its the safest bet.

As we have seen with every president ever once they are in office then they really choose what they are going to do. the campaign is often filled with just telling us what they think will get them elected.

As for being a libertarian i am far from it, i really like government when it works which in my opinion is rather often considering,I think the most important role of democratic government is community liberty that means regulating those that infringe on others with pollution or abuse of power etc. with safety being a close second,I think spying on american citizen's with out probable cause is a over reach.

[LittleBlue]

43. We pinned it on him?

Falsely accused? Really?

You're right, he had nothing to do with it.

[busterbrown]

47. Who the heck said “falsely accused”?

You’re pinning the idea that he is solely responsible for this situation...
And thats exactly what 2016 Republican politics want..

Obama spied on your internet!! Now take 3 weeks of news cycles to prove me wrong.

[LittleBlue]

58. "And thats exactly what 2016 Republican politics want.. "

Tell Obama to stop giving Republicans what they want

Buck stops with him, as the saying goes.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. You left out President Palin and "not as bad".

Getting desperate in trying to justify the unjustifiable?

[busterbrown]

59. Conflating Palin with Christi?

Talking about being in the middle...of nothing..

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

61. Conflating criticism of Obama's policies with a Christy win?

Talk about overlooking the way the government is run when it spies on its own people.

[busterbrown]

95. So you feel Obama is solely responsible for Prism?

And are you alluding to collection of data or the actual listening to phone calls. You are aware that a judge must give approval for such action I hope..

[Vinnie From Indy]

60. WTF?

Your post is far more insulting to Pres. Obama than those folks who rightly pin this on his lapel. The logic of your post is that Obama is completely powerless or ignorant. He isn't either of those things and it is our duty as citizens AND Dems to express our frustration and disapproval. That is the honorable thing to do. Your post dishonors our President.

Cheers!

[busterbrown]

66. Boy are you seeing what you want to see..

Where did I say he was" powerless and ignorant”.. Read the thing again..
My post is about how those are BLAMING Obama for the current situation are helping Republican’s prepare for the 2016 elections..

My friend, even Chris Hayes stated on his dhow on Friday that Republicans would be wise to use these
argument against Obama in the 2o16 elections.. That pissed me off. That Hayes would publicly give
Republican campaign strategy... He did say they were lies , but he still said it.

And finally on your last line. You should be more careful of unsubstantiated attacks on someone you don’t know.. I won’t even comment on it.. But you couldn’t be more incorrect.. Wise Up

[Number23]

62. Wrong!

Many on DU seemed to take viscous aim at our president as though they have been waiting patiently almost 5 years to nail him.

Many of these lunatics took aim at the man before he'd even been sworn in on January 2009.

[liberal_at_heart]

63. that bullying tactic doesn't work. I will always question my government, no matter who is president.

[Union Scribe]

64. It won't be a problem for our candidates

if they do what is right and oppose NSA overreach. Pretty simple if you ask me. The best way to not give the GOP ammo is not to support horrible policies that inevitably backfire.

[busterbrown]

69. How come none of you guys never but never talk about congressional oversight!!

It’s always Obama, like he’s got a magic wand!!
Can you imagine if Obama dismantled this program and shortly after there was some sort of Terrorist attack on our soil... Right Wing Repubs. would control our govt. for at least a decade,

[Union Scribe]

72. Lol. Pretty sure I didn't mention Obama at all.

Unless he's running again??

I AM talking about congressional candidates, and the fact that the Democratic party can't be "pinned" with a spying scandal if they reject instead of defend the spying.

[busterbrown]

73. My Mistake...I think I’m tired.....

[Union Scribe]

75. No prob

We all want Dems in power. You're worried about anything messing that up, I get it. G'night.

[busterbrown]

81. Your reply was like a shot of Caffein. I’m up and ready to go again..

Hold it.Where am I ?. Whats going on here..?

[sabrina 1]

65. Anyone who has done nothing wrong has nothing to worry about.

But when it comes to our individual Constitutional Rights do NOT expect people to remain silent. You will be very disappointed.

Bush's ratings are going up because this program has VINDICATED him, and if you don't believe that, you have not been listening to people like Ari Fleischer who thanked the President 'for having the wisdom to retain Bush's policies and for protecting the American people'. Same thing with Peter King. Don't worry, Obama's ratings are going up with Republicans. THAT is what you should be worried about.

[busterbrown]

83. i’m just saying that anything said bad about Obama especially from Dems...

Will come back and haunt our nominee in2016.. They will twist, distort and lie about anything they can lay their hands on. And it will take several news cycles to debunk their crap.. Some of it will stick..

Chris Hayes even said on Friday that Republicans should use this situation, even though they are lying..

[sabrina 1]

87. Well, I'm sorry about that. But when our Constitutional Rights are at stake politicians become

very minor concerns unless they are fighting those who are violating them. I'm not sure why you are concerned about 2016 right now aanyhow. That's always the excuse given to silence people when such important issues need to be resolved 'there is an election coming up, wait until after it'. Well frankly I'm not in the least concerned right now about 2016, other than demanding that by 2016 spying on the American people will be history.

Any Democrat who right now stands up against these horrible Bush policies, will get my support in 2016. Anyone who right now remains silent or supports them, will not.

So if you are worried about 2016, then encourage Democrats to do what is right and stand up against these Bush policies. So far, I see a few speaking out. I hope they run for the WH and I hope to see more.

This is not about any one politician or party, this is way, way more important than that. I expect MY party to defend and protect the US Constitution as they swore to do. If they do not, they are betraying their oaths of office, it is that simple.

[marions ghost]

123. Yep

This is a deal breaker as far as I'm concerned. Supporters of the continuation of these surveillance policies will not get my vote.

[Aerows]

74. This is all a variation of

you never really loved him type of crap. The spying is wrong, it was wrong under Bush, and it's wrong under Obama. WRONG. Period.

I voted for the man twice, but that doesn't make him infallible. And on this bullshit, he's wrong. He needs to put a stop to it, and Congress needs to repeal the "Patriot" Act because it's anything but patriotic. It's despotic.

[busterbrown]

86. obama repeals it and there is a subsequent terrorist attack on U.S. soil...No matter what the

size or damage,The House, Senate and Presidency would be controlled by right wingers for at least 2 election cycles. Not to mention a 6/3 Supreme Court.. Scalia minded..
That scares the shit out of me..

[Aerows]

103. If I can't criticize a Democratic President's

decision on occasion without it resulting in a Republican win, then I might as well never stand in a voting booth.

You are conflating criticism with being a Republican, instead of just acknowledging this is a bullshit policy. I can say something is a bullshit policy without being a Republican, right? I can say that Obama is not right on this issue without being a Republican, right?

Good grief.

[busterbrown]

107. Yea you can.. But the low information voter will be reminded of Obama’s evilness

that he personally was listening to the calls and many will believe that extreme lie..
It’s not about our criticism its about how our criticism will be used against our candidates in 2014 and 2016.

[Aerows]

108. Defending the indefensible

because it is politically convenient may be your gig, but it's not and never will be mine.

[Bluenorthwest]

150. What if our candidate is one of those offering criticism? Many Democrats are doing so

and asking challenging questions as well. Both of my Senators are on that list. Both Democrats. It's not as if our nominee is predestined to be some Blue Bagger or Tea Dog centrist kissing up to the right wing full time. Lots of Republicans are standing up for these programs, right along with you.
I agree with my own elected Democrats. You agree with let's say, Dianne Feinstein. That that's the primary question. More of the DiFi flavored past, or do we move on and get some progress and stop being a Bush stupid nation?

[busterbrown]

152. The first stage in getting a smarter nation is not to allow the right wing ..

to occupy the White House...

[Bluenorthwest]

161. Many Democrats are critical of these policies, kiddo, and one of them could be the

Democratic nominee instead of one of the right leaning centrist Blue Baggers.
You are incapable or unwilling to have a discussion. We already have a word salad bar at DU.

[Initech]

84. I'll keep repeating this until I am blue in the face: Obama is being framed for Bush's crimes!!!!!

That is what they set out to do from day one, and that's exactly what is happening with this NSA bullshit. After 9/11 the republicans and George Bush passed the Patriot Act blindly and greatly expanded the NSA's warrantless wiretapping abilities 10 fold. Now that Obama's used it, the Republicans are trying to pin what Bush passed on him. It's incredibly fucked up.

[busterbrown]

88. Thats exactly what I’m posting and reposting..

What you stated is whats expected from the right wing scum.. The fact that some on our side are repeating the crap about how now Obama owns this situation is crap.

All they are doing is giving the enemy material to use in the next two election cycles.
And like you I’ll repeat this until I’m purple in the face. The idea of a Republican right wing controlled House, Senate and Presidency(Christie) along with a 6/3 right wing S.C is an absolute fucking horror situation..
Say good night to anything which might have been a beginning of change in this country. Including the Affordable Healthcare Act, which has already begun to help millions..
I’m not giving an inch to these morons..

[Initech]

89. Oh hell yes.

But I'm far more worried about a Rand Paul or Paul Ryan getting in the white house than a Chris Christie. Those morons would make George Bush look like Abe Lincoln by comparison. The worst thing that could possibly happen is that we elect a president sponsored by the Heritage Foundation, Koch assholes, etc.

[busterbrown]

93. You might be right but those guys don’t play as well to moderate republicans especially woman..

They would win perhaps a primary but would have trouble in the election. Corporations would also have a little trouble supporting the Paul’s because of their anti choice/woman values..
I worry about Christie because Dems.in N.J. are already supporting him and moderate Repubs love him.
Corporations, Banks and wall street will flood him with money...
If elected he will turn on everyone..

[bowens43]

156. What is incredibly fucked up

Is that so many dems are defending this because it's Obama so hypocritical

[Initech]

164. That's pissing me off too.

The Patriot Act was pretty much blindly passed not even two weeks after 9/11 with almost no Congressional oversight. And now we're seeing the end result of this. And who gets blamed? Obama. Who should get blamed? The BFEE.

[Bluenorthwest]

170. But that was Obama's idea, 'turn the page and look forward not back' he said when

the people wanted investigations of Bush. At the time, I said this would happen. Any fool knew that it would but he's the President.

[Egalitarian Thug]

96. Seems like some really smart, super-dimensional genius might have seen this coming

and headed it off by taking the subtle position that wrong is wrong and stopped doing it.

But, I guess we're stuck with two options. Either the Democratic leadership are so stupid that being able to control their drooling when the cameras are on is the limit of their capacity, or that they really don't give a shit about the people that vote for them.

[busterbrown]

101. I would have hoped that Congress would have taken such steps. But the dems are such cowards!

By the way,I wonder if there was the same spike in 2006?
http://www.latimes.com/features/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-nsa-surveillance-puts-george-orwells-1984-on-bestseller-lists-20130611,0,5672562.story

[Bluenorthwest]

157. Tuesday, December 5, 2006

Washington, DC - U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) today announced his intention to vote against and support efforts to filibuster the conference report reauthorizing the USA Patriot Act, citing concerns about numerous provisions that could compromise Americans' privacy rights that would be made permanent under the legislation. Specifically, Wyden announced his intention today to oppose the legislation because it does not include sunsets for controversial powers and diminishes congressional oversight over the government's use of these powers. "The current version of the report strikes the wrong balance between security and civil liberties and leaves Congress with inadequate oversight," said Wyden. "Just as troubling is the inclusion of new language that will make it much more difficult for law-abiding Americans to defend themselves from possible Patriot Act abuses. These unjustified changes do not make the Patriot Act a more effective tool for fighting terrorism and in fact, make it more susceptible to abuse. I will vote against the current version of the legislation and support efforts to block its passage."

Of course Senator Obama voted Yes on reauthorizing the USA Patriot Act in 2006. The No votes:
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Murray (D-WA)
Wyden (D-OR)

[busterbrown]

162. Ten?

[Bluenorthwest]

174. Yep, two of which are still on the job and opposing this crap, you of course are not

pleased they are doing so, and are complaining about it. You are on both sides of the issue, calling Democrats cowards for not opposing it, then calling the ones who did and do oppose it Republican dupes. Basically, you dislike all Democrats save one.

[busterbrown]

175. Boy do make stuff up in your own mind.

10 out of 52? Give me a break.. When I call Dems cowards, I’m referring to Blue Dogs and there are plenty of those around.. I support every Democrat who votes for progressive legislation.Including Healthcare reform and protecting S.S and Medicare..
I just want to make sure the Presidency remains in the hands of A DEMOCRAT... My strategy is not to give them an inch. I support those who voted no in 2006 but there were not enough. I support civil liberties.
I don’t support the Republican Party and I am only trying to prevent them from succeeding..
Obama has been a good President not great.. I don’t drink Kool Aid...

[peacebird]

102. So trying to reign in an over the top program makes US the bad guys? Really? I was against it

when shrub was in office. It was defanged but apparently went undercover and kept going in secret.

[busterbrown]

104. No, descent is important.. But extending the discussion how Obama owns this program hurts our cause

in 2014 and 16.. And thats a big deal.. Because we have allowed this discussion concerning how Obama
is the bad guy in all this. Republicans will use this discussion during primary season and tweak, distort
and lie about Obama’s role. It will take the lazy MSM 3 news cycles to figure out its all lies,, By then more is implanted in the low informed electorate. Its dangerous!

[LondonReign2]

171. He does own it

It may hurt the Democrats cause, but that is because they are acting like Republicans. Obama does own this thing, while he may not have started the program, he's happily continued it and is defending that action publicly. That makes it his as much as Shrub's.

[Laelth]

113. Sigh.

Obama has a choice here. He can either stand up for the status quo (in which case he will deserve to have this mess hung around his neck, to the detriment of us all and our party), or he can choose to stand up for the Constitution (which would distance him from the mess and generate global goodwill that may insure 40 years of Democratic dominance).

His choice, but time is running out for him to decide. The Republicans will succeed in pinning this on him if he doesn't come out against government spying soon.

-Laelth


Here's my historical argument on the subject: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022979078

[graham4anything]

126. How is time running out? He is not running for office, though I myself would instantly vote for him.

and all it will lead to is LOL

everyone saying we should have voted for Hillary

and guess what

in short time we will!



Hillary/Booker 2016

Look what the waste of time did to Bill Clinton- it made him immortal
So I triple dog dare the anti-Obama people to do the same

Does one think Jeb Bush or Rand Paul will do anything different from W?

and the Ralph Nader court, how will they decide?

[Laelth]

128. I appreciate your stalwart defense of the President and the Democratic Party.

Really, I do.

That said, the Republicans will seize this issue and tie the whole mess around the necks of the Democratic Party unless the Party's leader, President Obama, gives us some cover and comes out against secrecy and suspicionless spying.

Here's why I think he should: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022979078

-Laelth

[graham4anything]

130. I am NOT a Jefferson supporter. He meant what he said when he said All MEN are created equal

He left out 82% of the 2013 democratic party when he wrote those words, which were far more important
than any of the later bill of rights.

He meant all MEN (NOT women) that looked and acted like him.

So, Jefferson means nothing to me, as he did not include me in his statement.

and maybe after the 2016 presidential election, then President Obama can get rid of the patriot act.

But, do you for a minute think any republican would instantly vote democratic in 2014 if Obama got rid of it now?

It would lead to a 100% republican victory (which is what Rand wants), because they would set up a friendly flag or something
and then say look what happened after the patriot act is repealed.

WHAT WOULD PETER KING DO? Ask him.
What he would do is what all would do.
It would be a republican massacre over the democratic party to do what you suggest.

However, 100% straight democratic voting, then let the new SCOTUS rule and have it on them.

Do you think Ralph Nader's picks for the court after 2000 will rule different?

If the President snapped his fingers and changed it, I bet SCOTUS would undo it now, and Obama then would be impeached.

And so would biden, and Eric Cantor or Paul Ryan would be President in 2015 after overthrowing Boehner.

[Laelth]

132. Yes, yes. Nobody's perfect. I do not expect "perfect" politicians.

The essay to which I referred you shows that Jefferson (pretty much single-handedly) preserved the Bill of Rights and definitely established the separation of powers promised by our Constitution. I am not asking you to worship at Jefferson's feet, but if you can not support these two Jeffersonian achievements, then you do not support the Constitution of the United States, and I have no use for you.

and maybe after the 2016 presidential election, then President Obama can get rid of the patriot act.

Given that President Obama will only be President for a few weeks after the 2016 election, and given that he will be a lame duck during that period, it is unlikely that he will be able to "get rid of" the Patriot Act. Besides which, only Congress or the SCOTUS can repeal or stirke down legislation.

It would lead to a 100% republican victory (which is what Rand wants), because they would set up a friendly flag or something and then say look what happened after the patriot act is repealed.

I do not think that we'd see a "100% republican victory" if Obama were to come out against government spying and in favor of the Constitution. The essay to which I referred you shows that the American people really like it when their leaders defend the civil liberties of the people. That said, I would not be surprised by a "friendly flag" operation that tried to show that the President's "weakness" on terror endangered American citizens. That's entirely possible. I just don't see it working. The paranoia of the post-9/11 days is waning quickly.

Thanks for the reply.

-Laelth

[graham4anything]

133. You just admitted it, President Obama does NOT have the power to change these things.

Your answer, second paragraph admits that.

However, if the democratic party wins a mega landslide in 2014 and has BOTH congress, then indeed, things can happen from Nov-Jan 17, 2016

I don't like instant gratification.
I like all the I's dotted and T's crossed.

and then its forever.

What makes you think President Obama supports Bush's policies?

He is saying, "If you build it, they will come" and it takes a village to make it happen.

But not by tearing Obama down and blaming him.

[tblue]

136. While the politics are not the crux of the problem

what you say is 100% true. Why can't we be the party of civil liberties? Or diehard defense of Medicare? Or real universal healthcare (instead of health insurance)? Why we always gotta be Republican-lite?

It's not me who's handing power over to the Repubs. It's the Dems implementing Repub policies. And I'll be damned before I try to silence the only liberal voices out there.

[Laelth]

138. Hear, hear! n/t

-Laelth

[busterbrown]

141. “Detriment of the Party"

How about a Christie Administration with the House, Senate and Supreme court solidly right wing..
You think that can’t happen... If it does, this country will be running under the direction of idiots like
Steve King or Louie Gohmert. How does that sound?

[Laelth]

142. Those things could happen, though I think it's very unlikely.

As I have said, I think the President needs to get out in front of this issue and stand up for the Constitution. If he does not (or can not) do so, I fear we may get the very real horrors you describe in your post.

-Laelth

[boilerbabe]

114. it's about the ISSUES not the personality of some politician you idolize!

[tblue]

137. It's so exhausting.

I have an inlaw who worries about Obama as if he was his son because people take issue with what our president has done. I'm more worried about the survival of civil liberties than I am about anybody's popularity. I can't control what Obama does, though God knows I've begged him to do the right thing.

[Democracyinkind]

127. Obama would be well advised to adjust his course.

Although Snowden and the GOP scandal catapult must be the worst reasons for Obama to act on this, it is time to act nonetheless. Every positive step that Obama may take now will be perceived as a reaction to the scnadal (not that I expect this admin to make any serious changes - I have no indication to assume that the President is fundamentally opposed in toto to the Bush approach to "Terrorism".)

Yeah, the Patriot Act must go. And so must all of these Orwellian programs that came to life as follow-ups of the original TIA program. As for what Snowden leaked so far, I don't find it intersting, new, or even important.

[Yo_Mama]

129. I couldn't disagree more with your post

First, this whole thing started under Clinton, escalated under Bush, and is now escalating even more under Obama (with increased focus on shutting down "careless talk" and unprecedented investigations and prosecutions of journalists). Let it go on from here and pretty soon the papers won't even print articles about this stuff.

Second, the effect of your argument here would suggest that every time we won an election, we would really be losing the election, because we would then lose the right to discuss essential rights in public due to the "disloyalty" factor.

Third, discussing public issues, especially issues of constitutional rights, is NEVER attacking the government. NEVER. It supports all the best that is in our government.

Fourth, in no way does this really hurt Obama. Our presidents don't really have much power - most of the government runs on autopilot. It's designed that way. Unless issues are discussed in public, presidents don't get to hear from the people. Probably neither Congress nor the President can offset this slow slide into a Stasi state unless they get to hear opposing voices from us - which is why trying to shut down information and debate on this issue and others like it is so harmful.

[busterbrown]

143. “Unprecedented investigations and prosecutions”?

You might want to read this carefully..

A Fox reported admitting he was trying to influence....

This is how it all started..

http://www.mediaite.com/columnists/doj-document-reveals-fox-news-reporter-james-rosen-wanted-to-impact-u-s-foreign-policy/

[Bluenorthwest]

151. That's all you could respond to in that very well stated post?

Your content and form both argue against lending you any legitimacy.

[busterbrown]

159. Stated so intellectually...

I’ll try to improve on content and form..

In the meantime keep believing in all your principals... but when you wake up one day soon with a right wing President, House and Senate backed by a Scalia minded Supreme Court, you might end up questioning your strategy..

In the meantime rest assure, that Fox News drove this story and its heading right where they wanted it to head..

[Bluenorthwest]

173. What a bunch of balderdash. I stand with my Democratic Senators. You don't.

You call Democrats cowards, mine aren't and you despise them for it. What State do you live in? What district?
I bet you have all Republicans in your delegation.

[busterbrown]

177. Where did I state that All Democrats are Cowards?

Last edited Thu Jun 13, 2013, 03:46 AM - Edit history (1)

You make shit up.
I’m referring to Blue Dog Dems..I know you listen to only your own voice in your head but my only point is about protecting the Presidency from the republicans. You may disagree with my strategy and thats fine, but don’t start making up shit about me calling all Democrats Cowards.

I am a Dem and have worked very hard during my life to support them..

Breaking: maybe you you should read this... A lot of Democrats are Cowards!!!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/12/1215805/-Which-73-Democrats-Just-Voted-to-Gut-Dodd-Frank-Today#

[onlyadream]

131. We knew the was going to happen

We knew this unwarranted surveillance was going to happen when the patriot act passed. It seemed the main stream didn't care to notice back then. Now we have a whistle blower telling us what we more or less knew. Why now?

[Marr]

135. So what sort of morning is it there in DC?

lol, this shit is pathetic.

[Floyd_Gondolli]

140. Many have hated him all along

[lame54]

144. This is an American people problem...

with the surveliance growing big-time under the Obama presidency

[still_one]

153. sorry, but bullshit. For one thing that poll is from gallop, who humiliated itself in 2008, and the

second is as much as MSM would like people to believe it is all the Democrats, the American populous knows what happened in 2000, and knows that the media were a willing accomplice in pushing the patriot act, the Iraq War, and other lies

No, the election is a long way off, and assuming christie is their man, is not a sure deal that the party of loonies will support him

[bowens43]

154. Sorry. This Obama mess. Period

[TNLib]

166. This crap has been going on for over a decade

Maybe the public will start to understand and push to pass laws for these companies to stop hoarding personal data and selling it to the highest bidder or giving it to the government.

It's not just the government that looks at meta data of individuals personal info. Companies looking to hire and marketing firms look at this stuff as well. Laws need to be passed to stop corporate America from data mining away our privacy.

[MNBrewer]

169. Is Christie the new Republican bugaboo? Is that's what's supposed to cow us into silence?

You sure it's not Palin or Bachmann or Perry or Cuccinelli or...?

But yeah, we get it. STFU about the failures of Democrats or else.... right? is THAT your basic message?

[busterbrown]

176. Basically for now yes and there are many who agree with me.

You know as well as I, that Christie is the perfect nominee.. If you were a republican strategist who would you want running?.. A wolf all dressed up as a moderate...Perfect!

I hope they put up one of your choices. Some chance!

[MNBrewer]

178. I don't HAVE a choice for the Republican Party's presidential nominee

That's for Republicans to decide.

However, I will not avoid criticizing a Democrat for fear of Republicans.

Our Surveillance State was wrong under Bush, it's wrong under Obama. As long as we have an acquiescent congress and a rubber-stamp FISA court it's a recipe for disaster. Even if I DID trust Obama and take him at his word, that "You can complain about Big Brother and how this is a potential program run amok, but when you actually look at the details, I think we’ve struck the right balance." We'll never get that opportunity. Most of Congress won't get that opportunity. Most judges won't get that opportunity. We have unaccountable organizations going to unaccountable courts to get permission to do things that we're assured are "legal" based on classified interpretations of laws.

[busterbrown]

180. I agree with what you say..

But I have even more fear of a right wing government destroying this country..
1st stop Defunding of Obamacare ( which is helping millions right now with medicaid funding) then
privatizing S.S. and Medicare.. Next stop, An Ayn Rand like destruction of all programs designed to help
the impoverished..

[MNBrewer]

181. ONE way to stop it is for Democrats to dismantle the governmental machinery that would enable it

You might trust Obama on the spying thing, but do you think that Democrats will occupy the White House in perpetuity? Of course SOME DAY a Republican will sit in the Oval Office and will have a nice, well-tuned Surveillance State machine at his or her disposal. A tweak here and there by a compliant Congress and a supine Judiciary and voila!!! Meet the new Police State Machine!

[busterbrown]

182. Definitely could happened.. I do trust Obama not to exceed legal requirements....

but generally I am no fan of any invasion of privacy...
People are so anxious to crucify me around here because I am concerned with Republicans using this whole Obama dilemma as part of a campaign strategy for the upcoming elections..
I don’t care about Obama’s legacy, I care about our lives..

[MNBrewer]

183. That's what's troubling about it

It shouldn't have to be a matter of "trust".

[busterbrown]

185. Are you as old as your avatar?

If your not. I’ll be there soon... I agree with you again.

[MNBrewer]

186. I'm old, but not as old as Charles Darwin would be were he alive.

[busterbrown]

188. Did not know it was Darwin...

I haven’t seen a textbook in ages.. Maybe I should freshen up..Seems like Charles is under the gun in several states in the south.. I guess they have their points... I’m still stuck on the fact that I’m not the center of the universe.

[RainDog]

190. What points do those in the south have concerning Darwin?

Please enlighten this board about these points.

[busterbrown]

191. I read several stories how Creationism is gathering strength in several school districts in the

south to be considered as subject matter as an alternative to Evolution..

I realize States which are outside the South are also engaged in this Creationism Crap.
But how about this?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/10/1208262/-South-Carolina-creationist-science-quiz-is-real#

[RainDog]

192. Fighting creationist bullshit has been a multi-decade issue in the south

from your remark, it seemed you were granting some credence to their points.

just doing a reality check.

[Generic Other]

172. They are gonna nominate Chris Christie?

You have a crystal ball. I thought it was going to be Jeb.

[Travis_0004]

179. The only person to blame is obama.

I'm not saying Obama knows absolutely everything, but there are at least some things he should be aware of.

This is his second term so he had time to stop it if he was against it, but he did not.

When the news came out, he could have even denied knowing how much he knew, and I might of accepted that, but instead he defended it.

So I will critize Obama for this program.

It doesn't even have to make the democrats look bad. I would like to see all democrats and republicans stand up and say this is wrong, and work towards putting a stop to it. If they refuse do do so, then I hope they loose the election.

In 2016, I hope both the republican and democrat candidates agree that this is wrong, and if Obama won't end it, hopefully the next president will, whoever that is.

[busterbrown]

184. If you think uber nationalists xenophobic Republicans are interested in doing away with....

Domestic Surveillance... You’re kidding yourself...Libertarians maybe, but republicans always want to
be perceived as being strong on National Security.. They are saying they are against it now because a
Democrat is in office...If a Repub. becomes president watch the reversal..

I never herd one Republican utter a peep against Bush while he was lying about his Surveillance Program!