Ouch! Meme pic of Obama points out uncomfortable truth...

[Poll_Blind]

BTW, the photoshopped hat is part of the "Scumbag Steve" meme.

PB

[cantbeserious]

1. Inquiring Minds Wonder Why That Might Be - Maybe He Is Protecting Them

eom

[Buzz Clik]

3. this is fun, isn't it?

Jump on board any disruptive thread and agree with it. No risk. Just the appearance of a tide of opposition to the president.

[cantbeserious]

7. And Your Point Would Be?

eom

[Buzz Clik]

12. You know damned well what my point is.

How far do you want to push it?

[cantbeserious]

26. I Would Like You To Respectfully Answer The Question - There Is No Need For Anger

eom

[Buzz Clik]

58. At least you've been well schooled.

[bahrbearian]

55. Would you also defend Bush/Cheney ?

[Buzz Clik]

56. I'm not defending Obama. I'm pointing out that the OP is pure bullshit.

[Civilization2]

77. So you are saying Obama cound DO NOTHING to prosecute a SINGLE bankster,.

this was the largest robbery in the history of humanity, and not a single investigation or prosecution?

What part of this is Bullsht to you?

[JW2020]

32. HaAHAHAAHAHA

Hahaahahaa

you are becoming tiresome.

[Buzz Clik]

36. JWnumbers! hi5!

I guess your point in following me around is to make a big show about your balls and debating skills.

Fine. Pick a topic, and get it started.

[JW2020]

39. You are the one following me around

But that's some fine projection. HEY! You reached 30,000 posts your family must be so proud!!!

[Buzz Clik]

41. "You are the one following me around". Riiiight. As evidenced by your out-of-context comment to me.

[JW2020]

44. Buzz, how many time have you called me by your nickname?

Really? Do you really have nothing better to do in life? Perhaps you see yourself as heroic or something, I don't know...

[Buzz Clik]

50. Well, look at it this way:

Through annoying the hell out of me, you've doubled your post count.

[JW2020]

52. Buzz, you started engaging me.

Don't deny it. You are at 30,006

[Buzz Clik]

53. 30,007. At a rate of under ten per day.

A little slower than your rate.

How odd.

[JW2020]

54. Did you know

That one poster here averages 36 post per day, every day for the past 8 years. THAT'S A LOT!

[bahrbearian]

60. So this is "Mines bigger than yours" LOL

[bahrbearian]

59. Its hard not to follow you , you're on every OP about this.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Really? Explain how evidence collected in that manner could be used to prosecute fraud.

[dawg]

6. Records of who has been talking to who, when, and for how long, are a really big thing.

They could provide strong evidence of collusion, dissemination of insider information, and anti-competitive practices.

I hope to God this information is never used in this fashion, though. As much as I dislike the banksters, we should all be secure in our papers and effects up until the point an individual warrant has been approved against us.

[Buzz Clik]

10. yeah, awesome. Trouble is....

.... evidence obtained under the guise of national security (the NS of NSA) could not be used to prosecute for fraud.

Oh, damn!

[Fearless]

14. Do you honestly think that they need to start with legal evidence?

They only need to END with enough legal evidence.

[Buzz Clik]

20. Go back to the OP: that is exactly what is being said: start and end with NSA evidence.

[Fearless]

22. This is what I'm responding to

".... evidence obtained under the guise of national security (the NS of NSA) could not be used to prosecute for fraud. "

It can be used. It is the starting point. They find evidence illegally as a starting point and work to find legal evidence. It's very easy when you know what you're looking for.

[cantbeserious]

28. Roger That Fearless - The Illegal Evidence Becomes The Pointer For Asking The "Right" Questions

eom

[Marr]

18. Why not, if we're talking about industries that are touted as "too big to fail"?

Seems like a legitimate national security interest to me.

[Buzz Clik]

21. Well, yours is not the only opinion that matters, unfortunately.

There's all this stuff about probable cause and misuse of warrants and all this legal mumbo jumbo that gets in the way.

[Marr]

31. You don't think the DoJ could establish probable cause for financial abuses at Goldman Sachs?

I think Matt Taibbi could do it alone.

[Buzz Clik]

33. That's not the issue. Referring to the OP, we're talking about the NSA gathering evidence.

Try selling that to a judge.

[Marr]

9. For financial industry abuses? I expect it would be more useful than actual speech.

Who's talking to whom and when would reveal a lot.

[mtpscwriter]

11. The institutions probably use phones and the Internet to communicate

externally and internally.

So if he were interested in whether the institutions were colluding, yeah, evidence collected in this manner could be helpful in an investigation.

[Buzz Clik]

15. You chose this to be your first post? I'm honored.

Explain how NSA gathering evidence for NS purposes could be used in this way over the noisy objections of defense attorneys.

Good luck.

[mtpscwriter]

23. Oh, post counting?

I'd surely rather not have almost 30,000 posts on a message board. There's too much life to enjoy. But, hey, to each their own.

If you don't think the NSA would refer potential criminal acts to the FBI, then you're naive. Probably naive enough to believe that any of these agencies can only do what the law says they can do.

[marble falls]

62. The same way the NSA claims its broken up 50 or so credible threats? ....

We all rather have the President than either Romney/Ryan or McCain/Palin. But either way we really don't want a surveillance state.

[1StrongBlackMan]

81. And, apparently ...

people are missing the irony of progressives arguing FOR this kind of expansion of law enforcement powers.

But I guess any slam on President Obama is a good slam ... even if what they are advocating would bring us the police state that they once opposed.

[Cooley Hurd]

4. The corporatocracy laid bare in a meme.

[FirstLight]

79. +1000

ironic, ain't it?

[Harmony Blue]

5. Internet memes

it has come down to this eh? I fear for our Republic....

[dawg]

8. Why worry about something that ended in the 1960's.

I was born into an empire. It's all I've ever known.

[FourScore]

13. PB, you are better than this. I find the hat photo-shopped on him quite offensive. n/t

[Poll_Blind]

25. It's not offensive- it's part of the "Scumbag Steve" meme. NOTHING racial. See here:

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/scumbag-steve

PB

[FourScore]

29. Ooooh. Where have I been? My bad. But then the question becomes...

do we continue to promote these memes?

[Poll_Blind]

30. The President is making choices, which he's accountable for. Period. (shrug)

PB

[ucrdem]

51. A racist photoshop is still racist even if the hat is from some AOL home page.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

[JW2020]

34. It's racist!!!

[FourScore]

35. No need to mock my post. It's already been cleared up as a meme. Or are you here to antagonize?

Unless, of course, you believe racism is non-existent in this country...

[Poll_Blind]

37. Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not but the hat is obligatory for this specific meme and...

...NOT racist:

"Scumbag Steve" meme:

About

Scumbag Steve is an image macro series featuring a kid with a sideways fitted cap standing in a hallway. The overlaid text generally centers around unethical behavior regarding drugs, partying, and other hedonistic behaviors.

PB

[JW2020]

40. sarcasm

But I thought that messing with any sort of icon of Obama was sacrilege.

[rhett o rick]

49. If you find that offensive then I bet you really have a hard time with political cartoons. nm

[Fearless]

16. Why would corporations agree to provide information on each other?

[flamingdem]

17. I take it you don't support President Obama

from the effort you made to indict him with your post

[Poll_Blind]

27. I don't support him protecting predatory financial institutions, no. nt

PB

[ProSense]

19. So this would be acceptable?

Good to know.

Maybe the ones who have been or are in the process of being prosecuted can charge the Government with illegal wiretapping.

http://www.stopfraud.gov/news-index.html

[SidDithers]

24. Obama as Scumbag Steve...

This is what DU has become.



Sid

[mwrguy]

43. This place is becoming a launch-pad for rethug attacks against the greatest president in my lifetime

[bahrbearian]

61. What are you 12 years old ?

[Fuddnik]

64. !

[NYC_SKP]

74. OHMAGERD!

[tammywammy]

46. It's a new low.

Pathetic.

[ucrdem]

48. You don't think the hat is funny?

Neither do I.

[Fuddnik]

63. Wait until they start on your Prime Minister.

[bahrbearian]

66. Sid's not interested in Canadian politics, "Go Keystone"

[greatauntoftriplets]

83. Absolutely disgusting.

Characterizing an African-American president as some kind of gangsta.

[ucrdem]

38. Posted for purely scientific reasons, natch.

Ouch!

[treestar]

42. Wow that's stupid

Wouldn't it be invading their privacy?

[Poll_Blind]

47. Ha! Reminds me of this great thread from yesterday:

A situation dripping with irony

!



PB

[Hotler]

45. Email and phone records could used to.......

prove cocaine use and dealing on Wall St. If you can't or won't charge them for fraud then charge them with drug crimes. Plenty of stories about cocaine fueling the bankers.

[MotherPetrie]

57. K&R

[CtDemoFarmer]

65. How many of the banksters are his former classmates?

Ivy League guys stick together.

[Autumn]

67. How many of the banksters are in the administration or are advisers?

[Poll_Blind]

68. I'm not so worried about who his friends were in the past. It's the pack he's running with now...

...that concern me more. You know, you run across people and maybe they've been associated with good things in the past. Maybe bad things, too. It's who they are now and what crowd they're running with that means the most, IMO.

I will say, though, one of the things I find odious is that his "change of heart" obviously didn't come overnight. At some point in his career he decided he'd be part of the problem while crowing about how much he believed in people working for the solution.

Now, whether that's Ivy League connections or something else, I dunno. I've known a number of people who went to Ivy League schools and who had graduated and then pursued a lifetime of social justice and equality. So you can't always tell...except by actions.

But it's clearly a pro status quo worldview he bought into somewhere along the line.

PB

[phleshdef]

69. Ouch! You don't understand FISA law!

The FISA court only deals with "foreign intelligence information" to mean information necessary to protect the United States against actual or potential grave attack, sabotage or international terrorism. FISA can't even get involved in going after financial institutions.

So, no, you are either just misinformed or a total liar. The President nor anyone else can use the NSA or FISA to go after bankers. I suggest you either learn something about the subject or get a better sense of honesty, depending on the reason you are spreading this erroneous bullshit.

[Recursion]

72. That left a mark.

But, yes, you're completely right.

[Recursion]

70. Well, no, he couldn't, legally

That's kind of the whole point.

[NYC_SKP]

71. SCUMBAG STEVE THE VIDEO.... er, really, a video interview...

[90-percent]

73. Here's a link to a profound DU post

about what our own government could do to us, in addition to stripping us of some fundamental Constitutional former rights.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023068081#post75

For all we know, something like this could have already been performed on Scott Ritter, a whistle blower I admire greatly from back before the Iraq Invasion.

I think he's serving time as a result of being entrapped soliciting sexual encounters with minors. Well, minors as played on the internet by police and/or FBI and/or CIA. To be fact based, I do consider the possibility that poor Scott really had a thing for under aged girls.

Same thing may have also happened to Elliot Spitzer.

So you could be a squeaky clean straight arrow with no criminal or immoral activities in your electronic footprint, and then find yourself being prosecuted for having a government manufactured criminal internet history!

So it's best to remain docile and ignorant and never question your government, lest they decide they really don't like you enough to destroy your entire life.

-90% Jimmy

[bahrbearian]

82. Thanks for that , amazing.

[90-percent]

85. You're welcome

My hope is this concept will go mainstream, and in this case, the source of this concept is the property of

HiPointDem

Keith Olbermann was good at this, making out a profound point buried in the haystack of human events. "I never though of that before, but, dayum, that's a very astute point there"

-90% Jimmy

[1StrongBlackMan]

75. Doesn't it trouble you ...

that this meme is factually incorrect?

The patriot act (and its extensions) CANNOT be used to prosecute anything other than matters of foriegn intelligence and national security.

[mick063]

76. You have to admit

"Too big to prosecute" is a big fail.


The hat is tasteless and distracts from a valid point.

Look. With respect to surveillance, the government can apparently do almost anything it wants to now......including building a case against the financial moguls though data collection via blanket warrants.

Now I'll go ahead and say that this would be a travesty. I'm against data collection and storage even when it benefits my favorite cause. That would be holding people accountable for the economic debacle in 2008.

I'm against blanket data collection and storage. No exceptions.

[sulphurdunn]

78. While I'm writing this

the laws of the United States, under its de facto suspended Bill of Rights, allow its security agencies to monitor my communications and movements, permits its armed agents to enter my home without a warrant, shoot my dog and disappear me indefinitely, all on the theoretical say so of the President. Those same agents could also make it a crime for my family to even mention that it had happened. You and I are in far greater danger of suffering such a fate than is Jami Dimon and we are insignificant threats to national security by comparison.

[gcomeau]

80. Not legally he can't.... morons... -eom

[davidn3600]

84. Since when has that stopped the government before?

The government has proven time and time again they have no respect for the constitution.

[gcomeau]

86. Since almost always. Grow up and live in the real world. -eom

[michigandem58]

87. Are you saying NSA phone and email records should be used to prosecute domestic crimes?

A simple yes or no will do, but I doubt I'll get one.