For the sake of curiosity. What happens if Obama shuts down the NSA thing?

[Liberal Veteran]

Let's say he ends the program now that a stink has been raised.

Will it be "All is forgiven, we love you, President Obama"?

Or will it be, "Third party! Here we come!"?

Or will some kind of public penance be required? Like mortification of the flesh or mortification of the spirit?

Just curious.

[bemildred]

1. We don't get to decide those sorts of things here.

We have no power, we just talk and hope to get ponies someday.

[Liberal Veteran]

4. Then why bother, if I may ask?

If we have no power to effect change, doesn't that sorta relegate our voices to a waste of time?

[bemildred]

6. We like to talk about things.

I mean we do get a lot of astroturf here, people with narrow agendas, paid or not, but most of us are not paid to be here, it's what we do for fun.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

2. I'm not mad at him personally

I can actually understand the logic he must have went through to arrive at a place where what the NSA does seems right to him.
What he doesn't get is that it's too much power they've been given. Whether he abuses it or not isn't the issue; it's that the government shouldn't have enough information in its possession about the lives of the people for abuse to even become an issue.

[bowens43]

3. He can't be trusted to do what he says he's gong to do.

Third party? no. But as far I'm concerned Obama is through

[Liberal Veteran]

11. So we haven't gotten anything from this presidency? It was all for nothing?

I wonder what DU would have been like in the 40's.

[Blue_Roses]

16. bullshit

Sounds like you never approved of him in the first place.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

5. #1 is probably not very likely- He has been on the "outs" with some since 2009

over one thing or another: Not getting rid of DADT fast enough or not getting ENDA enacted (i.e. via executive order), not closing Gitmo, no Single Payer or Public Option Health Care Reform, being amenable to Chained CPI, drones, or something else. For some people #2 and/or #3 is more likely no matter what he does IMHO

[think]

7. I'm looking straight past Obama as we have Bush and squarely at getting the secrecy laws changed.

The burden is on congress to pass legislation like that proposed recently by a bipartisan group of 8 senators:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/06/11/eight-senators-re-introduce-a-bill-to-reduce-secrecy-of-patriot-act-surveillance/

So if congress would pass such legislation (Not holding my breath) I would expect Obama to sign it and put an end to this mess....

[Fumesucker]

8. They just start it up again under a different name with even more security

It used to be called Total Information Awareness until they caught a bit too much heat and changed the name, tightened security.

It's never going to go away, entirely too damn useful to those in power.

[treestar]

9. It wouldn't be good enough.

See the history of the repeal of DADT.

[FarCenter]

10. The NSA will not be shut down

The National Security Agency is divided into two major missions: the Signals Intelligence Directorate (SID), which produces foreign signals intelligence information, and the Information Assurance Directorate (IAD), which protects U.S. information systems.

Those missions are necessary.

[dogknob]

12. We don't shut down, we re-brand.

Did you know that the Inquisition never stopped?

It was re-branded.

"Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office"

[Liberal Veteran]

13. That's amusing, but doesn't really answer the question.

It seems apparent a vocal contingent of the party wants something done with regards to the NSA.

President Obama didn't create it. But what does he have to do to satisfy that contingent and get back into their good graces?

[N.I.B.]

14. The only thing he can do

He needs to see to it that all those who broke the law pay the consequences to the full extent of the law because this is a very serious issue. But at this point he can't assume that policing the law will revive the support for him that has been lost. When someone loses trust in someone that is not an easy thing to get back. Sometimes its impossible as I am sure everyone knows.

All he can do is apologize to the public that this has happened and see to it that the guilty are arrested and given their day in court.

[Liberal Veteran]

15. I don't believe any illegality is implied in this.

Could you be more specific?

[Amonester]

26. I think it's about the fact that all contractors must follow the 'revised' law and...

it would appear that a lot of them don't give a flying eff about the law (re.: get FISA warrants before spying).

Those who break/broke the law should be prosecuted, and that includes Snowden if he accessed informations illegally.

[mhatrw]

17. All Obama needs to do is curb the worst of the worst excesses.

Why is that so hard for his brainwashed acolytes to comprehend?

[Liberal Veteran]

18. Please see reply #3.

And how many times do I have to say it, I prefer the term "ilk"?

[Union Scribe]

19. We would all instantly be killed by terrorists.

Duh.

[Liberal Veteran]

20. Well, I rather doubt that.

Everyone seems to be okay with some kind of intelligence program. It seems to run the gamut from "read my email, I've nothing to hide" to "well, we need to reign it in".

For some reason, I think the entire discussion is going to have the same punchline as that proverb: "We've already established that, madam. Now we are just haggling over the price."

[liberal_at_heart]

21. Personally my single issue is education. I will no longer vote for any democrat not willing to fully

fund public education.

[Hekate]

30. What exactly does "fully funding education" mean any more? 1950s levels? 1960s?

Because we could all wait a long time for that to happen.

As for not voting for anyone unwilling to fund education, all candidates claim that education is a Big Priority for them. My entire 65 years on this planet I have heard all candidates in every election swear up and down that educating our young people for the future is Priority #1 with them, and then as soon as they are sworn into office a thousand other priorities take precedence.

All I can do is go by reputation and background for those running for office, and also by party platform. The Democratic party platform is better in every respect than the GOP one, every time. And at least the Dems try.

I'm not at all happy with education funding and policy in this country, and have not been for decades.

[liberal_at_heart]

40. My son has suffered terribly under the current system and it is only getting worse.

I will not vote for any democrat who is not willing to fully fund public education. I've heard several say that much of the mess we are in started with the Reagan administration and I agree, so if you are going to ask me what fully fund means I guess I would have to say pre-Reagan. Will anybody do this? Probably not. Does that mean I have no candadite I can vote for? Maybe. Maybe I won't get to vote. Maybe I'll have to vote for a different party. But I will no longer just sit by and watch my son suffer. and I'm sorry but I disagree with your assessment that the democrats try. Education isn't even on the radar for them so they just go along with whatever the republicans want to do on education. Even Obama who says education is a priority only wants to spend pennies here and there for math and science or pre-k. Every grade, every subject is in desperate need of funding. Special Education is in desperate need of funding. And the only reason Obama is willing to spend money on math and science is because he is going along with the corportists that say that we must make students competitive in the workforce. That is why he is pushing schools to perform on standardized tests or else lose even more funds. These schools that are underperforming are usually doing so because of underfunding and Obama is telling them they will lose even more funding if they don't perform better. These schools are so desperate for that funding they are pushing curricula changes on our kids so fast it's almost like they are forcing the students to skip grades. In my son's case he literally was forced to skip grades. They forced 6th grade math curricula on him when he only had a 4th/5th grade understanding of math. No, in my opinion the democrats are just as bad at ecuation as the republicans are, and I will not just sit by and accept it anymore.

[Hekate]

41. I am sorry for your pain, especially since my two were in school in the Reagan-Bush years...

...in California, which was defunding its schools down to Deep South levels. I didn't know what hit me.

Then after Clinton, who did no harm to education, we got Bush Junior, and his No Child Left Behind/No School Board Left Standing/No Child Left Unrecruited schemes.

In your pain, you are conflating too many things and forgetting history. It was Junior's administration who came up with the brilliant idea of taking money away from poorly performing schools, thus sending them into a death spiral. It was Junior's administration that imposed standardized tests so stupid that a well-performing school could be punished for not "improving."

Democrats may sometimes be feckless, but the GOP is downright evil.

Once again, the president cannot spend money that the congress does not give him to spend. Obama proposes, and the GOP spits in his eye.

So -- don't vote. Stay home and ensure that the GOP majority in the House increases. Be my guest.

But please, whatever you do, learn to use paragraphs. It was very hard trying to figure out what you were saying.

[BlueCheese]

22. He would rise greatly in my opinion, for whatever that's worth.

I'm not against NSA surveillance in general-- I don't think anyone is. But if he returned it to pre-9/11 levels of operation, in which we need individual warrants to collect domestic phone records and Internet traffic, I would be greatly relieved and admire him for the courage it took to stand up to the overgrown intelligence establishment.

[Recursion]

23. I can show you 5 OPs from the past two days that oppose it in general

I'm not against NSA surveillance in general-- I don't think anyone is.

Check out the Greatest page from the past few days

[LeftInTX]

24. He would be impeached

If he issues an executive order disbanding it, congress will move to impeach. Congress will charge that he is neglecting his constitutional duty to protect and defend the country. (It doesn't matter how you or I feel about NSA. It's all about how congress feels about NSA)

[davidn3600]

25. I wont be happy until the Patriot Act is repealed, Gitmo is closed, and torture is ended

These are the remains of the Bush White House that need to be done away with, and should have been years ago!

[Hekate]

29. Me too. Have you communicated this to your Republican congressman? or John Boehner?

What did they say?

[peacebird]

33. I have told my congressmen, not that it has done any good.

[Hekate]

27. #1 He did not start the NSA. #2 He can't shut it down.

Just out of curiosity, why do you think he could do so?

[Skidmore]

36. No amount of communicating how government works

seems to work for some. Thanks for making that point. People seem to be turning a blind eye to the fact that we have branches of government with different responsibilities and refuse to accept that the presidency is not an absolute monarchy. Couple those misguided notions with railings about living in a democracy and it you end up with a mass of crazy making gibberish about the world in general.

[Hekate]

44. It's really depressing

The general level of civic knowledge around here has dropped like a stone, as has the level of discourse.

[Liberal Veteran]

42. I know that, but just throwing out the question to see what the scorn ratio is.

President Obama is in a position where no matter what he does, it isn't enough.

Did this. (Not fast enough)
Did this. (Didn't do it the way I like)
Did this. (Why isn't he doing something else?)

[Hekate]

45. True dat!

So how do you rate the scorn level today?

[Liberal Veteran]

47. My scorn-o-meter pegged at max and blew up the moment I logged in.

[Hekate]

48. You have provided me with my first DU-laugh in weeks

Ta!

[JI7]

28. i don't think it's a good idea for him to shut it down assuming he could do so

[danial3262]

31. I am thinking the same

I agree with you.

[ManiacJoe]

32. Asking the obvious follow-up question: Why would it be bad for him to do so?

[whistler162]

34. You will likely be one of the loudest

with Glenn Greenwald and his ilk to be screaming the next time a terrorist plot isn't foiled and blame President Obama for it!

[Pelican]

35. We'll continue on until the next terror attack...

... at which point the switch will be flipped back on with a new label.

[99Forever]

37. Once again.

This isn't about any one person, this is about violating the civil rights of hundreds of millions of law-abiding citizens and then lying to cover it up.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[sibelian]

38. Dunno. Depends, I guess.

I think his best bet is to knock the counter-terrorism unit of the FBI and the NSA together into one lump. He can't get rid of it, that would just look stupid.

The FBI have a cyber-crime branch, turn the NSA into a junior in the FBI ranks, says I.

[retread]

39. "if Obama shuts down the NSA thing" If that happens watch for this in

the vicinity of my butt.

[Atman]

43. The Unemployment Rates jumps by 3%

Just sayin'.

[Poll_Blind]

50. !

PB

[NCTraveler]

46. I get that it is a hypothetical...

But he is not going to shut down something that he likes and approves of. He supports things like this. He supports the Patriot Act in full. Something he did not do at one point.

[Jamaal510]

49. Nothing much out of the ordinary.

The RWNJs will continue to look for a way to impeach Obama and perhaps use that, while the so-called "true progressives" will be outraged over something else they believe Obama isn't doing quickly enough, while continuing to ignore Congress's obstruction.
We've seen this movie many times.

[Liberal Veteran]

51. But is it directed by J. J. Abrams?

If so, we need more lens flare.

[graham4anything]

52. If Rush Limbaugh or Ralph or Rand or Ron got everything he wanted, what would he have to talk about?

I remember in 2008, the Rush the vote operation Chaos (anyone else remember that?

Someone called him and asked, hey Rush, wait a minute, what happens if you are so successful and knock Obama out and then
Hillary becomes President

Rush hemmed and hawed and crinkled the paper sound effect and finally said
something like well, we don't want that, that would be worse

Hey Rush- your biggest nightmare is coming 1/17/2017 and with all the smears going bye bye, and with an 80-20
legislature vote, Rush will most likely take his millions and reitre.

Can't wait for it to happen to continue Barack Obama's agenda forever.

[JDPriestly]

53. It wasn't his program to begin with.

He is not the guilty party. He failed to end it, but what would he have risked if he had ended it without first having the support of an enraged people.

This is an NSA gone wild.

Obama is putting Susan Rice in charge of it. We shall see whether she will rescue him from the public anger over this program.

Obama, however, did not create this program. He is not personally to blame for it although he has approved it.

If the public outrage is great enough, Obama will have the support and strength to stop the program.

If anyone has any contact with Obama or members of his staff, please ask them to read Marshall's dissent in Smith v. Maryland.

I posted an excerpt here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023080703

Marshall's dissent will provide a legal reason for ending this vast program. They don't have to end ALL collecting of pen registers, but they need to limit their collection strictly to suspects of actionable crimes. They are not catching terrorists anyway. There is no way the Muslim terrorists would use internet services subject to the jurisdiction of American law and therefore to this program. The British may be picking up some of that stuff, and they may inadvertently pick up a little of the information from providers linking up to those servers beyond American jurisdiction, but it is naive to think that the terrorists would be calling numbers that link to our servers and use our satellites and giving away who they are. Only the very lowest level people would do that. If they had access to servers in Pakistan or a few other places, they might get what they claim they are seeking, but they would not need this American program to achieve their end.

This program is unconstitutional because it unlawfully restricts our rights under the Bill of Rights in that it chills them. Obama taught constitutional law. That is a fundamental concept. I would like o hear from some of his students about how he covered the topic of the First Amendment, specifically the chilling of the free speech right and freedom of the press. Anyone here who was in one of his classes? Surprisingly, I don't think I have ever heard anyone claim to have had him as a professor of constitutional law.

[NoOneMan]

54. Then he wins my vote for reelection for doing his job!

But since he can't run, how this issue reflects on Obama is actually beyond moot. Im not particularly sure why anyone is focused on this at all.

I'd like to see Obama "do the right thing". I don't think he will because I don't think he can. His real job is to make this palatable for the people (by primarily leading his base to accept it). That is really what presidents do (polish turds).