Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
woo me with science
woo me with science's Journal
woo me with science's Journal
October 16, 2013
The propaganda will always be mystified at why Democrats betrayed us "this time."
There is always an excuse. Usually it is a lesser of two evils con. Sometimes it is problems with redistricting. It's interesting that Virginia was gerrymandered while a Democrat who could have prevented its passage was absent from Washington. Things like that sure seem to happen a lot. And Harry Reid couldn't seem to rally Democrats to change the filibuster rules, either.
The propaganda will always try to make the arguments personal, too. It is always about "anger" or "enemies" or the sin of questioning the motives of a Democrat. We are never to notice or seriously consider the effects of the tsunami of corporate money flooding Washington and our Party, and we are never to look at the PATTERN.
Like in Groundhog Day, we're expected to retain no memory or awareness of the relentless, horrifying pattern of betrayals unfolding before us, day after day after day after day after day, the unslowed eating of the poor by the rich through policy. Each betrayal is presented as an aberration, a "special circumstance," or perhaps gazillion-dimensional chess on our behalf, that we couldn't possibly understand.
We are merely to smile and treat each one, again and again and again, as merely an aberration. We are to drift from betrayal to betrayal in hypnotic belief that our corporate Democrats share the same heartfelt principles and policy goals we do...even though their actions repeatedly, relentlessly pursue the opposite.
And even though the flood of corporate money they receive explains why.
It takes strenuous, almost superhuman effort to deny the obvious problem here, but that is what the propaganda does. You have no response to my extensive lists of betrayals by Democrats. You simply ignore them and divert.
And we are urged to circle the wagons and deny the real problem again.
October 16, 2013
Always watch the numbers. Watch the profits of insurance companies, oil companies, bankers, and thieves. Watch the expanding gap between rich and poor. There's always a bargain, and the poor are always the losers. Every. Single. Time.
You have argued irrelevancies throughout this thread and relentlessly diverted from the main point. You argue whether 5 votes is a "large" margin, or you argue that since Dems don't lose by "just enough" (i.e., one vote every single time), that the pattern of corporateward lurch after corporateward lurch is somehow irrelevant or does not exist.
And now you distort my point by arguing that since members of the Progressive Caucus do not serve as the "rotating villains" every single time, that the entire pattern of betrayal does not exist. Never mind that the list I posted shows Betrayal after Betrayal after Betrayal caused by the voting behavior of Democrats, whether Blue Dogs alone or members of the Progressive Caucus happen to be the "rotating villains" of the moment.
And even as you attempt to use these absurd irrelevancies to divert from the overwhelming pattern of corporate sellout through Democratic votes, you at the same time offer the bizarre, Orwellian claim that this week's most recent betrayal by Democrats is *counterevidence* to what I am saying. In other words, a new betrayal vote is *evidence* that the pattern of betrayal votes is illusory.
You can't make this stuff up.
The point is that the corporate outcome is consistent. It is a pattern. It is deliberate. And it is utterly consistent with the relentless, proactive corporate direction of this administration since Day One, detailed in this list that blows apart the absurd propaganda claim that Republican obstructionism is the only or main problem here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3202395 . Of course, the quiet replacement by the administration of a public option with the corporate ACA in back-door meetings with insurance executives, even as he was still lying to the public that it was still on the table, and even though the public option was very popular in polls at the time and could have been pushed with public support, is just one particularly ugly example. The direction of this administration is relentlessly corporate, and the behavior of Democrats in Congress is glaringly consistent. We have a problem. Not with rogue Democrats here and there, but with the overwhelming *chosen* direction of the Party.
Every Democrat who cares about the Party, and every American who cares about the nation, needs to face this problem of corporate money driving policy. The excuses, denials, and rationalizations do not cut it anymore. There's a reason this country is in crisis now. Republicans have long been trying to loot the country like this. The difference now is that corporatists have now seized control of our Party, too, and the Democratic Party is no longer standing in the way of the looting.
The cherry on top is your attempt here and below to dismiss this entire history of betrayal after betrayal...the continued relentless increase of the gap between rich and poor through policy even under a Democratic administration....by mocking one journalist who happened to write about it. You know the corporate propaganda has no good response to an argument when the reflexive smears of Glenn Greenwald ("GG"
and cries of "Libertarian!" are trotted out.
What a diversionary, distorting reply,
but illustrative of the corporate propaganda that is now ubiquitous on this site.
You chose to ignore the most relevant information in that thread expressing the rage of DU at another "bargain" that overwhelmingly favors the rich. Look at the numbers:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022115254#post23
Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #20)Wed Jan 2, 2013, 12:52 AM
woo me with science (22,592 posts)
23. And the middle class and poor will pay much, much more than the rich.
Not only does this public relations tax increase affect only a small fraction of the wealthy who should be paying, it is insulting in its size and the amount of money it does collect, compared to the amount of money that will be squeezed from Americans who have already been knocked down and robbed over and over and over again.
Look how obscene the numbers are: The new taxes on the top two percent will collect a measly 600 billion dollars, out of more than FOUR TRILLION that the White House seeks to collect over the next decade. Guess who's in line to be soaked for the rest?
http://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/542987339047200
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022110382
Always watch the numbers. Watch the profits of insurance companies, oil companies, bankers, and thieves. Watch the expanding gap between rich and poor. There's always a bargain, and the poor are always the losers. Every. Single. Time.
You have argued irrelevancies throughout this thread and relentlessly diverted from the main point. You argue whether 5 votes is a "large" margin, or you argue that since Dems don't lose by "just enough" (i.e., one vote every single time), that the pattern of corporateward lurch after corporateward lurch is somehow irrelevant or does not exist.
And now you distort my point by arguing that since members of the Progressive Caucus do not serve as the "rotating villains" every single time, that the entire pattern of betrayal does not exist. Never mind that the list I posted shows Betrayal after Betrayal after Betrayal caused by the voting behavior of Democrats, whether Blue Dogs alone or members of the Progressive Caucus happen to be the "rotating villains" of the moment.
And even as you attempt to use these absurd irrelevancies to divert from the overwhelming pattern of corporate sellout through Democratic votes, you at the same time offer the bizarre, Orwellian claim that this week's most recent betrayal by Democrats is *counterevidence* to what I am saying. In other words, a new betrayal vote is *evidence* that the pattern of betrayal votes is illusory.
You can't make this stuff up.
The point is that the corporate outcome is consistent. It is a pattern. It is deliberate. And it is utterly consistent with the relentless, proactive corporate direction of this administration since Day One, detailed in this list that blows apart the absurd propaganda claim that Republican obstructionism is the only or main problem here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3202395 . Of course, the quiet replacement by the administration of a public option with the corporate ACA in back-door meetings with insurance executives, even as he was still lying to the public that it was still on the table, and even though the public option was very popular in polls at the time and could have been pushed with public support, is just one particularly ugly example. The direction of this administration is relentlessly corporate, and the behavior of Democrats in Congress is glaringly consistent. We have a problem. Not with rogue Democrats here and there, but with the overwhelming *chosen* direction of the Party.
Every Democrat who cares about the Party, and every American who cares about the nation, needs to face this problem of corporate money driving policy. The excuses, denials, and rationalizations do not cut it anymore. There's a reason this country is in crisis now. Republicans have long been trying to loot the country like this. The difference now is that corporatists have now seized control of our Party, too, and the Democratic Party is no longer standing in the way of the looting.
The cherry on top is your attempt here and below to dismiss this entire history of betrayal after betrayal...the continued relentless increase of the gap between rich and poor through policy even under a Democratic administration....by mocking one journalist who happened to write about it. You know the corporate propaganda has no good response to an argument when the reflexive smears of Glenn Greenwald ("GG"
and cries of "Libertarian!" are trotted out.
October 15, 2013
As per the unwritten rules for obligatory corporate Dem propaganda responses,
you will continue to argue this point until everyone else gives up from exhaustion. You will argue relentlessly, because any overt statement of the obvious, coordinated control of this party by corporatist Dems cannot be permitted to stand in the current climate of 24/7 propaganda and messaging.
You will do this even though history and simple observation render your conclusions absurd. We are to accept that the now-predictable votes of Democrats to enable corporate hijacking of government are evidence that the Party really opposes corporate hijacking of government....just as in other threads we are solemnly lectured that Obama's offering up Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block proves that he opposes cuts in Social Security and Medicare.
War is Peace, and the chocolate ration has been increased, and they are working on an even bigger increase for all of us.
You will create and fixate on absurd distractions like suggesting that 2-3 spare GOP votes would be "close," but "4-5" certainly wouldn't be, ignoring entirely the larger point, which is that each and every important vote like this is predictable as the sunrise when it comes to its ultimate outcome: The Party makes sure of it.
Houston, we have a problem.
The fatally compromised Progressive Caucus.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022160908
Progressive Caucus Folds: Progressives who won't pledge no cuts to SS, Medicare, etc
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022451785
Wall Street Deregulation Garners Bipartisan Support Despite Devastating JPMorgan Report
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022539673
Which 73 Democrats Just Voted to Gut Dodd-Frank Today
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023005903
Rachel Maddow Rips Harry Reid For "Caving" on Filibuster Reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251280423
Oh well the American people just a got a bipartisan fucking.......
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022115254
8 Senate Democrats vote with Republicans to cut Food Stamps.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022943396
Senate votes 53-46 to stop US from joining UN Arms Trade Treaty
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014433427
Did one of your Democratic Senators vote to support the Keystone Pipeline?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022559350
WTF? Nine Democrats who voted for the shutdown?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251326927
Did your rep vote to continue NSA spying?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023365703
Which Democrats voted against restoring food stamps
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101664210
GMO Labeling Bill Voted Down In Senate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251307814
Three-Quarters of Progressive Caucus Not Taking a Stand Against Cuts in Social Security, Medicare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022434381
47 members of Congressional Progressive Caucus won't promise not to cut Social Security and Medicare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022657030
October 14, 2013
DUer leveymg and others have correctly identified what is really going on here:
Wake up, America. We had a few good months in which the American people were united and seemed to have an awakening realization that we are being played by corporatists on both sides.
It's still happening.
And again we are conned. The familiar "rotating villains" strategy.
We are being played by corporatists in both parties. Again.
These are not rogues. They are the designated villains for this round. This is the same con our own corporate-purchased party plays on us, over and over again.
http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 11:24 AM UTC
The Democratic Party’s deceitful game
They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can pass
By Glenn Greenwald
Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over on their own supporters, and this illustrates perfectly how it’s played:
.... Rockefeller was willing to be a righteous champion for the public option as long as it had no chance of passing...But now that Democrats are strongly considering the reconciliation process — which will allow passage with only 50 rather than 60 votes and thus enable them to enact a public option — Rockefeller is suddenly “inclined to oppose it” because he doesn’t “think the timing of it is very good” and it’s “too partisan.” What strange excuses for someone to make with regard to a provision that he claimed, a mere five months ago (when he knew it couldn’t pass), was such a moral and policy imperative that he “would not relent” in ensuring its enactment.
The Obama White House did the same thing. As I wrote back in August, the evidence was clear that while the President was publicly claiming that he supported the public option, the White House, in private, was doing everything possible to ensure its exclusion from the final bill (in order not to alienate the health insurance industry by providing competition for it). Yesterday, Obama — while having his aides signal that they would use reconciliation if necessary — finally unveiled his first-ever health care plan as President, and guess what it did not include? The public option, which he spent all year insisting that he favored oh-so-much but sadly could not get enacted: Gosh, I really want the public option, but we just don’t have 60 votes for it; what can I do?. As I documented in my contribution to the NYT forum yesterday, now that there’s a 50-vote mechanism to pass it, his own proposed bill suddenly excludes it.
This is what the Democratic Party does...They’re willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as there’s no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bush’s eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bush’s habeas and interrogation abuses (“Gosh, what can we do? We just don’t have 60 votes).
The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, it’s Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, it’s Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and “breaking with their party” to ensure Michael Mukasey’s confirmation as Attorney General; then it’s Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then it’s Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they can’t blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don’t need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 11:24 AM UTC
The Democratic Party’s deceitful game
They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can pass
By Glenn Greenwald
Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over on their own supporters, and this illustrates perfectly how it’s played:
.... Rockefeller was willing to be a righteous champion for the public option as long as it had no chance of passing...But now that Democrats are strongly considering the reconciliation process — which will allow passage with only 50 rather than 60 votes and thus enable them to enact a public option — Rockefeller is suddenly “inclined to oppose it” because he doesn’t “think the timing of it is very good” and it’s “too partisan.” What strange excuses for someone to make with regard to a provision that he claimed, a mere five months ago (when he knew it couldn’t pass), was such a moral and policy imperative that he “would not relent” in ensuring its enactment.
The Obama White House did the same thing. As I wrote back in August, the evidence was clear that while the President was publicly claiming that he supported the public option, the White House, in private, was doing everything possible to ensure its exclusion from the final bill (in order not to alienate the health insurance industry by providing competition for it). Yesterday, Obama — while having his aides signal that they would use reconciliation if necessary — finally unveiled his first-ever health care plan as President, and guess what it did not include? The public option, which he spent all year insisting that he favored oh-so-much but sadly could not get enacted: Gosh, I really want the public option, but we just don’t have 60 votes for it; what can I do?. As I documented in my contribution to the NYT forum yesterday, now that there’s a 50-vote mechanism to pass it, his own proposed bill suddenly excludes it.
This is what the Democratic Party does...They’re willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as there’s no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bush’s eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bush’s habeas and interrogation abuses (“Gosh, what can we do? We just don’t have 60 votes).
The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, it’s Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, it’s Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and “breaking with their party” to ensure Michael Mukasey’s confirmation as Attorney General; then it’s Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then it’s Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they can’t blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don’t need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.
DUer leveymg and others have correctly identified what is really going on here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3839411
67. It's because this lunacy is all a quite rational way to propel the Center-Right Austerity agenda.
That's precisely why I don't believe this BS about 40 Teahadis being responsible for the "crisis."
A partial shutdown suits the deficit hawks in both parties just fine, since it's been adjusted so it doesn't actually impact payrolls in the military and Intelligence agencies. This is simply austerity and cuts to social programs without anyone having to actually vote for it, and that's making the Center-Right smile.
Of course, they won't allow actual default of the debt - the "threat" of that just another psychological device to make this seem like a real crisis. It's not - it's simply austerity by default.
67. It's because this lunacy is all a quite rational way to propel the Center-Right Austerity agenda.
That's precisely why I don't believe this BS about 40 Teahadis being responsible for the "crisis."
A partial shutdown suits the deficit hawks in both parties just fine, since it's been adjusted so it doesn't actually impact payrolls in the military and Intelligence agencies. This is simply austerity and cuts to social programs without anyone having to actually vote for it, and that's making the Center-Right smile.
Of course, they won't allow actual default of the debt - the "threat" of that just another psychological device to make this seem like a real crisis. It's not - it's simply austerity by default.
Wake up, America. We had a few good months in which the American people were united and seemed to have an awakening realization that we are being played by corporatists on both sides.
It's still happening.
September 12, 2013
We are to blindly pick a side and wave our flags, STUPIDLY, belligerently, defiantly
ignoring any and all moral, ethical, and intellectual complexities.
We are incessantly bullied to think STUPIDLY, because STUPID THINKING lets corporate thieves and warmongers off the hook.
Yup. It's the Call to Stupid.
The incessant bullying to think like a stupid person.
We hate Ron Paul; therefore, if he is against bombing we should be for it.
We hate Glenn Greenwald; therefore, NSA spying is unimportant.
We hate Putin; therefore, nothing in that op-ed, not even one WORD, could possibly have any merit to it.
We hate Glenn Greenwald; therefore, NSA spying is unimportant.
We hate Putin; therefore, nothing in that op-ed, not even one WORD, could possibly have any merit to it.
We are to blindly pick a side and wave our flags, STUPIDLY, belligerently, defiantly
ignoring any and all moral, ethical, and intellectual complexities.
We are incessantly bullied to think STUPIDLY, because STUPID THINKING lets corporate thieves and warmongers off the hook.
August 25, 2013
Lizards.
"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said Ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in."
From So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish, by Douglas Adams
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said Ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in."
From So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish, by Douglas Adams
August 9, 2013
Remember this compilation of MSM clips about the poor
that was put together for The Daily Show?
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over
I recommend watching the whole thing, but the last few minutes, especially, will sicken and enrage you. It is exactly what you are talking about here.
This is the social messaging of a corporate state that values profit above human lives.
July 28, 2013
Their purpose is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.
It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.
The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies and talking points.
___________________________________________
*which is why the arguments need not be consistent or even logical... (edit add: Nov. 2013)
The goal of the propaganda assaults across the internet is not to convince anyone of anything.*
Their purpose is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.
It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.
The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies and talking points.
___________________________________________
*which is why the arguments need not be consistent or even logical... (edit add: Nov. 2013)
June 12, 2013
The point is that the Fourth Amendment REQUIRES PROBABLE CAUSE before the United States government may intrude into the privacy of citizens.
When a criminal is loose in this country, the government may not send out police officers en masse to demand entry into and search every home of millions of Americans in an attempt to find him. They need probable cause to invade your privacy...to have access to your home and your private life and information.
Our government has now outrageously decided that it has the right to preemptively demand, sweep up, and STORE the daily, detailed private activities and communication information of every American citizen. That they promise to get warrants to view or use the information after they collect it is outrageously beside the point. They have no business whatsoever collecting it and storing it for government use *in the first place.*
The propagandists are deliberately creating arguments about the circumstances under which the stored material may be viewed, or the process by which permission to view it is obtained. They are deliberately and manipulatively trying to frame the debate so that the sweeping collection/storage of our private material is a GIVEN, and we fight about the legal process that occurs afterward for use of the data.
Building surveillance files full of the private, daily activities and communication of millions of citizens is what totalitarian governments do. It creates an entire infrastructure through which the government has the means to preemptively target any citizen they consider problematic, through access to the minute details of their lives. It is an invitation to abuse and tyranny.
Read the Fourth Amendment again:
On what probable cause does the US government have the right to demand, collect, and store the contents of YOUR daily private phone calls, emails, and internet activity, and that of millions of other Americans?
We are being manipulated to miss the point.
The point is not whether laws have been passed to allow the spying. All governments that turn authoritarian attempt to "legalize" what they do.
The point is not whether anyone listens to the phone calls, although we have no reason whatsoever to trust that they don't/won't.
The point is not even that the FISA court is rubber stamping every single request that it receives, although this fact certainly drives home what a kangaroo court and illusion of responsible legal oversight we are dealing with here.
The point is that the Fourth Amendment REQUIRES PROBABLE CAUSE before the United States government may intrude into the privacy of citizens.
When a criminal is loose in this country, the government may not send out police officers en masse to demand entry into and search every home of millions of Americans in an attempt to find him. They need probable cause to invade your privacy...to have access to your home and your private life and information.
Our government has now outrageously decided that it has the right to preemptively demand, sweep up, and STORE the daily, detailed private activities and communication information of every American citizen. That they promise to get warrants to view or use the information after they collect it is outrageously beside the point. They have no business whatsoever collecting it and storing it for government use *in the first place.*
The propagandists are deliberately creating arguments about the circumstances under which the stored material may be viewed, or the process by which permission to view it is obtained. They are deliberately and manipulatively trying to frame the debate so that the sweeping collection/storage of our private material is a GIVEN, and we fight about the legal process that occurs afterward for use of the data.
Building surveillance files full of the private, daily activities and communication of millions of citizens is what totalitarian governments do. It creates an entire infrastructure through which the government has the means to preemptively target any citizen they consider problematic, through access to the minute details of their lives. It is an invitation to abuse and tyranny.
Read the Fourth Amendment again:
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.
On what probable cause does the US government have the right to demand, collect, and store the contents of YOUR daily private phone calls, emails, and internet activity, and that of millions of other Americans?
June 10, 2013
How does authoritarianism happen? Bit by bit, step by step. And the outrageous propaganda we are seeing now is designed to shift our thinking.....to invite us to debate, in utter seriousness and with great respect for the opposing arguments, our Constitutional rights, as though they should be debatable at all. We do not entertain "serious" and "rational" debates about the pros and cons of killing and eating small children. We likewise should not respond to these oh-so-serious bids to debate whether we really need our fundamental Constitutional rights and protections.
I recommend that when we see utter garbage like this, we simply respond with the text of the Fourth Amendment, and probably the First, too, since that is equally under assault.
As Americans, we should be discussing how to stop this government abuse of power, not whether it might, possibly, be a good idea to stop it. We allow propagandists to frame and shift the debate, and we move steadily into an authoritarian new way of thinking in which what used to be our given, understood, fundamental Constitutional rights as American citizens become merely points of opinion, like whether the government should paint its flagpoles silver or grey.
Don't entertain this garbage.
The corporate-authoritarian propaganda in the MSM and right here on DU now is inviting you to "debate" your fundamental Constitutional rights. You are being asked to have very respectful and serious discussions about the pros and cons of the government's having the right to spy on every single one of us, and amass and store our private information and communication activities in databases that can be accessed at any time in the future. The rationalizations are varied but invariably outrageous: Corporations do it, so what's the difference? Doesn't the new world of terrorism demand new methods? Don't you realize some bad, bad Republicans are against this?
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.
How does authoritarianism happen? Bit by bit, step by step. And the outrageous propaganda we are seeing now is designed to shift our thinking.....to invite us to debate, in utter seriousness and with great respect for the opposing arguments, our Constitutional rights, as though they should be debatable at all. We do not entertain "serious" and "rational" debates about the pros and cons of killing and eating small children. We likewise should not respond to these oh-so-serious bids to debate whether we really need our fundamental Constitutional rights and protections.
I recommend that when we see utter garbage like this, we simply respond with the text of the Fourth Amendment, and probably the First, too, since that is equally under assault.
As Americans, we should be discussing how to stop this government abuse of power, not whether it might, possibly, be a good idea to stop it. We allow propagandists to frame and shift the debate, and we move steadily into an authoritarian new way of thinking in which what used to be our given, understood, fundamental Constitutional rights as American citizens become merely points of opinion, like whether the government should paint its flagpoles silver or grey.
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Jan 13, 2004, 10:24 PMNumber of posts: 32,139
