|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:16 AM Original message |
Obama goes to bat for Bush wiretap program |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
atreides1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:18 AM Response to Original message |
1. Like I said in another thread |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:22 AM Response to Reply #1 |
2. I don't think our Constitution is advising us to "live with disappointments" . . . !! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Political Heretic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:30 AM Response to Reply #1 |
6. We don't have to "learn to live with" anything. It's not our job to passively accept what DC does. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
timeforpeace (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:40 AM Response to Reply #1 |
9. We have to learn to live with this, but we wanted to impeach Bush for it. What a message. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheWatcher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:42 PM Response to Reply #1 |
21. "As long as our football team does it, it's OK." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skittles (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 06:54 PM Response to Reply #1 |
63. it's not a disappointment, it is a TRAVESTY |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kentuck (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:24 AM Response to Original message |
3. Not only should he go to bat for it... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:25 AM Response to Original message |
4. We should have a contest |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Political Heretic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:31 AM Response to Reply #4 |
7. "your title?" It's the title of the San Fransico Chronical newspaper piece. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:28 PM Response to Reply #7 |
14. Thank you . . . I was just going to point that out to him . .. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:35 PM Response to Reply #7 |
18. So you object to the misleading title, too? Glad to hear it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Political Heretic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 01:45 PM Response to Reply #18 |
33. I object to you blaming the poster and not the author. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:44 PM Response to Reply #33 |
53. He's now openly endorsed the title of the OP. Your outrage is misdirected. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:33 PM Response to Reply #18 |
40. Usually the BS comes from the right . . . but, IMO, this title isn't that far off -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:44 PM Response to Reply #40 |
52. I see. So, blaming you for the title isn't that far off. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 06:54 PM Response to Reply #52 |
62. It's far off discussing the actual issue and a ridiculous distraction from very important news. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:27 AM Response to Original message |
5. Illegal surveillance now equals "Crown Jewel". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:40 AM Response to Reply #5 |
10. "the sources and methods of detecting terrorist attacks ..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:01 PM Response to Reply #10 |
11. THIS is our CROWN JEWEL right here: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:05 PM Response to Reply #11 |
12. "but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation," |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:23 PM Response to Reply #12 |
13. "but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation," |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:32 PM Response to Reply #13 |
15. Based on what I understand, the case to be made on warrantless wiretapping |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:32 PM Response to Reply #15 |
16. No argument from me on that account. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:36 PM Response to Reply #16 |
19. Holy shit. Two people on DU when after initial disagreement |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:47 PM Response to Reply #15 |
25. "By a judge" . . .???? No . .. by Congress . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:52 PM Response to Reply #25 |
29. Yes. I would be more likely to support congressional oversight. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 08:31 PM Response to Reply #12 |
66. There is. Don't let stand the illegal implementations of the previous criminal administration. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:50 PM Response to Reply #11 |
27. Original FISA law was already in violation of that -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buzz Clik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:36 PM Response to Reply #5 |
20. You might keep in mind that surveillance of this type has been on the books for decades. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:45 PM Response to Reply #20 |
23. FISA was in response to Nixon wiretapping/Watergate . . . but was itself |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:47 PM Response to Reply #23 |
24. I know, right? FISA was BAD ENOUGH! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:52 PM Response to Reply #24 |
28. All was made retroactively OK . . . and this wiretapping began BEFORE 9/11 . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:55 PM Response to Reply #28 |
32. They went after 5 or 6 of the officers! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:40 PM Response to Reply #32 |
43. Someone here at DU reported on this one company which is why |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:07 PM Response to Reply #43 |
47. Apparently there is a hearing TODAY.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:26 PM Response to Reply #47 |
50. Thank you for two very interesting links . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:39 PM Response to Reply #50 |
51. Nope, you're correct. It was QWEST. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:49 PM Response to Reply #51 |
54. Wow . . . this is certainly info I have to try to get back to later . .. thanks!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Political Heretic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 01:47 PM Response to Reply #20 |
34. It's expansion of a very narrow scope with strict oversight deserves our opposition. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 06:56 PM Response to Reply #20 |
64. Why are you apologizing for Bushco crimes against the people and the Constitution? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:37 PM Response to Reply #5 |
41. ...but notice wiretapping began 7 months BEFORE 9/11, therefore . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FiveGoodMen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:34 AM Response to Original message |
8. Change we can be sure will never happen |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:52 PM Response to Reply #8 |
30. As long as right wing interests control government, you're right --!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:34 PM Response to Original message |
17. Does anyone know what information is sought in this lawsuit? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Contrary1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:42 PM Response to Original message |
22. Well, there is one upside to this... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:48 PM Response to Original message |
26. Is there a difference in implementing a program and defending the results? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:54 PM Response to Reply #26 |
31. If the program is still active they can continue to wiretap . .. "results" are something else...??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 01:55 PM Response to Reply #31 |
36. I think that one thing I'm trying to resolve |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:24 PM Response to Reply #36 |
37. With a blanket of "national security" being used now by OBAMA to cover these |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:45 PM Response to Reply #37 |
44. Well, I think the point of the quote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:52 PM Response to Reply #44 |
45. What bother knowing which program . . . point is didn't protect us from 9/11 . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:03 PM Response to Reply #45 |
46. Right. I think that the quote is a very broad, statement. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:15 PM Response to Reply #46 |
48. Okay . .. so you're looking for release of info without disclosing details of program? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:23 PM Response to Reply #48 |
49. Honestly, I don't know enough about the issue to give a detailed answer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 04:28 PM Response to Reply #49 |
55. Disagree . . . the American public can be trusted when it is well informed on issues . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 04:34 PM Response to Reply #55 |
56. So you think that it is good policy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 04:40 PM Response to Reply #56 |
57. This is massive surveillance -- they're looking for everything. . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 04:48 PM Response to Reply #57 |
58. "at least in good part" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 05:00 PM Response to Reply #58 |
59. Divulge the info to the Congress . .. to a panel and let them decide. . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cant trust em (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 05:07 PM Response to Reply #59 |
60. Great. I appreciate your perspective. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Echo In Light (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 01:48 PM Response to Original message |
35. The thing is, when you consider the fact that it's a phony "war," what does that say about this? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:31 PM Response to Reply #35 |
38. It's another phony war hiding behind "national security" blanket . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 06:57 PM Response to Reply #35 |
65. And what does it say that the 2008 law the article cites was created AFTER the crimes to protect |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tim01 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:31 PM Response to Original message |
39. Maybe it is OUR lives which are going to be more transparent. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
solstice (278 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 02:40 PM Response to Original message |
42. Who didn't see this coming? Obama doesn't give a shit about civil liberties any more than Bush did. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 08:38 PM Response to Reply #42 |
67. and the thread drops ...................... .................... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 06:53 PM Response to Original message |
61. . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Truth2Tell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 08:48 PM Response to Original message |
68. K&R. Obama never really disagreed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:06 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC