From the time he voted for the FISA Bill I knew Obama was a Clintonite and it would be more of the same from him.

The Great White Hope has shown himself. He's a Federalist and a Charlatan.

We don't have a Government of the People, we have a Government of the Elites.

I guess Transparency in Government has just hit rock bottom. The ObamaMamas will tell us what we NEED to know, and we should trust them...though of course they don't trust us to review our own government and decide for ourselves.

He's shredding the constitution.

/boo hoo

He's shredding the constitution.
#2 | Posted by shirtsbyeric

That's already been done. He's just refusing to let us bring out the scotch tape.

Change you can believe in!

Have the talking points been issued yet? Where are the usual deflectors?

The more things "change"
The more they stay the same...

Meet the new boss...
Same as the old boss.

WOLF!

WOLF!

WOLF!

Where are the usual deflectors?
#5 | Posted by JOE

Pat deflector response #5:

"Funny that the people who are crying about this now were the ones who supported Bush doing the same thing."

That should about cover it.

Funny that the people who are crying about this now were the ones who supported Bush doing the same thing."

That should about cover it.

#9 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-04-06 02:14 PM

Not really. If they felt Bush was wrong doing it, then Obama is wrong for doing it, probably more wrong because he has said he would not do the same thing, which means he knows it is wrong.

"Not really."

You do know you're preaching to the converted, right? I'm not saying it sufficiently covers the justification, only that it covers the substance of the deflection.

I guess I never saw "wolf wolf wolf!" coming though.

Oh....gotcha! Yes, they will say that and I will laugh at them for saying it. Everyday this site proves we live in a two party country: the party in power and the party out of power and we support whatever our party does as long as it is in power.

I'm not sure the deflections will come though... I think there isn't much way to spin this since its contrary to a position they were vocal about before the inauguration. One or two may come by to give meek admission to their embarassment.

I didn't support Bush, the Patriot Act, the FISA Bill, or any other law that allows an intrusion into our privacy. But it is apparent now that Obama and the Mamas will not correct the abuses of the Bush Administration, will not convene an investigation into illegal activities within or without the government, and of course Geithner et al will continue to cover up the malfeasance of the Wall Street banking industry and steadfastly resist any attempt to audit the Federal Reserve.

After all, they need those campaign contributions for 2010 & 2012.

This is the Chump Change you can believe in because it is True.

But it is apparent now that Obama and the Mamas will not correct the abuses of the Bush Administration

Of course not...they will be "responsible" with the powers....naturally. (ROFLMAO and crying at the same time)

"ROFLMAO and crying at the same time"

That's cognitive dissonance because you believed.

I don't know if I believed, but I hoped, prayed, and begged.

I voted Obama, so this is my fault in some ways. I am still thankful Plain is no where near the Oval Office, but Obama is quickly declaring himself a "one term wonder."

I don't know if I believed, but I hoped, prayed, and begged.
#18 | Posted by kanrei

I reserve hope and prayer for the pew... and begging for... mi esposa.

Doesn't voting count as a "pew?" I know I usually have to hold my nose.

Kanrei- just another dopeless hope fiend.

Doesn't voting count as a "pew?" I know I usually have to hold my nose.
#21 | Posted by kanrei

Yeah... I brought my daughter into the booth with me. I whispered to her that maybe she'll find it in her heart to forgive me if it turns out I did the wrong thing. So far my conscience is clear.

"Congress expanded the wiretapping program in 2008 with passage of amendments to the Act, which gave telecom companies immunity for past and future participation in the program and expanded the legal use of warrantless wiretaps from 48 hours to seven days. The revised Act also allowed the government to destroy records of previous taps.

Obama voted for the revised Act while a senator last year."

"President Barack Obama invoked "state secrets" to prevent a court from reviewing the legality of the National Security Agency's warantless wiretapping program, moving late Friday to have a lawsuit that challenged the program dismissed"
........

As Obama should because GW broke no laws,contrary to the opinions of the lefty haters on the drudge.

Opinions are not laws.

The power of the president is to preserve our national security with all the gray issues going to him.Thats what real leadership is all about.

Seen Obama lately? He thinks he's emerging as some kind of world one man show.

Its going to be tough on him when he goes into freefall.

Suck it up.

rwd

The power of the president is to preserve our national security with all the gray issues going to him.Thats what real leadership is all about.

Not totally true. That is akin to Nixon's "if the President does it then it's not illegal" belief. The "gray issues" are for the SCOTUS to decide, not for the President to assume. The 10th Amendment clearly says any power not EXPRESSLY given to the Feds is a state's right. It is therefore up to the SCOTUS to say if it is addressed in the Constitution. Bush assumed a lot of powers whose validity have yet to be tested.

The Founders were very weary of central government and did all they could to limit it. They would NEVER default power to the Feds when in question.

This is the Precise roll of the President

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

If there was nothing illegal, nobody would need immunity.

The appearance of the law must be maintained, especially while it's being broken- Tamminy Hall

The "gray issues" are for the SCOTUS to decide, not for the President to assume.
#26 | Posted by kanrei at 2009-04-06 02:59 PM | Reply | Flag

The issues are for the congress to decide.
If Bush's policys were so contrary to the law they could have fixed it at anytime.
As was pointed out one time,the congress whos votes are in favor of the president this may be an issue.
Most of Bush's policys were from executive orders if i'm not mistaken,then the congress has the power to change that.
Now that there is an overwhelming support for Obama votewise in congress I do not see any problem with curbing his power with simple ledgeslation.

The issues are for the congress to decide.

That is so wrong. Congress makes laws, the SCOTUS determines if those laws are constitutional or not. Many times Congress has been overturned by the SCOTUS.

Most of Bush's policies were from "signing statements", not Executive Orders and the validity of those signing statements has yet to be tested in a court of laws. There is nothing in the Constitution however allowing for the President to make "signing statements."

Besides kanrei,since when are laws passed in congress vetted by the SCOTUS before they become law?

rwd

Signing statements?
The presidents handlers are not so stupid as to allow this to happen without some kind of opinion on the subject.
What signing statements are you refering to that you think he broke the law.
I am dam near positive the FISA issue was an executive order.

rwd

They are vetted everytime they are challenged and go before the Supreme Court. Because you do not understand the workings of the government is no reason to get snippy. Perhaps you should spend some time educating yourself on the various roles of each branch of government. That is how the Texas sodomy law was thrown out for example.

The presidents handlers are not so stupid as to allow this to happen without some kind of opinion on the subject.

Not many people advertise how clueless they really are. I am impressed.

Look whos getting snippy now.

I will just take a wild asses guess and state the Texas sodomy law was passed as law first,challenged and then thrown out.
The SCOTUS does not vett pending ledgeslation unless congress asks it to do so first.

rwd

The SCOTUS does not vett pending ledgeslation unless congress asks it to do so first.

I never said they did. You need this site too:

RIF.org

^5 100% agreement with You Kanrei.

I do not see any problem with curbing his power with simple ledgeslation. [SIC] rightwingDUMB

Legislation is never simple, but then if you can't spell it you probably know little else about it.

And this is not about curbing his power but his failure to abide his campaign promise and open the books so some sunshine hits those "gray" areas.

What's interesting is response from business people I know who are in the Republican Party and don't like the fact that the government is capturing phone conversations, emails, and even visitors to websites they decide to monitor.

None these guys are doing anything illegal, but how can anyone believe that these communications are protected from competitors when we have people in the government selling "state secrets" to foreign governments, and perhaps foreign corporations?

You wouldn't want a Peeping Tom in your neighborhood, but it's okay for the government to go snooping around, archiving if not reading your correspondence?

Of course the excuse is that we are at WAR. I say bullshit.

Hussein knows this is a power the government needs to combat terrorism.

This authority has been used for drug cases for decades, this is nothing new.

If the government is going to have the power to eavesdrop on pot growers, they damn sure better have it to stop Mohammed from blowing up more buildings.

It's a shame they didn't use this authority to put Hussein's best friend and ghost writer, Billy Ayers, out of business sooner then he was.

WOLF!

WOLF!

WOLF!

#8 | Posted by frankf55

If I remember correctly, Obama voted for an updated version of FISA - the one he is now defending in court - as a Senator, much to the chagrin of those on the left. I haven't read the article; is this inconsistent with that vote?

Nevermind, answered my own question:

If there was nothing illegal, nobody would need immunity.

#29 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-04-06 03:02 PM | Reply

You must be a plaintiff attorney.

A lack of immunity for phone companies turns them into the deep pockets and nuisance lawsuits. They should have immunity because they are not tapping anyone's phone: they are only cooperating with an official investigation.

OzarkAggie

Thought maybe you'd check back on here since you put up the thread.

I left you a post on the Nooner the other day when we adding on to the DR Military Veterans list but guess you didn't get back there.

This is a probably dumb, but sincere, question.

When you said to change your branch of service to "US Submarine Navy" that's exactly what I did on the list. But after thinking about it, and knowing your style of humor.... : )

It is really suppose to be listed as "US Submarine Navy" after your name?

Or should it say: "US Navy (Submarine)?

Or was the joke on me and it's just regular: "US Navy"?

I'm kinda particular when it comes to making sure the "DR Military Veterans" list is correctly done.

forgot to add "thanks!"

Obama = smarter bush

Opinions are not laws.

John yoo thinks they are. So did the bush admin.

That said...

Obama is going to be a one term president if he keeps doing shit like this.

Obama is going to be a one term president if he keeps doing shit like this.

He got elected by voting for shit like this, so what would prevent him from being reelected? He hasn't changed his stance.

Obama is going to be a one term president if he keeps doing shit like this.

Alex, I agree, I am already started the downing of obama at work with the guys.

If he isn't going to keep with his presumed portrayal stance of cleaning this shit out, screw obama.......one term and kick him out.

If we wanted this shit we could of just put a republican in if we didn't expect things to get fixed.

"This authority has been used for drug cases for decades, this is nothing new.

#41 | Posted by r_zeitgeist at 2009-04-06 05:25 PM"

That's different. There are warrants in those cases, and probable cause.

Why do Americans have guns? To protect their constitutional rights you say? Well then its really simple:Go protect your fucking rights!

And take up arms against the BO Administration for taking a logical position in connection with a litigation? Is that what you're saying Anti? Me thinks you need to relax a bit.

First--there is nothing wrong with these tools to protect this country.

Bush did it--data mining, FISA--the congress had oversight and then changed the FISA to reflect the new technology.

I had no problem with Bush doing this and knew this was going to (possibly) be handed--to a Dem POTUS.

As long as the oversight is there--no one taking advantage or over-reaching---no abuse---this is fine by me with Obama.

Wow, I agree with Murphy for once - and that was Obama's point when he voted in favor of the updated FISA bill.

It is not the data mining itself, but the fact that these people have access that the rest of us do not.

Secrecy begets tyranny.

Funny that the people who are crying about this now were the ones who supported Bush doing the same thing."

That should about cover it.

#9 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

Funny that Libtards were demanding Bush's impeachment on this, but now the sound of crickets fills the air!

Onebullshit sadly is mostly correct. A lot of very quiet democrats on this now that they get to use the toys.

I differentiate democrats from liberals on purpose as corporate democrats are not liberal obviously.

Obama is a real President who is trying to put the Bullshit of (8) years of constitution destroying, power happy, war mongering, money grubbing fanatical little children behind us even though all these Bush/Cheney mother fuckers deserve to be in prison.

I could refute you by bringing up expansion of the war into Pakistan. I could also bring up the fact that he fully intends to occupy Iraq indefinitely. I could could bring up the fact that the patriot act is still here. I could also add the department of fatherland security.

But, it's just easier to call you a fucking imbecile.

Is it possible for someone to be a bigger fucking imbecile than the one who lived in the White House for the last (8) years?

A trillion dollar war to oust a (2) bit thug dictator who couldn't even fly a fucking plane in 2/3'rds of his own country and Obama is expanding the war into Pakistan where the whole fucking thing started and where the greatest threat to the security to this country still remains.

"Obama fully intends to occupy Iraq"...Did you look into his soul like Bush did Putins and see the evil of his heart??? MORON For your information pal...John McCain lost then election.
We aren't staying in Iraq any longer han we have to in spite of Cheneys attempt to retain control of the worlds second largest oil reserves there at any cost in treasure and life.

The ignorance and outlandish statements of people never ceases to amaze me.

And I'm the Imbecile !!!

Dude... Check the Terrorist Color Code warning. Piss your pants in fear and then buy some guns and Tom Ridge Duct tape and put in around your house windows and go hide in your basement for the rest of your life.

Well, the Bush impeachment crowd just lost one of their "arguments".

Well, the Bush impeachment crowd just lost one of their "arguments".

#63 | Posted by everlong

Why impeach Bush ??? The boy appears to have vanished like a fart in the wind.

Imagine that...a two term (8) year President who claims history will will treat him as favorably as it now treats Harry Truman and the child has gone into complete hiding !!!

Now that's transparency you can clearly see.

Oh, and also change you can believe in.

Citizens of the world.

rofl

8) year President who claims history will will treat him as favorably as it now treats Harry Truman and the child has gone into complete hiding !!!

#64 | Posted by USATrueandBlue7

Some would call his actions simply class. Unlike Bill who stayed in the spotlight for as long as he could after his term was up, Bush realizes that he is no longer president and that any public remarks from him could only serve to belittle or demean the current presidents position.

yeah that's right, everlong, that's why bush is staying out of the spotlight.