Skip to main content

Glenn Greenwald nails the hypocrisy of Barack Obama and the disgusting politics of Diane Feinstein ...

... but does anybody really care?

Greenwald points out that President Obama has (a) repeatedly violated his own promises with respect to warrantless wiretapping, and (b) depends for its renewal on the very hardline conservative GOP politicians he routinely attacks, while ...

Feinstein is channeling her inner Dick Cheney by accusing anybody who wants to even debate transparency of furthering the ends of terrorism (and, yes, kavips, I DO think she wants to run for President in 2016).

If Americans actually understood that part of what the administration demanded in the power to keep even court rulings and specific laws secret, then Democrats would be thinking about drafting Senator Ron Wyden for the nomination.  Senator Wyden had the best quote of the day:
"secret law is inconsistent with democratic governance"
But the reality is that most Americans have become so numbed to the loss of civil liberties and constitutional guarantees that it doesn't really matter any more.

Comments

delacrat said…
"... but does anybody really care?"

Steve,

Last year, the NDAA went down around this time. The speculation was the ruling castes thought it best to slip it in while the "citizens" were preoccupied with Xmas spending, traveling and such. So maybe our rulers believe we care.

Anyway...Happy New Year.
December 29, 2012 at 8:08 PM
kavips said…
I concur. You don't sneak things through when you think no one cares. You sneak things through to be sneaky...

Oops... too late... got to wait 5 years now.

The main press dropped this big time. People want their internet to be free. CISPA and ACTA both were sneaked through, but got caught, and those pushing it got hung out to dry.... Remember every time you clicked onto Google it had your congressman's phone number and you were told to call him...

In 2007 it was acknowledged in court that the US was recording every transaction and every phone call made in the US. That is a lot of info and the enormous size alone protects our privacy. The idea was that once someone popped up as a potential suspect, one could go back probably to 2005 and sift through everything they've done. Had an affair? They'd use the threat of exposing it to solicit untrue information.... and have you incriminate another...

Hopefully none here on this blog has anything they need to keep secret.. because if anyone looks, it is there...

So, yes. People care... I was disheartened that the Saturday papers all slanted it as listening to foreign calls on foreign soils... That is not the turth of this bill at all. In fact the amendment to disclose how many Americans were caught up in this, came close, but was defeated....

The problem is most Americans (look at the outrage when Facebook loosens their privacy settings) don't even know it is happening .. I wouldn't if I hadn't been looking into it during the last passage of it in 2008... I'm so mad at myself. I wish I had remembered that is was supposed to expire.....

I don't have access to the links right now, but it would be wise to remember the case just this year, where an ex marine was arrested, (he thought it was a tv stunt at first) held without access to an attorney three states away in a military brig, for.... what turned out, was the lines of a rap song he'd been trying to sing in person, but had forgotten, and so, he typed them on facebook and sent them over.... In that exchange, AP got information and published that over 10,000 were being incarcerated without trial..

So. the answer is yes, I think every one cares... it is just that they know nothing about it... Our world is simply too big right now...

This is where... I say Happy New Year.
December 30, 2012 at 3:00 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
31 comments
Read more