If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   While the Petraeus investigation hasn't revealed a crime, it has shown the extent of the FBI's electronic surveillance capabilities. "You ask them for e-mails relevant to the investigation, but they let you look at everything"   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 120
    More: Interesting, CIA Director David H. Petraeus, FBI, investigation, u.s. wars, Rebecca Jarvis, J. Edgar Hoover, capability management, e-mails  
•       •       •

6891 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Nov 2012 at 9:08 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



120 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
Boe
2012-11-18 10:32:17 AM  

incendi: sammyk: The Director of the CIA is a civilian position. UCMJ does not apply.

(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:

(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.

(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.

(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.

(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.

(5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.

(8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.

(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.

(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.

(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(12) Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area ...


I think they still had to have committed the alleged violation while they were on active duty, though. After retirement doesn't count.
 
2012-11-18 10:33:14 AM  

jso2897: St_Francis_P: jso2897: Mean Daddy: No crime yet. The president and his accomplices in the media tell a story 180 degrees contrary to the general. The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt. Does that about cover it?

You forgot Reverend Wright and the Lizard people. And the squirrels - don't forget the squirrels.

What about ACORN? I'm sure they're right in the thick of this.

Look, f**ker - it's 7:25 AM in California, and I have had exactly one half of one cup of coffee - a little slack here, if you don't mind?


I'm hungover and fully caffeinated. This made me laugh.
 
2012-11-18 10:41:45 AM  

St_Francis_P: jso2897: Mean Daddy: No crime yet. The president and his accomplices in the media tell a story 180 degrees contrary to the general. The media laps it up, a film maker goes to jail and not a peep out of the liberal first amendment lover Larry Flynt. Does that about cover it?

You forgot Reverend Wright and the Lizard people. And the squirrels - don't forget the squirrels.

What about ACORN? I'm sure they're right in the thick of this.


I assumed it would be the Elders of Zion. They staged 9/11 in the first place, right? (ACORN is just a stooge front for the Elders.) They know Obama is a sikrit mooslim. They knew he'd try to destroy Israel as soon as he won reelection so they staged Benghazi to knock him out and kick-start another Mideast war to wipe out the Mooslim Brotherhood.. Wheels-within-wheels, sheeple, wheels-within-wheels.
 
2012-11-18 10:46:42 AM  
Firing him doesn't mean he won't have to testify.
 
2012-11-18 10:51:58 AM  

NewportBarGuy: I think you can technically be in violation of UCMJ unless you officially resign your commission. I'm not 100% certain of this, but I'm pretty sure we had this discussion regarding some officers during the Iraq war or something (maybe torture? There were some retired military people involved in that)... T'was years ago, and I can't recall the specific case.

I don't really care, either way... But, if they really want to prosecute under UCMJ, I think they could. Although, in this instance, I'm sure the FBI will focus more on the handling, storage, and dissemination of classified material.


The prosecutorial guidance we received back in the day was that acceptance of *any* "retirement" retainer pay would make you subject to recall to active duty and subject to the UCMJ. The only "out" would be not cashing that sweet first check, and who wouldn't want to do that?
 
2012-11-18 10:57:11 AM  

mr_a: While I wouldn't want the guy as a brother-in-law, why exactly does infidelity make a man unfit to run the CIA? And I don't really buy the "classified material" line, unless someone can point to actual documents of value. Hell, the weather forecast is probably classified top-secret.

I am all for law and order, and having good state security- but we have gone too far. The rules of search and protection from state-sponsored snooping have not caught up with the ability of gather and analyze electronic communications.

I don't consider myself especially paranoid, but I suspect that most of my phone calls and emails are monitored somewhere along the line by some giant computer. I just hope we don't destroy our liberty and freedom in trying to protect our liberty and freedom.


While I agree with you about the overly paranoid version of America we seem to be living in if you are a part of the security apparatus of the country you have agreed to their terms and conditions so if you want to break their rules then you get what you agreed to when you joined up. I feel for the guy, he just wanted a little bit of strange and his carreer has been ruined but no one forced him to join the CIA he wanted it.
 
2012-11-18 10:59:27 AM  
Damn that George Bush and his spying! We really need to get rid of this guy....
 
2012-11-18 11:18:39 AM  

This About That: Thing: Who the f*** is so slow they don't assume that the FBI can intercept anything - anything - that goes over the Internet both in history and in real time? The FBI can easily penetrate the military, however slightly.


It used to be illegal, to just trawl everything all the time, and do with it whatever you like. Does this mean it wasn't done before? No. But it was illegal.

All Hail Our Modern Police State
 
2012-11-18 11:19:17 AM  

mr_a: While I wouldn't want the guy as a brother-in-law, why exactly does infidelity make a man unfit to run the CIA? And I don't really buy the "classified material" line, unless someone can point to actual documents of value. Hell, the weather forecast is probably classified top-secret.

I am all for law and order, and having good state security- but we have gone too far. The rules of search and protection from state-sponsored snooping have not caught up with the ability of gather and analyze electronic communications.

I don't consider myself especially paranoid, but I suspect that most of my phone calls and emails are monitored somewhere along the line by some giant computer. I just hope we don't destroy our liberty and freedom in trying to protect our liberty and freedom.


Simple answer: the person who runs an organization as powerful as the CIA must be held to an incredibly high standard of judgement. It simply isn't conscionable to allow someone so powerful to get away with making long-term errors in judgement like that.
 
2012-11-18 11:21:38 AM  

BravadoGT: Damn that George Bush and his spying! We really need to get rid of this guy....


lolwut
 
2012-11-18 11:22:10 AM  

BravadoGT: Damn that George Bush and his spying! We really need to get rid of this guy....


Well, having clones of him run for president and lose isn't a real good way of doing that.
 
2012-11-18 11:42:06 AM  

Kibbler: This About That: Thing: Who the f*** is so slow they don't assume that the FBI can intercept anything - anything - that goes over the Internet both in history and in real time? The FBI can easily penetrate the military, however slightly.


It used to be illegal, to just trawl everything all the time, and do with it whatever you like. Does this mean it wasn't done before? No. But it was illegal.

All Hail Our Modern Police State


The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail stored in the cloud.

Thanks, Obama.
 
2012-11-18 11:50:19 AM  

Kibbler: It used to be illegal, to just trawl everything all the time, and do with it whatever you like. Does this mean it wasn't done before? No. But it was illegal.


I believe the public discovery of the practice and subsequent shenanigans involved a name change from Omnivore to Carnivore. At least that's the part we know about. There is no doubt in my mind that the FBI, maybe the NSA, maybe Homeboy Security, probably other alphabet soup monitors everything.
 
2012-11-18 11:57:27 AM  

BullBearMS: Thanks, Obama.


For one rare instance I have to side with the "goddamnit Obama" crowd. This capitulation to overreaching police and governmental spying on US citizens, together with Obama's abject refusal to help defuse the prison overcrowding issue (which includes enormous profits to the prison industry and a literal recruiting ground and highly effective continuing education program for a career in criminality) are two big disappointments with the current administration. Not that I would have voted for the other side, but really, what is up with that?
 
2012-11-18 12:00:00 PM  

BullBearMS: Kibbler: This About That: Thing: Who the f*** is so slow they don't assume that the FBI can intercept anything - anything - that goes over the Internet both in history and in real time? The FBI can easily penetrate the military, however slightly.


It used to be illegal, to just trawl everything all the time, and do with it whatever you like. Does this mean it wasn't done before? No. But it was illegal.

All Hail Our Modern Police State

The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail stored in the cloud.

Thanks, Obama.


That's not a good idea. I can understand the reluctance to deny the intelligence community what it wants in the midst of the kind of conflict we are in, but I have to part company with the Administration on this. It's just not the direction we want to be moving in. I'm off to fire off an email to the WH, and my congresscritter.
 
2012-11-18 12:02:30 PM  

This About That: BullBearMS: Thanks, Obama.

For one rare instance I have to side with the "goddamnit Obama" crowd. This capitulation to overreaching police and governmental spying on US citizens, together with Obama's abject refusal to help defuse the prison overcrowding issue (which includes enormous profits to the prison industry and a literal recruiting ground and highly effective continuing education program for a career in criminality) are two big disappointments with the current administration. Not that I would have voted for the other side, but really, what is up with that?


Exactly - I'm glad I voted for Obama, and I'll support him vigorously - but when he is wrong, I'm going to raise my voice in protest.
 
2012-11-18 12:06:43 PM  
the FBI was able to break into and intercept the head of the CIA's various forms of communications


I am conflicted.

On one hand, you want to be able to hold people accountable. The idea that anyone can be investigated in the interests of national security.

On the other, that is some scary ass power to wield. I wonder what kind of oversight is in place
 
2012-11-18 12:21:24 PM  

jso2897: This About That: BullBearMS: Thanks, Obama.

For one rare instance I have to side with the "goddamnit Obama" crowd. This capitulation to overreaching police and governmental spying on US citizens, together with Obama's abject refusal to help defuse the prison overcrowding issue (which includes enormous profits to the prison industry and a literal recruiting ground and highly effective continuing education program for a career in criminality) are two big disappointments with the current administration. Not that I would have voted for the other side, but really, what is up with that?

Exactly - I'm glad I voted for Obama, and I'll support him vigorously - but when he is wrong, I'm going to raise my voice in protest.


That's at least comforting. In 2008, all the civil liberties people were thrown under the bus and called racists if they didn't bow down and worship Obama. I guess it's a bit more realistic after this election. Maybe they learned that smearing everyone who doesn't agree with every one of your policies just turns people off who could have been allies on one or two issues. . . dunno. At least we got rid of that cult of personality thing, that was beginning to look a bit frightening.
 
2012-11-18 12:24:10 PM  

gobstopping: In 2008, all the civil liberties people were thrown under the bus and called racists if they didn't bow down and worship Obama.


Stupid, invalid strawman. I award you no points.
 
2012-11-18 12:26:27 PM  

LasersHurt: gobstopping: In 2008, all the civil liberties people were thrown under the bus and called racists if they didn't bow down and worship Obama.

Stupid, invalid strawman. I award you no points.


Americans have such short memories.
 
2012-11-18 12:26:54 PM  

gobstopping: At least we got rid of that cult of personality thing, that was beginning to look a bit frightening.


To me that seemed more of a media creation, which was in turn trumpeted as What Liberals Really Think by the right-wing sorts.
 
2012-11-18 12:28:04 PM  

gobstopping: LasersHurt: gobstopping: In 2008, all the civil liberties people were thrown under the bus and called racists if they didn't bow down and worship Obama.

Stupid, invalid strawman. I award you no points.

Americans have such short memories.


No, I have a fine memory, and I know that saying "All civil liberties people were called racists" is stupid and grossly inaccurate.
 
2012-11-18 12:35:17 PM  

LasersHurt: gobstopping: LasersHurt: gobstopping: In 2008, all the civil liberties people were thrown under the bus and called racists if they didn't bow down and worship Obama.

Stupid, invalid strawman. I award you no points.

Americans have such short memories.

No, I have a fine memory, and I know that saying "All civil liberties people were called racists" is stupid and grossly inaccurate.


I also have a fine memory and I've personally been attacked on Fark plenty of times for pointing out Obama's miserable civil liberties positions. This was after the head of the ACLU had publicly announced he was disgusted with the positions Obama had taken on civil liberties.

Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay and publish my personal information on Fark because I dared criticize Obama.
 
2012-11-18 12:39:47 PM  

BullBearMS: No, I have a fine memory, and I know that saying "All civil liberties people were called racists" is stupid and grossly inaccurate.

I also have a fine memory and I've personally been attacked on Fark plenty of times for pointing out Obama's miserable civil liberties positions. This was after the head of the ACLU had publicly announced he was disgusted with the positions Obama had taken on civil liberties.

Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay and publish my personal information on Fark because I dared criticize Obama.


Now here's a guy who doesn't know the difference between himself and "ALL" others. Neat.
 
2012-11-18 12:49:26 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: It's awesome to see the state surveillance apparatus directed up its own ass, isn't it?


Yes, this is the real story, isn't it? And it's even the topic of this thread! Imagine!

Nobody is paying any attention. Nothing will happen or change.
 
2012-11-18 12:50:12 PM  

LasersHurt: BullBearMS: No, I have a fine memory, and I know that saying "All civil liberties people were called racists" is stupid and grossly inaccurate.

I also have a fine memory and I've personally been attacked on Fark plenty of times for pointing out Obama's miserable civil liberties positions. This was after the head of the ACLU had publicly announced he was disgusted with the positions Obama had taken on civil liberties.

Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay and publish my personal information on Fark because I dared criticize Obama.

Now here's a guy who doesn't know the difference between himself and "ALL" others. Neat.


When Obama supporters are psychotic enough to attack people for being gay, there are definitely some farked up cult of personality things going on. I'm a liberal, so I'm going to attack you for being gay because you spoke out against warrantless spying?

On the issue of the state spying on it's citizens without a warrant, President Obama has an absolutely miserable record.

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to allow the government, without a court warrant, to affix GPS devices on suspects' vehicles to track their every move.

and

The Obama administration told a federal court Tuesday that the public has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in cellphone location data, and hence the authorities may obtain documents detailing a person's movements from wireless carriers without a probable-cause warrant.

and particularly relevant given the Petraeus incident:

The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual's Internet activity without a court order
 
2012-11-18 12:51:47 PM  

mark12A: That does it! Next international terrorist/criminal/kinky/tasteless scheme I run, it will be conducted using snail mail, sealed with wax, embossed by my signet.....

/that, or quantum crypto


Well, you can send messages that aren't stored in a server at the ISP. I usually prefer hand-written messages by fax. They® can read faxes you print out with machine generated text, but sloppily handwritten text is a different issue, or so the rumor has it.
 
2012-11-18 12:57:03 PM  
BullBearMS:

I sincerely, deeply do not care about anything you've said. He said "ALL" civil libertarians were shiat on. That is dumb and wrong. I called him on it. It is irrelevant if you, as ONE of them, had some troubles.
 
2012-11-18 01:00:09 PM  

gobstopping: jso2897: This About That: BullBearMS: Thanks, Obama.

For one rare instance I have to side with the "goddamnit Obama" crowd. This capitulation to overreaching police and governmental spying on US citizens, together with Obama's abject refusal to help defuse the prison overcrowding issue (which includes enormous profits to the prison industry and a literal recruiting ground and highly effective continuing education program for a career in criminality) are two big disappointments with the current administration. Not that I would have voted for the other side, but really, what is up with that?

Exactly - I'm glad I voted for Obama, and I'll support him vigorously - but when he is wrong, I'm going to raise my voice in protest.

That's at least comforting. In 2008, all the civil liberties people were thrown under the bus and called racists if they didn't bow down and worship Obama. I guess it's a bit more realistic after this election. Maybe they learned that smearing everyone who doesn't agree with every one of your policies just turns people off who could have been allies on one or two issues. . . dunno. At least we got rid of that cult of personality thing, that was beginning to look a bit frightening.


Part of the problem is that I have become so accustomed to every criticism of Obama that I hear being a bizarre, fantastic fabrication that I have gone into a sort of "cry wolf" mode. Trying to find anything legitimate in the avalanche of lying slander that the right has unleashed is like looking for pearls in piles of shiat.
 
2012-11-18 01:00:28 PM  

The Only Sane Man In Florida: mr_a: While I wouldn't want the guy as a brother-in-law, why exactly does infidelity make a man unfit to run the CIA? And I don't really buy the "classified material" line, unless someone can point to actual documents of value. Hell, the weather forecast is probably classified top-secret.

I am all for law and order, and having good state security- but we have gone too far. The rules of search and protection from state-sponsored snooping have not caught up with the ability of gather and analyze electronic communications.

I don't consider myself especially paranoid, but I suspect that most of my phone calls and emails are monitored somewhere along the line by some giant computer. I just hope we don't destroy our liberty and freedom in trying to protect our liberty and freedom.

Simple answer: the person who runs an organization as powerful as the CIA must be held to an incredibly high standard of judgement. It simply isn't conscionable to allow someone so powerful to get away with making long-term errors in judgement like that.


Well, then, too, there's the issue where your lover pumps you for info. You tend to confide things you technically ought not.

How many Farkers with clearance, I know most of you...raise your hands...yeah you too...ok - tell me that your wife doesn't have a pretty good idea what you're doing. Maybe not details, maybe not the CURRENT project or operation. But man up - unless you've got a really dysfunctional family or she's so stupid she BELIEVES you work for the USDA, you finally broke down about year two of your marriage and started giving her the broad brushstrokes. Right? You know you did.

As demonstrated by this bimbo having classified material in her possession and access to areas she ought not have - chiefly MacDill - through Petraeus' influence.
 
2012-11-18 01:01:28 PM  
LasersHurt: I sincerely, deeply do not care about anything you've said.

Ahhh... So you're just another one of the cult of personality assholes?

You don't care that Obama has taken the Bush warrantless spying he swore to end and dialed the knob up to eleven.

Just don't criticize Obama.
 
2012-11-18 01:06:15 PM  

mr_a: While I wouldn't want the guy as a brother-in-law, why exactly does infidelity make a man unfit to run the CIA? And I don't really buy the "classified material" line, unless someone can point to actual documents of value. Hell, the weather forecast is probably classified top-secret.

I am all for law and order, and having good state security- but we have gone too far. The rules of search and protection from state-sponsored snooping have not caught up with the ability of gather and analyze electronic communications.

I don't consider myself especially paranoid, but I suspect that most of my phone calls and emails are monitored somewhere along the line by some giant computer. I just hope we don't destroy our liberty and freedom in trying to protect our liberty and freedom.


See also: CALEA. Hell, prior to CALEA we could tap your phone calls in real time through the verification system. CALEA just organized that and added in ISP level monitoring. If you send emails using a typical email server, then that server will retain copies of emails for some time, including ones you think are deleted. They can get copies there, and that's what TFA is describing.

That said, long ago, maybe 2002, I was shown a stack of old emails I had sent from various places as part of a demo of a net monitoring system. I was told 'we can't get all of them, but we can get a nice sampling'. I would not have been as surprised had it all been traffic from work or a military base but some of it was personal from home. Go figure.
 
2012-11-18 01:06:42 PM  
Isn't adultery a crime in the UCMJ?
 
2012-11-18 01:09:43 PM  

BullBearMS: Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay


I don't know how to tell you this, but I suspect that most Farkers already caught onto that.
 
2012-11-18 01:11:30 PM  

BullBearMS: LasersHurt: I sincerely, deeply do not care about anything you've said.

Ahhh... So you're just another one of the cult of personality assholes?

You don't care that Obama has taken the Bush warrantless spying he swore to end and dialed the knob up to eleven.

Just don't criticize Obama.


I will criticize him - I am extremely critical of his failure to scuttle the excessive legacy of "security" measures he inherited from the Bush administration, as well as his failure to fire all the crazy RW fundies Bush had planted throughout the federal government.
These criticisms, however, were never a reason to vote for opponents who are a thousand times worse, or not to support him the 98% of the time when he's dead right.
Also - don't nurse grudges about things idiots have said to you on Fark. It's not healthy, and leads you to paint others who disagree with you with the same brush.
 
2012-11-18 01:12:47 PM  

erewhon: BullBearMS: Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay

I don't know how to tell you this, but I suspect that most Farkers already caught onto that.


Could it have something to do with me deciding that there was no point in not discussing it? Hell, there was some discussion of who needed to be hit like the angry fist of god in the American Chopper thread last night.

/Team Vinnie
 
2012-11-18 01:17:25 PM  

LasersHurt: BullBearMS: No, I have a fine memory, and I know that saying "All civil liberties people were called racists" is stupid and grossly inaccurate.

I also have a fine memory and I've personally been attacked on Fark plenty of times for pointing out Obama's miserable civil liberties positions. This was after the head of the ACLU had publicly announced he was disgusted with the positions Obama had taken on civil liberties.

Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay and publish my personal information on Fark because I dared criticize Obama.

Now here's a guy who doesn't know the difference between himself and "ALL" others. Neat.


So, are people like this paid party shills or something? I see that accusation bandied about periodically. Claiming that civil libertarians are not attacked, insulted and ignored on Fark is simply gaslighting. It's bizarre.
 
2012-11-18 01:17:56 PM  

BullBearMS:
Could it have something to do with me deciding that there was no point in not discussing it?
/Team Vinnie


I'd say your Fark handle was a giveaway.
 
2012-11-18 01:18:00 PM  

beta_plus: Both Sides Are Equally Bad, so let Democrats edit CIA talking points to blame a terrorist attack that killed 4 Americans including an Ambassador on the First Amendment while forcing out the head of the CIA immediately after a close election but before he is supposed to testify!

/The Pilgrims abused free speech to criticize another religion - it's too bad they didn't get killed by terrorists


As you are known to be dishonest, your claims are not credible.
 
2012-11-18 01:19:12 PM  

jso2897: I am extremely critical of his failure to scuttle the excessive legacy of "security" measures he inherited from the Bush administration


Obama hasn't merely failed to end the Bush excesses. He has expanded them at every turn.

He's currently fighting to reinstate the power to throw Americans into military prisons without a trial after a federal judge found the NDAA to be unconstitutional.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

There is no excuse whatsoever for his action.
 
2012-11-18 01:22:19 PM  

MartinaMcSorley: LasersHurt: BullBearMS: No, I have a fine memory, and I know that saying "All civil liberties people were called racists" is stupid and grossly inaccurate.

I also have a fine memory and I've personally been attacked on Fark plenty of times for pointing out Obama's miserable civil liberties positions. This was after the head of the ACLU had publicly announced he was disgusted with the positions Obama had taken on civil liberties.

Hell, one asshole on here decided to out me as gay and publish my personal information on Fark because I dared criticize Obama.

Now here's a guy who doesn't know the difference between himself and "ALL" others. Neat.

So, are people like this paid party shills or something? I see that accusation bandied about periodically. Claiming that civil libertarians are not attacked, insulted and ignored on Fark is simply gaslighting. It's bizarre.


Somebody pissed in his cornflakes this morning. He's being a dick in several threads.

erewhon: BullBearMS:
Could it have something to do with me deciding that there was no point in not discussing it?
/Team Vinnie

I'd say your Fark handle was a giveaway.


dl.dropbox.com
 
2012-11-18 01:24:30 PM  

jso2897:
Part of the problem is that I have become so accustomed to every criticism of Obama that I hear being a bizarre, fantastic fabrication that I have gone into a sort of "cry wolf" mode. Trying to find anything legitimate in the avalanche of lying slander that the right has unleashed is like looking for pearls in piles of shiat.


"Also - don't nurse grudges about things idiots have said to you on Fark. It's not healthy, and leads you to paint others who disagree with you with the same brush."
 
2012-11-18 01:31:15 PM  
Heh. We've got a nationally known Linux guy that contracts with us for driver work sometimes.

Mark is VERY twinkie, and to my wife and co-workers' amusement, he really REALLY likes me.

One day he had this dramatic coming out announcement at lunch, I guess he was afraid that we'd care a lot, since it's
a predominantly ex-military place. One of the guys
said "Jeez, Mark, we knew about 30 seconds after you showed up. Now you want to talk about it, quit mooning
around after Tom"
 
2012-11-18 01:38:11 PM  

erewhon: Heh. We've got a nationally known Linux guy that contracts with us for driver work sometimes.

Mark is VERY twinkie, and to my wife and co-workers' amusement, he really REALLY likes me.

One day he had this dramatic coming out announcement at lunch, I guess he was afraid that we'd care a lot, since it's
a predominantly ex-military place. One of the guys
said "Jeez, Mark, we knew about 30 seconds after you showed up. Now you want to talk about it, quit mooning
around after Tom"


The Onion has that one covered too.

Area Homosexual Thinks He's Still In The Closet
 
2012-11-18 01:38:34 PM  

BullBearMS: jso2897: I am extremely critical of his failure to scuttle the excessive legacy of "security" measures he inherited from the Bush administration

Obama hasn't merely failed to end the Bush excesses. He has expanded them at every turn.

He's currently fighting to reinstate the power to throw Americans into military prisons without a trial after a federal judge found the NDAA to be unconstitutional.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

There is no excuse whatsoever for his action.


You keep pushing this, even though I have agreed with you several times. Besides protesting it through my elected representatives, what are you suggesting I do about it? Vote for some GOP asshole who is a million times worse, and who would destroy my life? Support transparent witch hunts like Benghazi? Stop backing the President in those instances when he is right (which is most of the time, by a wide margin)?

What, precisely, do you want of me? Is there anything I could do that you would find satisfactory?
At some point, I'd like to hear some CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.
 
2012-11-18 01:51:15 PM  

jso2897: What, precisely, do you want of me? Is there anything I could do that you would find satisfactory?
At some point, I'd like to hear some CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.


What. You mean simply voting third party is not constructive criticism?

/sarcasm
 
2012-11-18 01:52:09 PM  

jso2897: At some point, I'd like to hear some CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.


Really?

jso2897: I am extremely critical of his failure to scuttle the excessive legacy of "security" measures he inherited from the Bush administration, as well as his failure to fire all the crazy RW fundies Bush had planted throughout the federal government.


You aren't criticizing Obama's actions. You're trying to blame Bush for Obama's actions.

Obama has continued and expanded upon damn near every single lawless Bush action.

He takes the blame for that. Not Bush.

This didn't stop mattering when Obama took office.
 
2012-11-18 01:56:59 PM  

BullBearMS: You aren't criticizing Obama's actions. You're trying to blame Bush for Obama's actions.

Obama has continued and expanded upon damn near every single lawless Bush action.

He takes the blame for that. Not Bush.

This didn't stop mattering when Obama took office.


True, this is very shameful.

How is having the Republicans in charge again going to make that any better?
 
2012-11-18 02:05:32 PM  

Mrtraveler01: How is having the Republicans in charge again going to make that any better?


How is rewarding the politician who promised to end something and then did the exact opposite going to make things any better?

Citing the Obama administration's evocation of the state secrets privilege, a divided federal appeals court agreed Wednesday to toss a lawsuit against a Boeing subsidiary accused of helping the CIA transport detainees to secret foreign prisons where they allegedly were tortured.
 
2012-11-18 02:09:51 PM  

BullBearMS: jso2897: At some point, I'd like to hear some CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.

Really?

jso2897: I am extremely critical of his failure to scuttle the excessive legacy of "security" measures he inherited from the Bush administration, as well as his failure to fire all the crazy RW fundies Bush had planted throughout the federal government.

You aren't criticizing Obama's actions. You're trying to blame Bush for Obama's actions.

Obama has continued and expanded upon damn near every single lawless Bush action.

He takes the blame for that. Not Bush.

This didn't stop mattering when Obama took office.


I kind of thought you were just whining. Thanks for confirming it. I really didn't think you had anything constructive to offer.
 
Displayed 50 of 120 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report