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.

(Talking Points Memo)   NYT editorial slams Obama. Take THAT liberal mainstream MSM media   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 190
    More: Interesting, President Obama, NYT, NYT editorial, editorial board, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, credibility, National Security Agency, FISA  
•       •       •

1363 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Jun 2013 at 11:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-07 08:02:13 AM  
Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.
 
2013-06-07 08:20:05 AM  
A free press? Your happy about that.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-07 08:33:09 AM  
Yes, this sort of thing can happen when you have actual journalists covering a story.
 
2013-06-07 10:12:37 AM  

Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.


I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the people who have a legitimate* problem with it now also did then.

*yes I know the partisan hacks, but I am disregarding them
 
2013-06-07 10:22:08 AM  
The NYT doesn't know that this activity far predates the Patriot Act.

By all means be pissed, but at least know what you're angry about.
 
2013-06-07 10:22:41 AM  

Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.


This comes up in every single thread about this.  Please shut the fark up.  Lots of people had problems with Bush doing it and now lots of those same people have problems with Obama doing it.  It isn't all a game of R vs. D.
 
2013-06-07 10:24:46 AM  

Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12  19 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.


FTFY.  CALEA was enacted in 1994, and that laid the groundwork for this by requiring that telecommunications companies make the records available.

Oh, and those of us who *DID* warn about it were called paranoid.
 
2013-06-07 10:25:02 AM  

nekom: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the people who have a legitimate* problem with it now also did then.

*yes I know the partisan hacks, but I am disregarding them


Id say pretty much all the GOP outrage is the partisan mindset and not because they are against it.
 
2013-06-07 10:26:06 AM  

dittybopper: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12  19 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

FTFY.  CALEA was enacted in 1994, and that laid the groundwork for this by requiring that telecommunications companies make the records available.

Oh, and those of us who *DID* warn about it were called paranoid.


See? This farking guy knows more than the NYT.  Good on you.
 
2013-06-07 10:26:10 AM  

James!: The NYT doesn't know that this activity far predates the Patriot Act.

By all means be pissed, but at least know what you're angry about.


So when he said "Change we can believe in" he was lying the whole time?
 
2013-06-07 10:27:51 AM  

cman: James!: The NYT doesn't know that this activity far predates the Patriot Act.

By all means be pissed, but at least know what you're angry about.

So when he said "Change we can believe in" he was lying the whole time?


Unicorns! Free Money! Obamaphones!

I'm not going to play politics tab bingo with you.
 
2013-06-07 10:28:36 AM  

Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.


Funny, I've been on fark far a few years now and I have never once see anyone in support of the patriot act or this type of surveillance in general. Not once!
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-07 10:29:33 AM  

cman: James!: The NYT doesn't know that this activity far predates the Patriot Act.

By all means be pissed, but at least know what you're angry about.

So when he said "Change we can believe in" he was lying the whole time?


Well, he did get the approval of the FISA court instead of just ignoring the law, so that's a change.
 
2013-06-07 10:33:34 AM  

sammyk: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Funny, I've been on fark far a few years now and I have never once see anyone in support of the patriot act or this type of surveillance in general. Not once!


You must be wrong, I was told all of the Libs are covering for Obama and furthermore
 
2013-06-07 10:33:50 AM  

vpb: cman: James!: The NYT doesn't know that this activity far predates the Patriot Act.

By all means be pissed, but at least know what you're angry about.

So when he said "Change we can believe in" he was lying the whole time?

Well, he did get the approval of the FISA court instead of just ignoring the law, so that's a change.


FISA court and congress. There are strict rules about what they can and cannot access which are reviewed every 90 days as well.
 
2013-06-07 10:36:04 AM  
I am proud of President Obama for taking the same measures that President Bush took during his presidency that kept us safe and free for eight years.
 
2013-06-07 10:38:32 AM  

James!: See? This farking guy knows more than the NYT.  Good on you.


Actually, about signals intelligence, it's entirely likely that I know more about it.  I used to be in that business, and it's been an area of intense interest to me for over 30 years now.
 
2013-06-07 10:43:09 AM  

sammyk: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Funny, I've been on fark far a few years now and I have never once see anyone in support of the patriot act or this type of surveillance in general. Not once!


Honestly i'm really fine with it. I'm quite sure my email and social media has been examined by the NSA because I have lots of dealings with Iranians in my work.
 
2013-06-07 10:44:12 AM  
I'm not really angry as much as worried - I genuinely think that prior to taking office, Obama was pretty liberal on these issues. Maybe I'm being a fool but I don't think he was faking it. It seems that being President has vastly changed his mind though, which has the disturbing implication that it really doesn't matter who we elect to run the security state, as whatever policies they believe in coming in will ultimately be irrelevant.
 
2013-06-07 10:44:54 AM  

dittybopper: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12  19 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

FTFY.  CALEA was enacted in 1994, and that laid the groundwork for this by requiring that telecommunications companies make the records available.

Oh, and those of us who *DID* warn about it were called paranoid.


It goes back farther than that. 1960, in fact.
 
2013-06-07 10:45:30 AM  

Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.


Its ok when we do it.

sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-06-07 10:46:23 AM  
I just wonder about the computing power the government has to pull this off.
 
2013-06-07 10:46:37 AM  

I_C_Weener: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Its ok when we do it.

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 500x385]


"It's not okay to selectively blame one person" sounds better? No, it looks like you'd rather do that too.
 
2013-06-07 10:48:48 AM  
I love reading the gloating posts from conservatives who are all angry about Obama doing all this, but argued in favor of the government protecting us with these methods back when the war criminals were in charge.
 
2013-06-07 10:49:30 AM  

LasersHurt: I_C_Weener: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Its ok when we do it.

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 500x385]

"It's not okay to selectively blame one person" sounds better? No, it looks like you'd rather do that too.


Perhaps instead of b*tching about who used to do it, we focus on who is currently doing it.

Yes, the Republicans are total f*cking hypocrites on things like this, but it still doesn't change the fact that it's still going on with Obama and the rest of the Democrats' blessing.
 
2013-06-07 10:49:51 AM  
Matt Apuzzo  @mattapuzzoIf the programs needed secrecy to succeed, will NSA shut them down now? If not, did they ever need be secret? Or did I just blow your mind?

 Retweeted by
 
2013-06-07 10:50:26 AM  

gimmegimme: I love reading the gloating posts from conservatives who are all angry about Obama doing all this, but argued in favor of the government protecting us with these methods back when the war criminals were in charge.


The far worse thing is seeing people like Rove and Flesicher come out defending Obama. Makes me want to puke.
 
2013-06-07 10:51:34 AM  

Aarontology: Yes, the Republicans are total f*cking hypocrites on things like this, but it still doesn't change the fact that it's still going on with Obama and the rest of the Democrats' blessing.


No, no, no.  If its bad, then it becomes good when we can point out that the other team started it.  Remember, how when your brother would hit you, and you hit him back, but you got in trouble and you said, "But he started it"  and your mom said, "Good point.  You can have some ice cream."
 
2013-06-07 10:52:11 AM  
It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.
 
2013-06-07 10:53:07 AM  

I_C_Weener: It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.


Why did we start that undeclared war in Iraq again?
 
2013-06-07 10:53:07 AM  

Aarontology: Yes, the Republicans are total f*cking hypocrites on things like this, but it still doesn't change the fact that it's still going on with Obama and the rest of the Democrats' blessing.


I'm not sure if this is true. Do we know how many Democrats support this in Congress? You only need a small amount, together with the GOP, to do stuff like this.
 
2013-06-07 10:53:47 AM  

Aarontology: LasersHurt: I_C_Weener: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Its ok when we do it.

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 500x385]

"It's not okay to selectively blame one person" sounds better? No, it looks like you'd rather do that too.

Perhaps instead of b*tching about who used to do it, we focus on who is currently doing it.

Yes, the Republicans are total f*cking hypocrites on things like this, but it still doesn't change the fact that it's still going on with Obama and the rest of the Democrats' blessing.


... AND the Republicans still. Everyone. So my point is, go "Grr, government" all you want. "Grr Obama" is just focusing it on one person to be spiteful, but it's not an honest representation of the situation.
 
2013-06-07 10:54:24 AM  

I_C_Weener: It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.


Has everyone forgotten the wars and shiat? Am I nuts?

Kill thousands of Americans, sure, but don't collect my data.
 
2013-06-07 10:55:24 AM  

I_C_Weener: It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.


So, which president started an unnecessary war on false pretenses which cost the lives of 5000 Americans, over 20,000 Iraqis, and indirectly lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people thanks to the secretarial violence and civil strife during the occupation?

Remind me who that was, again?

i.telegraph.co.uk
 
2013-06-07 10:56:24 AM  

gimmegimme: I_C_Weener: It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.

Why did we start that undeclared war in Iraq again?


Did that have to do with spying on our own citizens?
 
2013-06-07 10:56:52 AM  

I_C_Weener: No, no, no. If its bad, then it becomes good when we can point out that the other team started it. Remember, how when your brother would hit you, and you hit him back, but you got in trouble and you said, "But he started it" and your mom said, "Good point. You can have some ice cream."


I'm an only child so I had to get in fights with the dog :(

DamnYankees: I'm not sure if this is true. Do we know how many Democrats support this in Congress? You only need a small amount, together with the GOP, to do stuff like this.


I recall only one or two who have come out against it. Even if they're not OK with it, none of them seem to be upset enough to introduce legislation to stop it.

LasersHurt: ... AND the Republicans still. Everyone. So my point is, go "Grr, government" all you want. "Grr Obama" is just focusing it on one person to be spiteful, but it's not an honest representation of the situation.


I don't think it really should be necessary to point out the GOP is consistently trying to increase the power of the government at the expense of our rights in the interests of "national security"

But people are focusing on Obama, because the NSA is part of the Executive Branch, and if he wanted to, he could order them to stop.
 
2013-06-07 10:57:46 AM  

I_C_Weener: gimmegimme: I_C_Weener: It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.

Why did we start that undeclared war in Iraq again?

Did that have to do with spying on our own citizens?


If you're only talking about one facet of executive power, please recast your statement in a more specific manner.
 
2013-06-07 11:00:04 AM  

I_C_Weener: Did that have to do with spying on our own citizens?


You want this guy.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-06-07 11:10:10 AM  

I_C_Weener: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Its ok when we do it.

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 500x385]


I think you meant to say "It's NOT ok when THEY do it"
 
2013-06-07 11:17:26 AM  

hardinparamedic: dittybopper: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12  19 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

FTFY.  CALEA was enacted in 1994, and that laid the groundwork for this by requiring that telecommunications companies make the records available.

Oh, and those of us who *DID* warn about it were called paranoid.

It goes back farther than that. 1960, in fact.


Well, no.

You see, I used to be at the point-tip of the SIGINT spear, and it was impressed upon us in no uncertain terms that collecting on "United States Persons" without proper FISA authorization was very, very bad ju-ju.

The only time I can recall being allowed to do that was copying US ham radio operators during training, mainly during the "free time, scan around, pick your own targets" portion of the training, which was rare enough.  We were doing it on old KSR teletypes, and the hard copy got immediately placed in burn bags.  The KSRs weren't hooked up to anything except electricity (essentially, we were using them as typewriters).  This was covered under the training exception to the FISA statute, and no records of any kind were kept.

That was after 1960, but before 2001.

/The low end of 40 Meters was always a good place to get Morse signals.
//An R-390, a KSR-33, a set of cans on my ears, and my ass in a gray swivel chair.
///Ah, the memories!
 
2013-06-07 11:18:36 AM  

DamnYankees: I'm not really angry as much as worried - I genuinely think that prior to taking office, Obama was pretty liberal on these issues. Maybe I'm being a fool but I don't think he was faking it. It seems that being President has vastly changed his mind though, which has the disturbing implication that it really doesn't matter who we elect to run the security state, as whatever policies they believe in coming in will ultimately be irrelevant.


I think it just means that when you're the President, you're privy to a lot more information than before. Some of it legit, some of it scare mongering from the CIA, FBI, etc. When you're in charge and it's your "responsibility" to keep everyone safe, you're probably not going to end programs like this if you can help. I don't care who it is, from Kucinich to the either of the Pauls
 
2013-06-07 11:20:34 AM  

I_C_Weener: Lurking Fear: Yawn. If you have such a problem with this, then perhaps you should have pushed back against these powers 12 years ago when they were granted, dumbfarks.

Its ok when we do it.

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 500x385]


One of the last Fark IndependentsTM is gracing us with their presence today. How special
 
2013-06-07 11:21:06 AM  

dittybopper: Well, no.

You see, I used to be at the point-tip of the SIGINT spear, and it was impressed upon us in no uncertain terms that collecting on "United States Persons" without proper FISA authorization was very, very bad ju-ju.


During the 1970s, ECHELON was used by the NSA, without a court order, to spy on US Citizens suspected of being Soviet spies by monitoring their telecommunications activity. Pretty much anyone who had any business with someone related to the Soviets, at that time, was being watched by ECHELON's computer system.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-07 11:22:37 AM  

DamnYankees: Aarontology: Yes, the Republicans are total f*cking hypocrites on things like this, but it still doesn't change the fact that it's still going on with Obama and the rest of the Democrats' blessing.

I'm not sure if this is true. Do we know how many Democrats support this in Congress? You only need a small amount, together with the GOP, to do stuff like this.


Well, the FISA act of 1978 that authorizes this was introduced by Ted Kennedy and signed by Jimmy Carter.
 
2013-06-07 11:27:27 AM  
Everyone is saying the outrage from the right is phony and hypocritical.  I am going to argue it is not.  Anyone see the movie The Lives of Others?  It is about living in a country where the government employs your neighbors to spy on you.  In Germany it was the Stasi or secret police.  Russia used the KGB It was Cold War policy for the KGB of the Soviet Union and the secret services of the satellite states to extensively monitor public and private opinion, internal subversion and possible revolutionary plots in the Soviet Bloc.

With modern technology, you just need a data dump from Google to extensively monitor public and private opinion.  The Right has been saying Obama uses the same tactics as communists like Stalin-era Russia.  We didn't mean just regarding 'spreading the wealth around'.  We also suspected he would be spying on us, like the phone records and this internet data.  Far from being phony outrage or hypocritical, the Right's reaction to this story has been consistent with our prior accusations.  In fact, this validates our arguments against Obama from the past 5-6 years.  Obama has done exactly what we said he was going to do.

He promised transparency, but delivered unprecedented levels of secrecy.

I don't condone Bush or any other Republican doing the same thing - phone logs, internet, whatever, without a warrant and probable cause.
 
2013-06-07 11:29:33 AM  

SlothB77: Everyone is saying the outrage from the right is phony and hypocritical.  I am going to argue it is not.  Anyone see the movie The Lives of Others?  It is about living in a country where the government employs your neighbors to spy on you.  In Germany it was the Stasi or secret police.  Russia used the KGB It was Cold War policy for the KGB of the Soviet Union and the secret services of the satellite states to extensively monitor public and private opinion, internal subversion and possible revolutionary plots in the Soviet Bloc.

With modern technology, you just need a data dump from Google to extensively monitor public and private opinion.  The Right has been saying Obama uses the same tactics as communists like Stalin-era Russia.  We didn't mean just regarding 'spreading the wealth around'.  We also suspected he would be spying on us, like the phone records and this internet data.  Far from being phony outrage or hypocritical, the Right's reaction to this story has been consistent with our prior accusations.  In fact, this validates our arguments against Obama from the past 5-6 years.  Obama has done exactly what we said he was going to do.

He promised transparency, but delivered unprecedented levels of secrecy.

I don't condone Bush or any other Republican doing the same thing - phone logs, internet, whatever, without a warrant and probable cause.


Nothing you said in this entire post does anything to argue that the outrage isn't phony, which is what you said you were going to argue. You're just arguing its bad. In other words, you're a 2003 liberal.
 
2013-06-07 11:33:49 AM  

SlothB77: Everyone is saying the outrage from the right is phony and hypocritical.  I am going to argue it is not.  Anyone see the movie The Lives of Others?  It is about living in a country where the government employs your neighbors to spy on you.  In Germany it was the Stasi or secret police.  Russia used the KGB It was Cold War policy for the KGB of the Soviet Union and the secret services of the satellite states to extensively monitor public and private opinion, internal subversion and possible revolutionary plots in the Soviet Bloc.

With modern technology, you just need a data dump from Google to extensively monitor public and private opinion.  The Right has been saying Obama uses the same tactics as communists like Stalin-era Russia.  We didn't mean just regarding 'spreading the wealth around'.  We also suspected he would be spying on us, like the phone records and this internet data.  Far from being phony outrage or hypocritical, the Right's reaction to this story has been consistent with our prior accusations.  In fact, this validates our arguments against Obama from the past 5-6 years.  Obama has done exactly what we said he was going to do.

He promised transparency, but delivered unprecedented levels of secrecy.

I don't condone Bush or any other Republican doing the same thing - phone logs, internet, whatever, without a warrant and probable cause.


I wish the Right would truly be outraged by this but sadly this has not been the case yet.  If anything Liberals seem to be more concerned about this then the Right.  I'd like to bi-partisan condemnation of this and legislation to stop it.  My position has been consistent throughout both Administrations.  Glad to see some Conservatives shifting their position on this and some Liberals maintaining their position despite politics.
 
2013-06-07 11:34:06 AM  

hardinparamedic: I_C_Weener: It is amusing seeing that even with all this awesome power granted to him (unconstitutionally) that Bush was still more trustworthy than Obama.

So, which president started an unnecessary war on false pretenses which cost the lives of 5000 Americans, over 20,000 Iraqis, and indirectly lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people thanks to the secretarial violence and civil strife during the occupation?

Remind me who that was, again?

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]


Violent secretaries are a threat to everyone.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-07 11:34:15 AM  

SlothB77: Everyone is saying the outrage from the right is phony and hypocritical.  I am going to argue it is not.  Anyone see the movie The Lives of Others?  It is about living in a country where the government employs your neighbors to spy on you.  In Germany it was the Stasi or secret police.  Russia used the KGB It was Cold War policy for the KGB of the Soviet Union and the secret services of the satellite states to extensively monitor public and private opinion, internal subversion and possible revolutionary plots in the Soviet Bloc.

With modern technology, you just need a data dump from Google to extensively monitor public and private opinion.  The Right has been saying Obama uses the same tactics as communists like Stalin-era Russia.  We didn't mean just regarding 'spreading the wealth around'.  We also suspected he would be spying on us, like the phone records and this internet data.  Far from being phony outrage or hypocritical, the Right's reaction to this story has been consistent with our prior accusations.  In fact, this validates our arguments against Obama from the past 5-6 years.  Obama has done exactly what we said he was going to do.

He promised transparency, but delivered unprecedented levels of secrecy.


No, if you supported Bush illegally using warranties wiretapping then it is certainly hipocritical to oppose legaly gathering limited data (but not wiretapping) with a warrant.

If you didn't know that Bush ignored the law, or that Obama followed it then that's just ignorance.
 
2013-06-07 11:35:47 AM  

hardinparamedic: dittybopper: Well, no.

You see, I used to be at the point-tip of the SIGINT spear, and it was impressed upon us in no uncertain terms that collecting on "United States Persons" without proper FISA authorization was very, very bad ju-ju.

During the 1970s, ECHELON was used by the NSA, without a court order, to spy on US Citizens suspected of being Soviet spies by monitoring their telecommunications activity. Pretty much anyone who had any business with someone related to the Soviets, at that time, was being watched by ECHELON's computer system.


60 Minutes reported over a decade ago that Echelon was monitoring all wireless communications, all the time.  I'm surprised people are surprised about this today.
 
Displayed 50 of 190 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report