So to sum up our new Realpolitik:

[MannyGoldstein]

Under a Democratic president:

1. It's OK to spy on all Americans because Edward Snowden may have broken laws and/or not smiled at neighbors, and/or because FREEDOM.
2. It's OK to spy on other countries because we just kinda know they do it too and/or we heard something about this before and/or FREEDOM.

[MotherPetrie]

1. Well, with limits. First, a Democrat has to be in the White House. That's what makes it OK.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Yes indeed. Thanks for the clarification.

I'll add that to the OP.

[treestar]

17. Why would a Democrat say that?

I could hear Republicans saying it that bitterly.

[sabrina 1]

25. Honest Democrats will say it, because it is a fact, watching the defense of policies that Democrats

used to oppose, from a few on the Left, it can hardly be denied, can it? Blind loyalty is a dangerous thing for a democracy. A good Democrat will not act like the other party and condone or apologize for horrendous policies just because their party is doing it. They want THEIR party to support GOOD policies. I hope that answers your question.

[treestar]

36. A Democrat supports Democrats

And does not go out of their way to whine and cry when Democrats have the powers that the Republicans just did previously. This bitter sounding "OK when the Dems do it" sounds just like what Republicans would say.

Furthermore, it is not even the case. The Democrats have the same Executive powers as the Rs do when they have the Presidency. That they are better trusted with it goes without saying. However, Obama actually cut down on those powers for himself. So it shows the bad faith in which his (allegedly left wing) detractors argue.

[MotherPetrie]

38. And blindly supporting their Dear Leader regardless is exactly what Republicans do.

[treestar]

40. No it is not blindly supporting Dear Leader

It is allowing the Democrats the same powers as Republicans when they have that office. You keep resorting to that claim because you think it's clever. In fact, it's stupid and just proves you think no one should have those powers, and Democrats should not, either. While the legal system gives those powers. (Cue your bitterness that it's not legal if you think it's not legal, damn society and the courts or any other branch of government).

[MotherPetrie]

44. Your argument is utterly hypocritical, dishonest, and repugnant.

[Katashi_itto]

62. A Sith Lord by any other name is still a Sith Lord

[MotherPetrie]

35. Why WOULDN'T a Democrat call out Democrats for the same transgressions she calls Repugs out for?

[treestar]

39. Why it is a transgression to operate the Executive branch when elected to it?

Why can't Dem Presidents use the powers Repuke Presidents did?

You aren't calling anyone out for transgressions of any kind, you simply insist that being elected to office makes the winner guilty of transgressions where you simply don't understand the law/Constitution.

[MotherPetrie]

46. Bullfuckingshit. Not even a good try.

[sabrina 1]

47. Well you said it right here:

Why can't Dem Presidents use the powers Repuke Presidents did?

Because the Repukes abused that power. Now you are admitting that Democrats, rather than correcting those abuses which is why they were elected, are using them. That is exactly the problem.

[MotherPetrie]

49. Exactly. And this individual seems to have no problem with that. But I sure do. If that un-Dems me,

so be it. I'd rather not be a Democrat under those circumstances.

[kardonb]

30. Realpolitik

is just that , dealing with realities , not imaginary Disneylands .

[idwiyo]

3. Yeah, that and 'I'll gladly trade YOUR privacy for my ( illusion of) security'. Because...FREEDOM!

And ALL foreigners are potential terrists and its OK to spy on them. Because we (dirty foreigners) absolutely hate you for your freedoms.

PS. The thread title is the line I saw pushed on DU, believe it or not.

[whatchamacallit]

4. Ha, pretty much sums it up. K&R

[n2doc]

5. You emo racist paulbot

Obama is a GOD! The Greatest President in all History. He has kept us safe and secure, and has only our very best interests at heart.

[cherokeeprogressive]

10. Plus, he's scrumptiously handsome-riffic! n/t

[n2doc]

15. Well, I will say in all honesty that he takes a good picture

His whole family is beautiful. And he gives amazing speeches.


It's all that other stuff that gets troublesome.

[treestar]

18. All that other stuff like having

The powers of the presidency ?

[n2doc]

19. It's how one uses them that matters n/t

[sabrina 1]

27. What powers? I thought he was powerless and that is why he can't push progressive policies

because the minority party won't let him. Which is it? He is pushing cuts to SS but not because he wants to, it's because the other party is forcing him to. He lifted the ban on Offshore drilling, because he was forced to do it by the other party etc etc.

So what powers does he have that should have enabled to stop the Bush policies from being strengthened rather than ended? How about Guantanamo? We were told he doesn't have the power to close it??

[treestar]

34. He has the powers listed in the Constitution under Article II?

Why is it all or nothing with you constitutional scholars? Do you not get that each branch has power, but none over the other branches? How stupid do you have to be to keep insisting the legislature should bow down to the presidency and have no power but at the same time whine that the executive has "spying" powers? Complain about the executive having a database while wishing it could overrun the legislature.

[forestpath]

6. K&R

[backscatter712]

7. We must invade your privacy to protect your FREEEEEEEEDOOOOOM!!! n/t

[nineteen50]

21. We have to kill it

to save it, trust us.

[mick063]

8. I'm rooting for the Seahawks

I can live with the players using performance enhancing drugs.

Just as long as they win.

As Al Davis used to say; "Just win baby"

Yayyyy!!

"Our" side is winning!!!!!

[East Coast Pirate]

33. Well, nice guys finish last.

[L0oniX]

9. We must trust the NSA. We don't want to wait until we see a mushroom cloud do we?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

11. I thought that he was/became a Centrist (C).

After we worked to get him elected, he told us so himself.

[ProSense]

12. Actually,

So to sum up our new Realpolitik:

Under a Democratic president:

1. It's OK to spy on all Americans because Edward Snowden may have broken laws and/or not smiled at neighbors, and/or because FREEDOM!
2. It's OK to spy on other countries because we just kinda know they do it too and/or we heard something about this before and/or FREEDOM!

...no!

Bush and Cheney were liars, and there is an effort to create the impression Obama is no different
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023043154

As for Snowden, he's likely up shit creek.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023124655

[Savannahmann]

13. The official position from the Truth

good to know. I'll ignore any other information not coming from the proper authorized messenger.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. Can you please remind us of Obama's victories in reducing

the amount of spying on Americans?

Or a reduction in the prosecution of whistleblowers?

[ProSense]

20. Sure

"Can you please remind us of Obama's victories in reducing the amount of spying on Americans?

Or a reduction in the prosecution of whistleblowers?"

First, Obama is cleaning up Bush's mess here. NYT:

<...>

Describing for the first time the scale of the Bush administration’s hunt for the sources of The Times article, former officials say 5 prosecutors and 25 F.B.I. agents were assigned to the case. The homes of three other security agency employees and a Congressional aide were searched before investigators raided Mr. Drake’s suburban house in November 2007. By then, a series of articles by Siobhan Gorman in The Baltimore Sun had quoted N.S.A. insiders about the agency’s billion-dollar struggles to remake its lagging technology, and panicky intelligence bosses spoke of a “culture of leaking.”

Though the inquiries began under President Bush, it has fallen to Mr. Obama and his attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., to decide whether to prosecute. They have shown no hesitation, even though Mr. Drake is not accused of disclosing the N.S.A.’s most contentious program, that of eavesdropping without warrants.

<...>

Under President Bush, no one was convicted for disclosing secrets directly to the press. But Lawrence A. Franklin, a Defense Department official, served 10 months of home detention for sharing classified information with officials of a pro-Israel lobbying group, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., a top aide to Mr. Cheney, was convicted of perjury for lying about his statements to journalists about an undercover C.I.A. officer, Valerie Plame Wilson.

The F.B.I. has opened about a dozen investigations a year in recent years of unauthorized disclosures of classified information, according to a bureau accounting to Congress in 2007.

<...>

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/us/politics/12leak.html

Bush launched the investigations and now Obama is cleaning up the mess. Drake home was raided and he was terminated during the Bush administration.

So what's the spin: Absolve Bush for launching the investigations, add a qualifier for Bush's convictions and repeat often "Obama's prosecutions!!"

The charges were dropped in the following case:

Remember whistleblower Thomas Tamm?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023032225

Some of the more recent leaks seem to be agenda related and aimed at embarrassing the U.S. or starting wars.

I'm not a fan of those type of leakers: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022850304


More leaks, more prosecutions. That's how the law works.

Bruce Schneier:

Edward Snowden broke the law by releasing classified information. This isn't under debate; it's something everyone with a security clearance knows. It's written in plain English on the documents you have to sign when you get a security clearance, and it's part of the culture. The law is there for a good reason, and secrecy has an important role in military defense.

But before the Justice Department prosecutes Snowden, there are some other investigations that ought to happen.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/06/prosecuting_sno.html

Like I said, Snowden is likely up shit creek.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023124655

[MannyGoldstein]

37. So, in one or two sentences, what exactly are you claiming

as evidence that Obama is less spy-crazed or secrecy-crazed than Bush?

[mick063]

55. Just great...huh?

Mr. "Too big to prosecute" Holder is really cracking down on those "dirty leakers" and "pot traffickers."

At least we know he isn't a gun runner for the Mexican cartels. You gotta give him credit for giving Dept. of Justice some shred of credibility.

As much as FOX tries to blast him for made up shit, you think they would try the truth for a little more punch.

Then again, FOX is aligned with his agenda. That would be the corporate agenda. They just don't want this administration to get credit for it.

[MannyGoldstein]

57. re: Fox, reminds me of the Churchill quote:

"You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war."

[xchrom]

16. Du rec. Nt

[cantbeserious]

22. Freedom - That Indescribable Feeling Of Being Coddled In The Warm Glow Of Surveillance

eom

[idwiyo]

29. K&R Perfect description!

[reformist2]

23. We must violate your rights in order to preserve them...

Otherwise the terrorists win!

[cantbeserious]

24. Freedom - What's Good For Terrorists - Is Good For The Rest of You

eom

[Narkos]

26. Those are some nice straw men you've constructed

[KoKo]

28. For Us Small Businesses here in America...we've already been feeling the restrictions

of Globilization for the 1% and Struggle for the rest of us...Contrary to the Neo-Lib's Message of "Rising Tide Raises ALL BOATS" and "It will Trickle Down from the Movers and Shakers" .nd, then there's the worst scam... "Let's Leave it up to the YOUNG ...because THEY are the ENTREPRENUERS who will Bring US ALL OUT OF THIS!" (Their Prime Example is Elon Musk who takes up Prime Time on Bloomberg Business News every other day).

Business friend in Germany sent out something today with the Breaking News about USA Spying on EU. He said: "Caution: There are many German Businesses who find this Spying by America on the EU Very Bad for Business Connections between Germany and the US. We are disappointed that this is the way Business Interests are heading there in US...and it's not worthwhile for Small Business to try to work with getting our Products out there when the Spying means that the Big Business will have advantage because of this spying."

Another DU Family could eventually end up on Food Stamps along with those we could have hired because of this Revelation.
IOWD's
If our World Partners are shocked that "America...Home of the BRAVE AND FREE...is SPYING on their ALLIES...there will be repercussions... from THEIR OWN HOMELANDS

[cheapdate]

31. For all that this OP, and so many other posts on this subject

talk about people who believe, "It's OK to spy on all Americans" because we have a "Democratic president", you'd think that DU was absolutely overrun with such people.

For every person on DU who might have a position that modestly includes any part of that proposition, there are 10 more who would argue no such thing, and yet are improperly "accused" of having that belief. It's like a witch hunt here these days.

There have been times when a rational balanced argument was met with a rational, balanced counter-argument. Not so much lately.

These days, if a person speculates that while what Snowden did may be good for the country in the long run, it may still be true that the government has a prosecutable case against him for improperly handling classified materials, then that person is liable to be excoriated and labeled with the usual pejoratives.

[cantbeserious]

32. That A Law Was Broken Is Not At Issue - At Issue Is The Underlying Surveillance

eom

[cheapdate]

45. Yes, the surveillance is the far more imporatnt issue

not whether Snowden broke any laws, neither of which was the point I was making.

[burnodo]

42. I think Snowden's crime is comparitively insignificant , don't you?

handling/leaking classified materials, or conducting a massive spying operation on American citizens?

[cheapdate]

48. Yes, Snowden's crime was relatively insigificant

against the massive surveillance operation, although my post didn't take any positions on those questions.

[burnodo]

52. some of us are trying to understand why so many need to make Snowden the entire story

when his role, questionable or not, is not relevant

It's why people get a little upset. Should he be put on trial? I suppose so. Maybe? But that has nothing to do with this action by our government. The fact that Snowden revealed the crime is immaterial.

[cheapdate]

53. Snowden is an aspect of the story.

To reiterate, my original post took no position on Snowden or the NSA. It was intended as conditional proposition in an attempt to illustrate a point of style.

I largely agree that Snowden's personality, history, and motives are relatively immaterial to the larger questions over widespread, pervasive government surveillance.

I'm not however, upset, when others discuss Snowden. If I have something I want to contribute to the discussion, I'll do it.

[treestar]

41. Yes it's OK until the law is overturned or repealed

Your interpretation notwithstanding. Why should we sit there and be spied on and not be able to spy back? Your characterizations and labels just show your bitterness and hatred and inability to be moderate in describing anything.

[MannyGoldstein]

43. Which Western European countries are spying on us?

Thanks in advance.

[cheapdate]

51. "Now, in a fresh leak, we're learning that Brits are snooping on us, too...

" -- tapping the world's telephone and Internet traffic, and sharing that info with the United States.

"Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), Britain's version of the NSA, is allowed to tap more than 200 fiber-optic data cables running through British territory, giving the organization access massive amounts of telephone and Internet data, according to the Guardian, who revealed today that Snowden provided it with a document detailing the UK spy agencies efforts to collect phone and web data."

- Foreign Policy, June 21, 2013

[MannyGoldstein]

54. That's a cooperative effort with the NSA

The NSA is using the GCHQ to spy on Americans more thoroughly than NSA can do by itself.

I'm not sure that this really counts as "they do it so we need to do it too".

[cheapdate]

56. "They do it so we need to do it"

was not the question. Did the question shift a little?

[MannyGoldstein]

58. Obama's asking a country to spy on the American People is a bit different

than a country surreptitiously spying on us, I think?

[cheapdate]

59. Yes, it is different.

The point remains that the UK is a European country that spies on us.

[MannyGoldstein]

60. Should a dominatrix be charged with assault and battery

if her client asks for, and pays for, her services?

[cheapdate]

63. Not as far as I'm concerned.

[idwiyo]

64. That's like totally OK because they GCHQ is sharing the info with NSA. Them are twins separated

by the Pond but united by umbilical cord that is a Trans-Atlantic cable.

[cheapdate]

68. It's totally OK for British security agencies

to work closely with the NSA on massive, indiscriminate phone and internet surveillance operations.

[cheapdate]

65. "The World from Berlin: Electronic Surveillance Scandal Hits Germany"

"A German hacker organization claims to have cracked spying software allegedly used by German authorities. The Trojan horse has functions which go way beyond those allowed by German law. The news has sparked a wave of outrage among politicians and media commentators."
- Spiegel Online International, October 10, 2011


Not the same, but in the ballpark. Some European governments may be more like the United States that we know or than they'll admit. Or not.

But the justifiable anger of many European citizens over the latest revelations is very real.

[MannyGoldstein]

66. That's evidence that Germany is spying on the US?

It's barely evidence of anything at all.

"Some guys on the Internet claim that it's possible that..."

[cheapdate]

69. No, it's not evidence that Germany is spying on the US,

as I said in the post, "Not the same". Maybe you missed it.

[MannyGoldstein]

70. I apologize, I did miss it

I should never post after downing a margarita. Damned limes ruin my concentration.

[sabrina 1]

50. Well, we are sitting here being spied on and not being able to spy back. All of us.

Snowden attempted to spy back, and look what is happening to him. I am all for the people in a state where the government is spying on them, to be able to spy back.

[Recursion]

61. Spying on other countries is "new" realpolitik?

Bismark would be shocked.

[MannyGoldstein]

67. That it's OK to spy on other countries BECAUSE...

Is the new realpolitik.

Or a load of crap.

[Recursion]

71. Spying isn't about what's "OK". Why was Australia spying on us?

[MannyGoldstein]

72. Because the White House asked them to? (nm)

[felix_numinous]

73. It's OK to data mine

and network with private corporations when we have a respectable and decent President in the White House.

Because we are SURE that future presidents will ALL be respectable and not batshit crazy. We have never seen crazy people run for president, or question our super duper Diebold elections!

Woohoo good thing we're safe and sound!