Obama-can't trust him anymore...sigh

[kpete]

"We Don't Have a Domestic Spying Program"

And I can give assurances to the publics in Europe and around the world that we’re not going around snooping at people’s emails or listening to their phone calls. What we try to do is to target very specifically areas of concern.

President Obama, September 4, 2013

http://voices.suntimes.com/...

Obama administration had restrictions on NSA reversed in 2011

The court’s expansion of authority went largely unnoticed when the opinion was released, but it formed the basis for cryptic warnings last year by a pair of Democratic senators, Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Mark Udall (Colo.), that the administration had a “back-door search loophole” that enabled the NSA to scour intercepted communications for those of Americans. They introduced legislation to require a warrant, but they were barred by classification rules from disclosing the court’s authorization or whether the NSA was already conducting such searches.

“The [surveillance] Court documents declassified recently show that in late 2011 the court authorized the NSA to conduct warrantless searches of individual Americans’ communications using an authority intended to target only foreigners,” Wyden said in a statement to The Washington Post. “Our intelligence agencies need the authority to target the communications of foreigners, but for government agencies to deliberately read the e-mails or listen to the phone calls of individual Americans, the Constitution requires a warrant.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-had-restrictions-on-nsa-reversed-in-2011/2013/09/07/c26ef658-0fe5-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html

and NOW, he expects us to buy SYRIA?

I voted for the man

I hoped....


but, hey PEACE ANYWAY,
kp

[Autumn]

1. It is a bit of a quandary .

rec

[MotherPetrie]

2. K&R

[GeorgeGist]

3. Old enough to remember 'The Peter Principle'?

For those too young, it DOES NOT refer to being an affable Dick and gaining admiration.

[leftstreet]

4. I can't believe how he's gotten a pass on that lie n/t

Obama To Leno: 'There Is No Spying On Americans'

by Greg Henderson
August 07, 201312:44 AM


President Obama defended the US government's surveillance program, telling NBC's Jay Leno on Tuesday that: "There is no spying on Americans."

"We don't have a domestic spying program," Obama said on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. "What we do have is some mechanisms that can track a phone number or an email address that is connected to a terrorist attack. ... That information is useful."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/06/209692380/obama-to-leno-there-is-no-spying-on-americans

[jsr]

5. There is a lot more going on than meets the eye.

Always watch what he does, not what he says.

In fact, most of what he says is nice-sounding crap.

[elias49]

6. I, too, am disappointed ..

and I think it just goes to show that being the President isn't being powerful. The strings that jerk him around ... ? who are the real puppet masters?? Obama is/was a good man with good intentions. I believe that. But you know what they say about the road to hell.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

7. What a happy liar.

[L0oniX]

8. A smooth talker is what we got. After Bush that was very welcome but the shine has worn off now.

At least we all could laugh at the stupid shit Bush said ....I kinda miss that.

[Maedhros]

50. There is no denying that Obama is a much, much better liar than Bush.[n/t]

[Raksha]

65. Sad but true. n/t

[L0oniX]

69. Well I wouldn't call him a malicious lair but he entered into the DC bubble where distortion...

framing and omission of the truth is a norm. Once in the bubble it becomes very easy to change to and be affected by the influence of others in the bubble. I understand it but I DO NOT accept it as an excuse for going back on ones word.

[Ocelot]

9. I miss Bill Clinton

Yeah, I know, we got NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall at the end of his second term. He was far from perfect. But compared to what's happening now....

[ellenrr]

19. he deformed welfare, he created the largest surveillance state to date

civil libertarian Nat Hentoff calls him a "serial violator of civil rights".

http://www.villagevoice.com/1999-01-05/news/what-s-happening-to-the-left/

I don't miss him at all!

NAFTA is a disaster for everyone except big agriculture.

[Ocelot]

21. He was a hell of a lot better than Obama

I'd like to hear what Nat Hentoff has to say about Obama's NSA abuses. Over 8 years Clinton's uses of war powers were very limited and he certainly didn't espouse Dubya's "Imperial Presidency" bullshit, or enthusiastically try to dismantle the Constitution as Obama has done.

[Iliyah]

39. Pres O has not

dismantled the Constitution and where I have heard that before, ummmmmmmmmmm, Fake news and hate talk radio. Talk about dismantling the Constitution, W - enough said.

[Ocelot]

45. Sorry, NSA abuses ARE dismantling the Constitution

Maybe you're not familiar with the 4th Amendment, if that's the case you're beyond help.

[kpete]

67. there has been

much dismantling
by many (bling to go with it): a Get Out Of Jail Free Card

I don't blame Obama, Iliyah
I am disappointed (not the first time, certainly won't be the last)



what if I wake up tomorrow and read this headline?

Congress & America Say No to War & Obama Decrees PEACE Throughout The World

Obama will be my hero
and I will eat crow,
even though my better self is a devout vegetarian

as always

Peace & Kindness too,
kp

[ellenrr]

59. well, you won't get an argument from me about Obama.

[Matariki]

30. No, we're not going to have a President, or a Congress, that truely represents us

until some serious campaign reform takes place. Until the massive amounts of money spent on elections gets reigned in.

[OnyxCollie]

34. Get rid of voting machines, too.

Since one of the four authors of HAVA is now the Sec. of Defense, and the NSA operates under the purview of the Dept. of Defense.

[Matariki]

35. Yes. What you said, absolutely.

[OnyxCollie]

48. Time to spray the infestation.

Last edited Wed Sep 11, 2013, 08:58 AM - Edit history (1)

The NSA gathered info on Democratic politicians that it would turn over to the FBI and US Attorneys, resulting in investigations and prosecutions, operating under "parallel construction," which would occur during close elections.

ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT’S 2002 MEMORANDUM

On March 6, 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a memorandum regarding new procedures to apply to foreign intelligence (FI) and foreign counterintelligence (FCI) investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It proposed significant changes to FISA and allowed overlapping between intelligence officers and law enforcement officers:

Prior to the USA Patriot Act, FISA could be used only for the "primary purpose" of obtaining "foreign intelligence information." The term "foreign intelligence information" was and is defined to include information that is necessary, or relevant, to the ability of the United States to protect against foreign threats to national security, such as attack, sabotage, terrorism, or clandestine intelligence activities. See 50 U.S.C. § 1801(e)(1). Under the primary purpose standard, the government could have a significant law enforcement purpose for using FISA, but only if it was subordinate to a primary foreign intelligence purpose. The USA Patriot Act allows FISA to be used for "a significant purpose," rather than the primary purpose, of obtaining foreign intelligence information. Thus, it allows FISA to be used primarily for a law enforcement purpose, as long as a significant foreign intelligence purpose remains. See 50 U.S.C. §§ 1804(a)(7)(B), 1823(a)(7)(B).

The Act also expressly authorizes intelligence officers who are using FISA to "consult" with federal law enforcement officers to "coordinate efforts to investigate or protect against" foreign threats to national security. Under this authority, intelligence and law enforcement officers may exchange a full range of information and advice concerning such efforts in FI or FCI investigations, including information and advice designed to preserve or enhance the possibility of a criminal prosecution. The USA Patriot Act provides that such consultation between intelligence and law enforcement officers "shall not" preclude the government's certification of a significant foreign intelligence purpose or the issuance of a FISA warrant. See 50 U.S.C. §§ 1806(k), 1825(k).


These procedures were changed or rejected by the FISA court and its opinion was publicly released in August 2002.

In spite of the long-accepted, constitutionally sound, independence-preserving method of appointing interim U.S. Attorneys, the appointment process was radically changed with the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2006. Removed was the interbranch appointment from the district court; the Attorney General could now make interim U.S. Attorney appointments. Also eliminated was the 120 day period that interim U.S. Attorneys could stay in office before a district court could appoint an interim U.S. Attorney to fill the vacancy. Interim U.S. Attorneys could now remain in office indefinitely, or until the President appointed a U.S. Attorney to the district. Interim U.S. Attorney appointments bypassed Senate confirmation, leaving the determination of qualification to the Justice Department.

The insertion of this new clause into the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act went unnoticed. Senators were at a loss to explain how the clause made its way into the bill. It was later determined that the Justice Department had requested Brett Tolman to insert the clause into the bill (Kiel, 2007). At the time the clause was inserted Mr. Tolman was a counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which is Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) is a member. Sen. Specter responded to inquiries about his involvement with the clause by saying, “I do not slip things in” (Kiel, 2007, p. 1). According to Sen. Specter, the principal reason for the change was to resolve “separation of power issues” (Kiel, 2007, p. 2). The Senate voted to repeal the clause in February 2007 (P.L. 110-34, 2007). At the time of this writing, Mr. Tolman is a U.S. Attorney for the state of Utah.

~snip~

A report from Professors Emeritus Donald C. Shields and John F. Cragan of the University of Missouri and Illinois State University respectively, shows that of 375 elected officials investigated and/or indicted, 10 involved independents, 67 involved Republicans, and 298 involved Democrats. “U.S. Attorneys across the nation investigate seven times as many Democratic officials as they investigate Republican officials, a number that exceeds even the racial profiling of African Americans in traffic stops” (Shields & Cragan, 2007, p. 1).

Criminal defense lawyers demand access to secret DEA evidence
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/08/criminal-defense-lawyers-demand-access-to-secret-dea-evidence/

In interviews, at least a dozen current or former agents said they used “parallel construction,” often by pretending that an investigation began with what appeared to be a routine traffic stop, when the true origin was actually a tip from SOD.

Defense lawyers said that by hiding the existence of the information, the government is violating a defendant’s constitutional right to view potentially exculpatory evidence that suggests witness bias, entrapment or innocence.

“It certainly can’t be that the agents can make up a ‘parallel construction,’ a made-up tale, in court documents, testimony before the grand jury or a judge, without disclosure to a court,” said Jim Wyda, the federal public defender in Maryland, in an email.

“This is going to result in a lot of litigation, for a long time.”

"Parallel construction" is really intelligence laundering
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023425612

The government calls the practice "parallel construction," but deciphering their double speak, the practice should really be known as "intelligence laundering." This deception and dishonesty raises a host of serious legal problems.

~snip~

Taken together, the Fifth and Sixth Amendments guarantee a criminal defendant a meaningful opportunity to present a defense and challenge the government's case. But this intelligence laundering deprives defendants of these important constitutional protections. It makes it harder for prosecutors to comply with their ethical obligation under Brady v. Maryland to disclose any exculpatory or favorable evidence to the defense—an obligation that extends to disclosing evidence bearing on the reliability of a government witness. Hiding the source of information used by the government to initiate an investigation or make an arrest means defendants are deprived of the opportunity to challenge the accuracy or veracity of the government's investigation, let alone seek out favorable evidence in the government's possession.

The third major legal problem is that the practice suggests DEA agents are misleading the courts. Wiretaps, search warrants, and other forms of surveillance authorizations require law enforcement to go to a judge and lay out the facts that support the request. The court's function is to scrutinize the facts to determine the appropriate legal standard has been met based on truthful, reliable evidence. So, for example, if the government is using evidence gathered from an informant to support its request for a search warrant, it has to establish to the court that the informant is reliable and trustworthy so that the court can be convinced there is probable cause to support the search. But when law enforcement omits integral facts—like the source of a tip used to make an arrest—the court is deprived of the opportunity to fulfill its traditional role and searches are signed off without the full knowledge of the court.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-laundering

The NSA-DEA police state tango
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/10/the_nsa_dea_police_state_tango/singleton/

On the other hand, this is a genuinely sinister turn of events with a whiff of science-fiction nightmare, one that has sounded loud alarm bells for many people in the mainstream legal world. Nancy Gertner, a Harvard Law professor who spent 18 years as a federal judge and cannot be accused of being a radical, told Reuters she finds the DEA story more troubling than anything in Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks. It’s the first clear evidence that the “special rules” and disregard for constitutional law that have characterized the hunt for so-called terrorists have crept into the domestic criminal justice system on a significant scale. “It sounds like they are phonying up investigations,” she said. Maybe this is how a police state comes to America: Not with a bang, but with a parallel construction.

[dougolat]

117. +++ nt

[annabanana]

118. Horrifying. . . . .n/t

[Iliyah]

40. Thank you!

[kpete]

70. 2000, Stolen just saying

again, peace & kindness
peace, and kindness

Thanks Matariki,
many of us here agree elections need to be in the hands of
WE THE PEOPLE

its like the "Baptism of Democracy"
the RIGHT TO VOTE

peace, kp

[Uncle Joe]

86. It seems we're still suffering from that travesty.

[Whisp]

41. and wars.

but somehow that is forgotten.

he softened up Iraq for 2 full terms with sanctions and bombings, so the dry drunk Chimperor could go in and finish up the job.

but yeh, the Clintons are all for peace and looooooooove and human rights.

[Ocelot]

47. You could apply those same standards to Jimmy Carter

"He paved the way for Reagan", etc. Or you could find fault with any Democratic President of your choosing. No President has a spotless record. But Obama's record is especially APPALLING and he's by far the most Republicanesque "Democratic" President.

The ONLY thing Obama has done so far that's good is being for gay equality, after he was against it.

[Whisp]

49. I'm not talking spotless records, no human has so I don't expect

a President to with all the works on his plate.

I'm talking about character, Carter had it and still does, and Obama has it.
Clinton(s) had/has selfishness and egomania and money grubbing paws.

[Ocelot]

54. Well, this is where we fundamentally disagree

I'm no longer under the impression that Obama has "character". He went on national television and knowingly lied to the American people about NSA abuses, and now he's trying to lie us into a war in the exact same way that Bush did.

That's a bit more grave than lying about having sex with "that woman", wouldn't you say?

[rhett o rick]

106. How can you judge that Obama has character? He has yielded control of

the spy agencies to those that have been in charge for decades. He has yielded control of the economy to those that have been in control for decades. He has yielded control of foreign affairs to those that have been in power for decades. Are you starting to get the drift? He has no advisers that dont represent the 1%. I dont call that "character".

[blue14u]

110. There has to be more of a reason

than he just decided "it was ok to be gay"! He has an agenda..

The draft maybe?

For this raging war coming at us that we don't want!

There is more going on here than we can realize.

[JI7]

97. Bill Clinton Criticized Obama for not going into Syria long before the CHemical Weapons were used

[delrem]

116. I think you might be pining for the same BS era as fans of R. Reagan pine for.

We know that fans of R. Reagan pine for an era that doesn't actually exist. They pine for a highly doctored memory, one that focuses on fireside chats, jellybeans, a white guy wearing a white hat on a horse.... Not for the actual era which was one (in the americas) defined by the ugliest and most dishonest, most deceitful wars.

I recall, now, that Pres. Obama applauded Ronald Reagan. Clinton hangs out with Bush Sr. I can understand this better, now that I've experienced Obama's wars and theatrics.

There's something very very wrong here, something that smells.

[mtasselin]

10. more

This upcoming bombing in Syria is more then Syria, this has to do with Iran. Iran is pushing the buttons on this and if we don't do what needs to be done we will be going to war with Iran in the near future.

[Ocelot]

13. Incorrect, Saudi Arabia and Israel are the ones "pushing the buttons on this" (n/t)

[blkmusclmachine]

14. !

[magical thyme]

17. Israel, Saudi Arabia and PNAC are pushing the buttons

And if we attack Syria, we will be at war with Iran, and close to war with Russia and China. Syria and Iran are allies and have a mutual defense pact.

[nolabels]

115. I. S. and P. are the parties the U.S. should be at war with.

At least if it wanted to keep the world safe

[ArsSkeptica]

20. I'm probably stepping into a deep pile by posting this...

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/how-attacking-syria-makes-conflict-with-iran-more-likely/
How Attacking Syria Makes Conflict with Iran More Likely

I'm no fan of conservative press because I do have my biases after all, but there's a point here (if only on the top of my noggin). If nothing else, it adds to the case that we need far more compelling reasons for military action on Syria.

"Just trust us," says admin that lies repeatedly about NSA and keeps James "Perjury" Clapper on the payroll.

"My case is so compelling we need wiggle room," Kerry may as well have said.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/08/syria-john-kerry-un-resolution

So yeah, I think the timing of this compared to Iran's election of Rouhani is interesting.

[Ocelot]

22. You could find a better source probably (n/t)

[man4allcats]

28. Actually, this has to do with a natural gas pipeline - nothing more and nothing less.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/112753604

and, as this poster noted in the comments, The US Govt. doesn't give a crap about anything that has to do with Democracy or human rights...

[durablend]

11. HE'S DOING THIS TO KEEP YOU SAFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY CAN'T YOU APPRECIATE THAT HE CARES ABOUT YOU?!?!?!?

[blkmusclmachine]

12. LIAR

[cantbeserious]

15. Hope And Change Officially In Flames

eom

[sarcasmo]

16. I didn't vote for this nonsense. Called my congress critter, but I'M pretty sure Obama has made up

his mind.

[another_liberal]

18. Power corrupts . . .

Imperial power corrupts a whole fucking bunch!

[SammyWinstonJack]

51. I doubt very much that Obama needed much help in the corruption dept..

[philosslayer]

23. Liberals still support Obama

By a resounding margin. The last poll is saw had it at 80%+. And if my President was allowed to run for a 3rd term, I'd bet dollars to donuts the vast majority on DU would walk over broken glass to vote for him.

However, as usual, the tut-tut brigade is sniping and whining about every perceived slight. Is it a wonder my President is having difficulty getting anything done? When his own party leads the second guessing? Would you prefer the alternative?

Our health care crisis is on its way to being fixed. We are out of Iraq, and on our way to being out of Afghanistan. The economy Bush destroyed is getting stronger by the month. Not perfect, but stronger. Sorry, but i'm a glass-half-full type of person, and i still believe.

[OnyxCollie]

25. Rah! Rah! Rah! Goooooo team!

Blue is the BEST color!

[philosslayer]

27. Mock away

No President is perfect. Obama has had to endure more criticism and obstruction than any President in modern memory. And yet, when the history is written, I am quite confident he'll be rated as one of the most successful and transitional Presidents in history. But go ahead, keep slinging arrows. Set up the circular firing squad. Armchair quarterbacking is fun and easy, isn't it?

[OnyxCollie]

29. Do you have anything of substance

with which to defend Obama, or is it all about popularity?

Keep to the topic of domestic surveillance.

[Matariki]

31. "mock away" - coming from the person who calls people "the tut-tut brigade"

Your post is full of cliches and short on substance.

[Iliyah]

38. LOL, I guess you prefer

RED.

[Egalitarian Thug]

56. It's what they do. It's all they got. +1

[roguevalley]

26. the bog is that away

[Iliyah]

36. Yep and you know why?

Because they generally feel he is trying to protect the USA and more importantly her people. I'm a Liberal/Progressive and I still trust him although I may not agree with him in some decisions or policies, I myself believe he's sincerely is doing his best in protecting us.

The health care crisis will take time and I do believe we will get that single payer. We will be out of Afghanistan and our economy will become stronger and the sequester will be dealt with in favor of the 99%er even though the GOPers will continue to obstruct.

As to Syria, I truly believe that Assad did it. Do nothing and this will allow others to use chemical weapons. Whats the best why to send a message, I dunno but leaning for a world diplomatic solution.

I cringe to see a future of GOPers and Libertarians making decisions concerning the USA welfare and foregoing policies.

[backscatter712]

46. Did you copy and paste that all by yourself? n/t

[leeroysphitz]

52. lol

[Ocelot]

37. I don't believe those polls

Polls also showed that Romney and Obama were neck-and-neck, when we now know that was ridiculously wrong. Polls can be manipulated and polls can be bought & paid for.

BTW MoveOn.org's members have gone on record as being 73% AGAINST military action in Syria. That wasn't just a poll, that was an actual vote. And without MoveOn Obama wouldn't even be in the White House.

Thanks for the White House propaganda, it's been duly noted. You realize that you are losing badly, don't you?

[uponit7771]

87. keyword polls, if it were one you'd have a point but wingers of course will bash ad nause

[Jack Rabbit]

61. And I'm a glass half-empty kind of guy

Nevertheless, we can't blame it on my clinical depression that the water isn't coming up to the half way point right now.

(I)f my President was allowed to run for a 3rd term, I'd bet dollars to donuts the vast majority on DU would walk over broken glass to vote for him.

Yes, considering the alternative is going to be Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio, I would. Over broken glass, I'll require a thick pair of shoes.

(T)he tut-tut brigade is sniping and whining about every perceived slight. Is it a wonder my President is having difficulty getting anything done? When his own party leads the second guessing? Would you prefer the alternative?

The President was having difficulty getting anything done before his recent difficulties talking straight to the American people about NSA domestic spying or what a wonderful thing it would be to punish Assad by bombing the people that he gassed. The major problem in getting things done is the obstinate, nihilistic Republican party. Their position on everything is that if Obama is for it then they are against it.

The Republicans are not a serious opposition party right now. They oppose Obama, as an opposition party should, but they are doing it by blocking every attempt to re-energize the economy while offering no alternative. They finally realized that the reason they lose elections is that people vote against them. The only remedy they've advanced for that so far is voter suppression legislation. If the Republicans are marginalized, they have no one to blame but themselves. They aren't being part of any serious discussion, and they're fooling fewer and fewer people into thinking they are less and less of the time. They have become irrelevant.

So, my good man, if Obama isn't going to get constructive criticism from the opposition, then where else is he going to get it but from what you call the "tut-tut brigade." Tut-tut brigade? Did you get that from Rahm Emanuel?

It's not like the President has never needed some constructive criticism. He filled his economic team with a bunch of Wall Street sycophants, starting with Tim Geithner; when given the opportunity to replace Geithner, he replaces him with Jack Lew; and he wants to make Larry Summers, an architect of the disaster of deregulation, to be chairman of the Fed. Obama's Justice Department has also been way too Wall Street friendly. Attorney General Holder has done nothing to prosecute massive fraud. Holder allowed Lanny Bruer to remain as chief prosecutor, although Bruer took a hands off approach to Wall Street crime and was rewarded with a lush Wall Street job after leaving the DoJ. That smacks of good, old-fashioned corruption. It's not the sort of thing that makes the President look good.

Let's get off Obama. He's not going to be on any ballot ever again, unless he runs for his old Senate seat in Illinois. Let's let history judge him. I think history will say that he missed a lot of opportunities. That's water under the bridge now. What we need to concentrate on is marginalizing the Republican party at federal and state levels and replacing those Democrats who take money from corporations and start acting like Republicans once they've been re-elected with people who will be loyal to the voters who elected them.

[Vanje]

63. What poll is that?

What poll is it that has liberals supporting Obama at 80%?

I am curious.

I've been reading on DU for YEARS, now, that Liberals support for Obama is at over 80%.
The percentage doesn't seem to change at all, while other polls ,of the public at large show a decided downswing. (see illustration below)

When you say, "The last poll is saw had it at 80%+", I wonder how recent this "last poll" was. Was it last week? Last month? Last year? I wonder if it was last taken before 2010.





Figure from this page: http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm#ObamaJob

[philosslayer]

71. See the link

http://www.gallup.com/poll/164150/obama-approval-fluid-among-hispanics-moderate-gop.aspx

Minimum of 82% among liberal democrats over the course of the President's term in office.

Even among moderate democrats its never been below 73%.

[truebluegreen]

104. "gallup"

[philosslayer]

108. So you're saying Gallup has OVERSTATED President Obama's popularity?

That's a new one. Usually people are complaining polling outfits are downplaying the Presidents popularity.

[truebluegreen]

125. I'm saying Gallup is lousy.

[philosslayer]

126. You asked for data

I gave it to you. You may disagree with it, but you don't get to pick your facts. The point is, Liberal Democrats overwhelmingly support Obama, and have since the beginning of his term. The Gallup poll was but one example. If you have data that contradicts that assertion, feel free to post it.

[truebluegreen]

129. I asked for data?

[philosslayer]

130. The original questioner did.

Do you disagree that Obama's job approval among Liberal Democrats is 80%+? You clearly didn't believe Gallup. Fine. Find another poll that contradicts it.

[truebluegreen]

131. Tell you what:

I'll believe that Gallup found that liberal Democrats like Obama better than the alternative, like rMoney. Without seeing anything about the framing of the questions or how Liberal Democrats were defined I don't give it any more credence than that.

Happy now?

[philosslayer]

132. I was never unhappy

Liberal Democrats overwhelming support President Obama. Its been born out in poll after poll. Sorry to disappoint you.

[truebluegreen]

133. Uh-huh.

Gallup can call a ham sandwich a "liberal Democrat." Doesn't make it one.

[philosslayer]

134. I didn't say gallup poll after gallup poll

I said poll after poll. Period. You talk really big. So back it up. Find the poll where President Obama is NOT overwhelmingly popular among Liberal Democrats.

[PlanetaryOrbit]

75. I'm not sure if liberals really have strong support for Obama.

It seems to me that a lot of the "support" for Obama these days is the, "At least it's better than having a Republican president" kind of "support".

[Skittles]

81. YOU NAIL IT, PLANETARY ORBIT

yes INDEED

[uponit7771]

88. So out of ALL the polls showing liberals supporting Obama that's what the asked question?!!?!?

[Union Scribe]

94. You are conflating two groups

The polls always separate liberals and "liberal Democrats" and there is usually a high single digit difference in support for Obama. And put that "would you prefer the alternative" in a sack and drown it in a river, please, because we got tired of hearing that years ago.

[HooptieWagon]

127. 95% of Congressional Black Caucus reported to be opposed to unilateral Syria strike.

Obama doesn't have much liberal support. It disappeared when he threw us under the bus, repeatedly. And trust disappeared with the repeated lying.

[OnyxCollie]

24. Obama-couldn't trust him since 2008.

In 2007, Obama was going to filibuster any bill that gave retroactive immunity to the telecoms that helped the Bush administration illegally spy on US citizens.

Obama's wiretapping flip-flop? Yes
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jul/14/obamas-wiretapping-flip-flop-yes/

In October 2007, Obama spokesman Bill Burton issued this unequivocal statement to the liberal blog TPM Election Central: "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."

...

But Obama knows how to drive a hard bargain, making he (and Rahm) the top recipients in the Senate and House of 2008 campaign contributions from AT&T employees and PAC.

Obama: $270,191
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000076&party=D&chamber=S&type=P&cycle=2008

Rahm: $50,650
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000076&chamber=H&party=D&cycle=2008&state=&sort=A

...

Obama supported an amendment that would have stripped telecom immunity from the measure. But after that amendment failed, Obama declined to filibuster the bill. In fact, he voted for it. It passed the Senate, 69-28, on July 9. The House passed the same bill last month, and Bush said he would sign it soon. (McCain missed the vote because he was campaigning in Ohio, but he has consistently supported the immunity plan.)

In a message to supporters, Obama defended his position, citing a phrase Democrats fought to include that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is the "exclusive" means of wiretapping for intelligence. The bill "is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year... (because it) makes it clear to any president or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court."

...

That's the rubber stamp FISA court, hand-picked by John Roberts, the Chief Justice chosen by George W. Bush...

[woo me with science]

74. Excellent post.

Thank you.

[damnedifIknow]

32. Why doesn't he push a liberal/progressive agenda

like he's pushing this war? Boggles the mind.

[Iliyah]

44. Gosh, Pres O can

walk, talk and chew gum at the same time. I'm reading other cites where he is doing so.

DU is becoming pro RW.

[Maedhros]

77. Anti-war = pro RW

Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

You BOG people and your weird zero-sum partisan gamesmanship leads to stupid logic like this:

Because Obama wants war with Syria, then Progressives must also support war with Syria, because if they don't then Obama looks bad and the Republicans win.

Apply some basic reasoning skills. Which is more likely?

A. Progressives are really right wing moles because we oppose war.

B. Obama is aligning himself with MIC/PNAC objectives.

[ThirdWayCowplop]

120. Those who want a war with Syria are more then welcome to go fight in and and PAY for it

The rest of us will sit at home while the children go and play war.

For those that want war:

www.Marines.com
www.goarmy.com
www.airforce.com
www.Navy.com

Put YOUR money where your mouth is or STFU about going to war.

[marble falls]

33. Domestic survelliance isn't a program, it's the effect of a policy - intercept all ....

communications. It was an unforeseen, an unintended consequence. Don't worry, we don't look at anybodies' communications, truuuuuusssst us.

[michigandem58]

42. I'm sure he's devastated

n/t

[madamesilverspurs]

43. Tar and feathers,

that's my new wardrobe around here.

There's much I do not understand. That said, there's much I don't understand that my cardiologist does, either, but I still trust him because he's the one with several years of medical school. Frankly, I'm damned glad that he hasn't limited his treatments to the level of my understanding.

[madrchsod]

53. we are going to need a bigger bus

this brand new chinese bus should be large enough for everyone to fit under......

[DJ13]

85. Thats noy a bus, its a road train

[arely staircase]

55. says internet message board person who never trusted him

and all the people who liked this thread are also the ones who have shat on him from day 1. what will he do having lost their trust?

[kpete]

57. not true

.


peace, kp

[arely staircase]

58. you can all take the Obama bumper stickers off your cars

again



See, the problem with being a constant negative critic of the president leaves you little room in the "well, now he has gone and done it" department.

[Maedhros]

80. Your ROFL smilie

says more than reasoned discourse ever could.

[arely staircase]

83. your sarcasm thing is brilliant

[Maedhros]

128. I used it so that there could be no question that I was mocking your childish attitude [n/t]

[LiberalArkie]

123. I took mine off when he announced that Rahm Emanuel would be his chief.

I knew then how it was going to be.

The affordable care act - the greatest give-away to insurance companies yet. It is what big business has been wanting for years. A way to stop having to provide health care.

But he came out the gays - but only after the log cabin republicans took up the fight.

[Maedhros]

79. Yes. It's all about personality.

Who we "trust" or "shit on."

Ridiculous.

This isn't high school. We're not voting for Prom King.

[QC]

122. Sadly, a good many people around here

think we are, in fact, voting for Prom King.

I'll never forget the first time I logged on to DU and found threads full of people sighing and giggling at dreamy pinup photos of politicians.

That was certainly something very new on a site that had once prided itself on its smart factor.

[Skittles]

82. ah, the YOU NEVER LOVED HIM meme

[arely staircase]

84. ah, the meme meme nt

[Skittles]

90. that's because there's so f***ing many of them!!!

[arely staircase]

91. lol (the original meme, I suppose) nt

[Union Scribe]

95. I just can't believe it took 55 posts

for someone to pull the "you never loved him" card. Fucking hell, you guys are slipping.

[QC]

121. kpete never really loved him!!!

[Rex]

60. Well...I kinda knew that after how he handled the BP disaster.

I think he will resend the order to strike Syria. After the vote by Congress.

[Jefferson23]

62. The more we know, the better. No other way to look at it imo.

How we go forward is the most difficult and challenging aspect for Democrats.


K&R

[kpete]

64. an absolute

The more we know, the better.


thanks Jefferson23
for the reminder


and peace, kp

[Jefferson23]

78. I think so kpete, they're clearly out of control, in so many ways, imo.

In Rush to Strike Syria, U.S. Tried to Derail U.N. Probe
Analysis by Gareth Porter

http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/08/in-rush-to-strike-syria-u-s-tried-to-derail-u-n-probe/

[forestpath]

66. He lies like a rug.

[MrMickeysMom]

68. President Obama is telling what HE BELIEVES to be the truth...

It's called cognitive dissidence... works like a charm...

[MineralMan]

72. Based on my pretty good memory, I don't believe you ever trusted him.

Seems like you've been digging up negative stories about the man for a long, long time. This is just another in the series. It's sure to get lots of DU Recs, though.

[uponit7771]

89. Yeap, weekend negatives on Obama ALWAYS get rec'd then during teh weekdays these post sink

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

73. I trusted him when he said he would escalate the lost war in Afghanistan.

That's why I didn't vote for him. But, he kept his promise.

[Thinkingabout]

76. Who do I trust more, Obama or Snowden, the answer would be Obama. Why? Simple,

I don't trust a thief. Who has more integrity Obama or GG, it would be Obama.

[ocpagu]

92. If Obama strikes Syria, he will be internationally recognized as a war criminal.

Any "thief" would have more integrity then...

[Thinkingabout]

93. Did you know there is an international treaty since 1925, charges of being a war criminal would not

Hold against Obama, but theft charges would hold against the thief.

[ocpagu]

96. The United Nations already warned him. It would be a war crime and period. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

98. What are you going to do with the treaty?

[ocpagu]

99. You can not allege obedience to a treaty to direspect another.

Ban Ki Moon: "As I have repeatedly said, the Security Council has primary responsibility for international peace and security. The use of force is lawful only when in exercise of self-defence in accordance with article 51 of the United Nations Charter and or when the Security Council approves such action."

[Thinkingabout]

100. so you think the UN is given ng to ignore the treaty aginsts using chemicals on anyone?

[ocpagu]

102. Obama should start looking for a better excuse if he really intends to strike Syria...

... rather than saying "I did it to enforce an international treaty while I was myself disrespecting another treaty".

Really. Read it carefully and notice how cynical this sounds.

[totodeinhere]

119. That treaty does not authorize unilateral military action by a rogue state.

The fact that there is a treaty against the use of chemical weapons would not absolve Obama of an legal military strike.

[bbgrunt]

101. the whole thing just does not compute

one has to wonder if people are being threatened with another false flag operation

[JoePhilly]

103. This is absolutely, positively, no doubt about it ... the last straw!!!!!

Again.

[Wilms]

105. ^

[Lady Freedom Returns]

107. I trust him.

As for peace... I bet those children over there that fear of dying like many of their friends would love peace too.

[BillyRibs]

109. Mr. President,

You disappoint me!

[99th_Monkey]

111. Obama told you he was ALL about CHANGE & HOPE ...

So once elected, he CHANGED colors and many points of view.

The HOPE comes in the 2nd Act, when you need it most to endure the CHANGE.

[DeSwiss]

112. Three paragraphs regarding Syria:

But the insistence that a durable and effective solution to this crisis lies at the end of an American cruise missile beggars belief. It is borne from the circular sophistry that has guided most recent "humanitarian interventions": (1) Something must be done now; (2) Bombing is something; (3) Therefore we must bomb.

The problem for America in all of this is that its capacity to impact diplomatic negotiations is limited by the fact that its record of asserting its military power stands squarely at odds with its pretensions of moral authority. For all America's condemnations of chemical weapons, the people of Falluja in Iraq are experiencing the birth defects and deformities in children and increases in early-life cancer that may be linked to the use of depleted uranium during the US bombardment of the town. It also used white phosphorus against combatants in Falluja.

Its chief ally in the region, Israel, holds the record for ignoring UN resolutions, and the US is not a participant in the international criminal court – which is charged with bringing perpetrators of war crimes to justice – because it refuses to allow its own citizens to be charged. On the very day Obama lectured the world on international norms he launched a drone strike in Yemen that killed six people.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/08/us-little-credibility-syria-chemical-weapons

- K&R

[adirondacker]

113. Does Leno even have an audience? The mentality to watch that idiot is crippling. nt

[Spitfire of ATJ]

114. Given those two choices, I pick "none of the above"....

I believe the NSA has gone rogue AND that Snowden exaggerated things and that Obama was uninformed.

[Sunlei]

124. facebook, email providers, isp, messageboard admin., phone company, stores, banks, have less

restrictions and regulations than the Gov. on what information they can 'read' or sell to others

google, game companies, all kinds of private companies are more than willing to sell your info to others including the Gov.