Obama and the House GOP Leadership: Peas in a Pod

[bks]

A Tea Party-supported US representative (Justin Amash) and liberal lion John Conyers teamed up to sponsor a bill seeking to defund a single element of the NSA's domestic surveillance program: the bulk collection of telephone records of all US citizens.

Sound reasonable?

Well, not according to the Obama Administration and its strong ally in the continuing production of big government and criminal surveillance activity, otherwise known as the Republican Leadership in the House of Representatives. Team Boehner and Team Obama joined forces (as they will in matters like these) to narrowly defeat the bill, though it was something of a victory that it was voted on at all.

Both Obama and Boehner are waterboys for the national security establishment that pretty much runs this country (and is running it into the ground). Nothing could make that clearer than the debate surrounding this bill, and the vote itself.

Those of you who voted for, or support, one of the chief waterboys, Mike Rogers (R-MI) should be quite clear now what kind of bought-and-paid-for sycophant you have representing you in DC. Like the rest of the so-called small government GOP leadership, Rogers loves the really biggest parts of big government - the parts that enrich defense companies to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year, profiting as they do from the spilled blood of American service personnel; and the parts that expand the structure of the US surveillance state at an untold cost.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/us...g.html?hp&_r=0

[Saratoga_Mike]

Yeah that pesky National Security Establishment....why do we even need one?

[bks]

I, too, Mike, might partake in the construction of false dilemmas if I had no argument, and no willingness to confront the issues raised head-on.

The country most certainly does not need a national security establishment, particularly one that doesn't care all that much about actual national security.

[Robert Goren]

If the house republicans and Obama agree on anything, It must be needed really bad. They could not agree whether to have Ribeyes or NY Strip steaks for supper if Mosty and Just Ralph were splitting the tab.

[so.cal.fan]

Seems only conservative libertarians and liberals teamed up for the 205 votes to defund NSA's spying on U.S. citizens.
Doesn't anyone care about this?
What am I missing here?
There is no real coverage of this on any of the mainstream media, can someone explain this?

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by so.cal.fan

Seems only conservative libertarians and liberals teamed up for the 205 votes to defund NSA's spying on U.S. citizens.
Doesn't anyone care about this?
What am I missing here?
There is no real coverage of this on any of the mainstream media, can someone explain this?

Nobody is going to look at the collected data unless it connected to criminal act, most likely a terrorist act. In this case, the safety is in sure volume of collected data. Whether anyone likes it or not, we are at war with radical Islam and that war is being fought on our shores. Whose in charge in Egypt doesn't matter much, it is the bomber(s) who blow things up in NY, Boston or anyplace in this country that does.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by bks

I, too, Mike, might partake in the construction of false dilemmas if I had no argument, and no willingness to confront the issues raised head-on.

The country most certainly does not need a national security establishment, particularly one that doesn't care all that much about actual national security.

Strong words.

If you want to say they don't care about civil liberties, you might have a point.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by so.cal.fan

Seems only conservative libertarians and liberals teamed up for the 205 votes to defund NSA's spying on U.S. citizens.
Doesn't anyone care about this?
What am I missing here?
There is no real coverage of this on any of the mainstream media, can someone explain this?

Most people realize there hasn't been another event on the scale of 9/11 (or worse) on US soil b/c of the NSA and related entities. Therefore, they get a pass. You can say that's ridiculous, but it's reality.

[so.cal.fan]

Perhaps, Mike, but I'm still very apprehensive about this whole thing.
Certain things just don't add up.
I suppose I just don't understand it.

My guess would be your answer + the massive spread of advanced technology, the latter being the biggest culprit to the massive changes in our society. That is just my opinion, and I'm often wrong.

[Tom]

Never trust the government.
I should think that goes without saying.

[Tom]

Whether anyone likes it or not, we are at war with radical Islam and that war is being fought on our shores.

Then we should be profiling.
We are NOT at war.

[so.cal.fan]

It's so very sad when we can't trust our government.

[newtothegame]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

Nobody is going to look at the collected data unless it connected to criminal act, most likely a terrorist act. In this case, the safety is in sure volume of collected data. Whether anyone likes it or not, we are at war with radical Islam and that war is being fought on our shores. Whose in charge in Egypt doesn't matter much, it is the bomber(s) who blow things up in NY, Boston or anyplace in this country that does.

Bull crapola,
If no one is going to look at it, then what's the point of "collecting" it?
You see, here in lies the problem. In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty. By collecting the data, (at least in my eyes), you have assumed to be guilty before ever being found guilty.
Now you can make an argument that without the data, they would never catch anyone and I would only reply that in this country, in order to do surveillance or wire tapping or anything of the sort, the law needs a court order to do so.
How many court orders were obtained to "collect" this information???

Secondly, I would add if this information is so valuable to collect, how is it that a Chechnya (sp) immigrant can travel to and from known terrorist areas outside of the country, how can this country be warned by the Russian government of the ties, and lord only knows what other information has been obtained, and STLL carry out an attack on U.S. soil???? Looks like the information isn't being used properly so why collect it??????

Its a far over reach of powers.......

[bks]

It goes beyond not caring about civil liberties, Mike. Plainly they don't, you're right. But collecting data about every move you make means the State has unlimited power to use blackmail (or even the threat of it) against anyone who wants to challenge it. Those are Gestapo and Stasi-esque tactics. Real dissent has basically been criminalized. That's not America.

No one wants terrorism to befall anyone. But if the cost of fighting terrorism is total information awareness and all that comes with it, then the terrorists have already won a victory they never could have dreamed of, because they helped create the conditions under which our own government now treats ALL OF US like we're the terrorists.

I need to emphasize though that it's a false choice between freedom and security. We're the target of terrorists for obvious reasons. It's not random. But Washington's hubris and sense of superiority does not permit self-scrutiny. The American way, as Dick Cheney said, is non-negotiable. He spoke for the leadership of both the Democratic and Republican parties when he said that.

[Tom]

This miserable excuse of a government could not keep track a bunch of guns it sold to drug cartels. It could not keep track of the exorbitant spending on parties by the IRS. Incompetence rules the roost in DC. They have no RIGHT to our data - none at all.