Update II: Is this the music for Obama Dimocrats PRISM spy scandal? It certainly fits lovelorn Big Media as it sings to the object of adulation – Barack:
Update: In California today the Peking Duck is meeting with the Lame Duck on of all things “cyber-security”. Maybe China will fight for our freedoms? But forget the ducks. We want to know what came first in this chicken or the egg story:
“The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life,” Representative Maxine Waters told Roland Martin on Monday. “That’s going to be very, very powerful,” Waters said. “That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”
Did the NSA in any way help Obama CREEP in 2012? What did Google know and when did Google know it? The denials from internet companies and the Obama government are increasingly revealed as lies if we are to believe the latest report from Britain’s The Guardian: PRISM “collection directly from the servers”. What did Obama and his allies at Google know and when did he and they know it? Inquiring minds want to know.
National security matters but terrorist attacks in this country have been thwarted by regular citizens like those former Vietnam War guys in Times Square who alerted the police (which mostly stood by oblivious to the threat while collecting their pay). Ditto the Boston Bombing and the Muslim Tsarnaev Killers – PRISM did not help catch the killers.
This NSA scandal is like the national gun registry we continue to hear derided as a “conspiracy theory”. In this case however we are all in the registry for crimes to be determined in the future.
On November 13, 2008 we wrote the article that can be found at the top of the left hand column of this website. That November 13, 2008 article is titled Obama Is The Third Bush Term. Our critique in that article included Obama’s promise to oppose FISA (indeed Obama promised to lead a filibuster against FISA) legislation during the presidential campaign but once the nomination was assured Obama voted FOR FISA.
We followed that Obama Is The Third Bush Term article with one titled Obama Is The Third Bush Term, Part II Guantanamo. We wrote, “The third George W. Bush term – starring Barack W. Obama – will be just as exciting, more corrupt, inept, dangerous and debilitating.” We pointed out Obama’s history of lies on this issue and that no facts or political realities had changed once he became president. Obama flim flammed on this issue and the corrupt left and the corrupt Dimocratic Party went along with the lies.
“It is well past time for Republicans to recognize how they hurt the country when they abandoned their alleged principles with unwavering support of irresponsible, if not criminal, George W. Bush policies and begin to intelligently oppose Barack Obama.
Democrats, Dimocrats, and Republican must realize the essential facts about Obama: (1) Obama is a flim-flam man; (2) Obama is a confidence artist who only cares about his advancement; (3) Obama race-baited his way, with help from powerful Dimocrats like Dean/Brazile/Pelosi/Kennedy/Kerry to the Democratic nomination; (4) It was only disgust with George W. Bush and the massive economic crisis during the last month of the election that allowed Obama to overcome John McCain’s lead; (5) Obama employs distraction as a key weapon to forswear responsibility; (6) Obama never takes responsiblity. Further, Democrats, Dimocrats, and Republicans must realize that
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
We were able to write what was apparent to anyone not willfully shutting their eyes because we stuck to our principles, not our party in 2008. If America is to survive Barack H. Obama it will do so only if principled Independents, principled Republicans and the few remaining principled Democrats and Dimocrats unite to oppose Barack H. Obama and drive him and his Chicago hoods from office.
It won’t be easy to stick to principles. We know. We’ve lost a lot of friends and a lot of opportunities for speaking out and opposing Barack Obama.
In January 2009 we posted five pictures of Obama morphing into George W. Bush on the lower right column of this website. Some of our commenters protested and asked we take the pictures down. Other commenters voted to keep the pictures up. The protests were mostly for esthetic reasons. Most of our commenters understood that Obama flim flammed and lied and that he was Bush without the decency.
By January 2009 it was apparent that Barack H. Obama was Barack W. Obama. Even one Big Media outlet in June 2009 admitted as much:
“In stark legal turnaround, Obama now resembles Bush
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is morphing into George W. Bush, as administration attorneys repeatedly adopt the executive-authority and national-security rationales that their Republican predecessors preferred.
In courtroom battles and freedom-of-information fights from Washington, D.C., to California, Obama’s legal arguments repeatedly mirror Bush’s: White House turf is to be protected, secrets must be retained and dire warnings are wielded as weapons.
“It’s putting up a veritable wall around the White House, and it’s so at odds with Obama’s campaign commitment to more open government,” said Anne Weismann, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a legal watchdog group.”
Of course we now realize our morph pictures and “Obama is the third Bush term” messaging is unfair – to George W. Bush. As detestable as we at the time found George W. Bush to be we have to admit there was a degree of integrity and honesty to what he said that is entirely missing in anything Barack Obama says/reads/writes.
George W. Bush took responsibility and called himself the “decider” whereas Barack Obama seeks to blame someone (often George W. Bush) else or as on his recent drone speech pretends he is not in charge. Obama’s “this is not who we are” platitudes on drones or forced feedings are substitutes for not stopping policies which he has the authority to stop.
Much of the left and those that used to be part of what was once known as the Democratic Party continue to make excuses for Barack Obama. Sure, recently some noise has been made to protest. Huff n’ Puff after years of shilling for Barack Obama today even posted the morph picture we have featured since January 2009. Five years too late.
Likewise Ron Fournier, formerly of AP roused himself to state “. Welcome to the Bush-Obama White House: They’re Spying on Us The “Bush-Obama era” will be long remembered for curbing the Constitution“. At Politico, which has quarterbacked for Obama for years the realization hit that we are in ‘Bush’s 4th term’.
The New York Times continues to weasel. At first the useless birdcage liner declared that “The administration“, not Barack Obama but “The administration”, has “lost all credibility.” Later “on this issue” was added to further weaken the condemnation. It was even worse on other Big Media sites.
William Saletan at Slate declared the latest scandal to be much ado about nothing. Hypocrite Saletan shrugged his shoulders and declared “telephony metadata” was nothing to get worked up over. Jane Mayer of The New Yorker explains why metadata is so dangerous for the government to have:
“The gist of the defense was that, in contrast to what took place under the Bush Administration, this form of secret domestic surveillance was legitimate because Congress had authorized it, and the judicial branch had ratified it, and the actual words spoken by one American to another were still private. So how bad could it be?
The answer, according to the mathematician and former Sun Microsystems engineer Susan Landau, whom I interviewed while reporting on the plight of the former N.S.A. whistleblower Thomas Drake and who is also the author of “Surveillance or Security?,” is that it’s worse than many might think.
“The public doesn’t understand,” she told me, speaking about so-called metadata. “It’s much more intrusive than content.” She explained that the government can learn immense amounts of proprietary information by studying “who you call, and who they call. If you can track that, you know exactly what is happening—you don’t need the content.”
For example, she said, in the world of business, a pattern of phone calls from key executives can reveal impending corporate takeovers. Personal phone calls can also reveal sensitive medical information: “You can see a call to a gynecologist, and then a call to an oncologist, and then a call to close family members.” And information from cell-phone towers can reveal the caller’s location. Metadata, she pointed out, can be so revelatory about whom reporters talk to in order to get sensitive stories that it can make more traditional tools in leak investigations, like search warrants and subpoenas, look quaint. “You can see the sources,” she said. When the F.B.I. obtains such records from news agencies, the Attorney General is required to sign off on each invasion of privacy. When the N.S.A. sweeps up millions of records a minute, it’s unclear if any such brakes are applied.
Metadata, Landau noted, can also reveal sensitive political information, showing, for instance, if opposition leaders are meeting, who is involved, where they gather, and for how long. Such data can reveal, too, who is romantically involved with whom, by tracking the locations of cell phones at night. [snip]
Binney, who considered himself a conservative, feared that the N.S.A.’s data-mining program was so extensive that it could help “create an Orwellian state.”
As he told me at the time, wiretap surveillance requires trained human operators, but data mining is an automated process, which means that the entire country can be watched. Conceivably, the government could “monitor the Tea Party, or reporters, whatever group or organization you want to target,” he said. “It’s exactly what the Founding Fathers never wanted.”
It’s not enough to be upset or outraged over this latest scandal. One “progressive” thinks protest squeaks need to be emitted:
“We have arrived at a defining moment for the progressive movement in this nation.
The New York Times editorial board, which has generally given this president a lot of leeway throughout his career, wrote a scathing denunciation Friday of the Obama administration’s use of data mining, claiming that “the administration has now lost all credibility” on the issue of balancing civil rights with national security.
Every progressive with even a shred of moral consistency should side with the New York Times against the White House.
The events of the past month – from the Associated Press subpoena to the James Rosen search warrant to the revelation that our government has been indiscriminately collecting phone records data – have forced liberals to make a choice between complacency and outrage, between keeping silent because one of our own is in the White House and calling him out on betraying the principles for which we have fought for so long.
Consistency has never been the fiber of political discourse but it is nonetheless a vital ingredient of credibility.
Progressives rightly denounced the overreach of the Bush administration when it came to abuses of the Patriot Act. We should just as strongly denounce the expansion of those abuses by this administration.
Many of us did not buy the previous administration’s excuse that overreaching infringement upon the civil rights of ordinary Americans was a necessary step in keeping those same ordinary Americans safe. We should not buy it from this administration now, simply because this president is ostensibly one of us. [snip]
Progressives should stand with the Times on this. Otherwise, we are just rooting for the name on the jersey, and not for the values that the jersey represents.”
That “denunciation” is so weak we can barely rouse a yawn. The “progressives”, which we once fancied ourselves to belong to, had their test in 2007/2008 and failed. There’s not much value in these diluted protests even though Barack Obama cannot be happy to see these clowns pouting and weeping.
For those that think we are looking a gift horse in the mouth consider this:
“The National Security Agency pushed for the government to “rethink” the Fourth Amendment when it argued in a classified memo that it needed new authorities and capabilities for the information age.
The 2001 memo, later declassified and posted online by George Washington University’s National Security Archive, makes a case to the incoming George W. Bush administration that the NSA needs new authorities and technology to adapt to the Internet era. [snip]
Americans learned about one upshot of NSA’s philosophy this week when Washington acknowledged two of its subsequent surveillance programs: One that tracks the phone records of millions of Americans and one that accesses the servers of several major Internet companies, including Facebook, Google and Apple. The revelations were first reported by Britain’s Guardian newspaper and the Washington Post. [snip]
NSA’s phone-tracking program and its PRISM Internet monitoring program both suggest U.S. officials continue to take to heart NSA’s “rethought” interpretation of the Fourth Amendment. Rather than tracking only Americans suspected of crimes or involved with terrorism, since 2006 NSA has collected the records of everyone, then returned to a secret federal court to get authorization to target specific individuals more closely.
President Barack Obama defended the surveillance on Friday on his visit to California to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping.”
So according to Obama: If you can’t trust government to follow the Constitution while spying, we’re going to have some problems. The problem is that the Constitution is not a hindrance to these gangsters from Chicago.
Barack Obama and his gang of Chicago hoods have attacked the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Tenth Amendment and hidden behind the Fifth Amendment.
“The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post.
The program, code-named PRISM, has not been made public until now. It may be the first of its kind. [snip]
PRISM was launched from the ashes of President George W. Bush’s secret program of warrantless domestic surveillance in 2007, after news media disclosures, lawsuits and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court forced the president to look for new authority.
Congress obliged with the Protect America Act in 2007 and the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which immunized private companies that cooperated voluntarily with U.S. intelligence collection. PRISM recruited its first partner, Microsoft, and began six years of rapidly growing data collection beneath the surface of a roiling national debate on surveillance and privacy. Late last year, when critics in Congress sought changes in the FISA Amendments Act, the only lawmakers who knew about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues. [snip]
Firsthand experience with these systems, and horror at their capabilities, is what drove a career intelligence officer to provide PowerPoint slides about PRISM and supporting materials to The Washington Post in order to expose what he believes to be a gross intrusion on privacy. “They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,” the officer said.”
What we have learned recently is that the IRS cannot be trusted. Not only did the IRS target political viewpoints for abuse, the IRS also provided names of donors to political organizations to the opponents of those organizations. Now we are told to trust the NSA.
This is not time to trust and verify. It is time to investigate and impeach. These recently uncovered Obama scandals (none by American Big Media) are a signal of the deep corruption that has moved from Chicago to the nation’s capital.
We concluded our previous article by stating, If you think things are bad now, on the economy and foreign policy, they are about to get worse. On civil liberties, freedom, liberty, and the Constitution things just got a whole lot worse. The latest scandals are dangerous and worthy of revolutionary uprising.