Skip to comments.Obama: "We're going to have some problems here" (Only the uninformed would trust him)
Posted on 06/09/2013 7:02:20 AM PDT by Kaslin
You dont trust President Barack Obama?
No faith in the massive federal bureaucracy? Dont hold a huge reservoir of confidence in Congress representing your interests? How much do you trust the federal courts that handle secret requests from the Department of Justice . . .and then issue secret decisions based on the judges secret interpretation of the law?
Be advised: President Obama finds your lack of faith disturbing.
If people cant trust not only the executive branch, but also dont trust Congress and dont trust federal judges to make sure were abiding by the Constitution, due process, and rule of law, Mr. Obama told reporters, then were going to have some problems here.
Lets put partisanship aside and agree with his conclusion. Indeed, there are problems galore; the morning paper reads like a dystopian novel.
Uncle Sam or Big Brother (it is increasingly difficult to tell them apart) is snatching a record of every phone call you make, including to whom you are calling, from where you call, and how long you talk. And, but for a leak of classified information, we wouldnt be worrying our pretty little heads about it.
Still, no one is listening to your telephone calls the POTUS reassures, as if the Feds knowing every phone call you make, when, where and to whom, isnt a serious enough violation of your privacy. Of course, if the FBI or NSA or CIA are listening to the content of calls, its surely classified and you wont be told.
But trust him.
Or trust that good ol Congress! I think at the outset, explained the president, its important to understand that your duly elected representatives have been consistently informed on exactly what were doing.
Considering congressional approval ratings, that point strikes me as less than assuring.
Its nonsensical, too. The few members of the House and Senate intelligence committees who receive classified briefings (the entire Congress is not informed) are sworn to secrecy. Even if they disagree with whats happening, their hands are tied. They cant do very much about it.
Moreover, the few congressmen informed only know what they are told. Thats hardly oversight.
Its not just all of your phone records, either, the National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping into the servers at Apple, AOL, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Skype, Yahoo, YouTube, etc., and capturing your personal information emails, pictures of kids and grandkids, financial information. The administration argues the companies have agreed to this surreptitious government snooping, but the companies publicly deny it.
Again, the Great O assures you that they are not reading your emails. But doesnt he mean not at the moment?
They are also reportedly grabbing all your credit card information. Who is they? I think that information is classified.
Its all legal, though. Or so were told. But no law passed by Congress not the Patriot Act or any other can overrule our constitutional rights.
The FISA courts, created by the Foreign Surveillance and Intelligence Act, are not lawful in approving secret government requests to violate the Fourth Amendment rights of virtually every American in a secret proceeding without any countervailing party to raise objections and without any ability to appeal a decision.
Even supporters of the FISA court easily admit that its essentially a rubber stamp. According to several reports, Big Sam er, Uncle Brother I mean, the government has never had a request denied.
Setting up a secret court and whispering the secrets to a few members of Congress who promise not to tell isnt a meaningful check on power. The only group I have any confidence in, the public, is kept in the dark.
President Obama tells us there are compelling national security interests, upon which our rights must be balanced. You know, when I came into this office, he offered, I made two commitments that are more important than any commitment I make: number one, to keep the American people safe and, number two, to uphold the Constitution, and that includes what I consider to be a constitutional right to privacy and an observance of civil liberties.
His priorities are flipped. Mr. Obama is required to take an oath, which he swore twice, to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. There is no addendum about keeping people safe.
The president should, of course, do all he can to keep the American people safe. But he does not have a choice to do so at the expense of abiding by the Constitution, including the Fourth Amendment . . . the Second . . . the First . . . and all the others.
Otherwise, there are going to be problems. [further reading]
You have a government that has taken on a life of its own. It has its own inertia and is run by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who answer to no one.
sooo, who is leaking info from the WH, informed or uninformed?
If people cant trust not only the executive branch, but also dont trust Congress and dont trust federal judges,,,”
He forgot to add the media to the list.
Well, that’s our problem: the majority is uninformed and is expected to remain so.
I find the fact that parasitic idiots of this country twice elected this ignorant POS dictator wannabe disturbing.
From the very beginning, this adminstration was about apology and revenge. Apology for what America was and revenge against their political opponents. The end game was the creation of an all-powerful, one-party state supported and abetted by a compliant press, a leftist intellectual class, unions, public schools, and academia. Clearly, they will use whatever means they have to destroy conservatives — all the while protesting that any criticism of their purpose or means of attack is motivated by racism, blind hatred, or paranoia.
How can you not trust the most Transparent administration we have ever seen. I wouldn’t trust him wih my garbage.
New tagline ...
I'm not sure it's accurate to say he was "elected".
So do I
He was elected through fraud
Maybe this will help you,
then were going to have some problems here.
THAT is a threat.
I always wondered what it was like in 1930’s Germany when the state was becoming all powerful behind a charismatic leader, and opposition was buried.
Now I live in a modernized technologically advanced mirror image. It’s 1933/2013.
“then were going to have some problems here.
THAT is a threat.”
that’s the way I heard it. He was threatening that if anyone stands in his way they were going to find trouble.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.