Posted on 06/09/2013 4:50:27 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
June 9th, 2013
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis.; Michael Hayden, former head of the CIA and the National Security Agency.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Pre-empted by coverage of the French Open.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H.; Reps. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., Michael McCaul, R-Texas, Elijah Cummings, D-Md., and John Dingell, D-Mich.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Mark Udall, D-Colo.; Reps. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., and Keith Ellison, D-Minn.
STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Udall, Cummings; Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Obama doesn't need an amnesty to make the Dems the permanent majority party. An amnesty will just hasten the process.
I think it is mainly about oil supply. We have enriched the Sheiks so lavishly with our foreign oil dependence (refusing to drill here) that they turned it into a political force. Jim Baker has always been a pro-Arabist which is now hand in glove pro-Islamist. Then you have a majority of American Jewry not giving a hoot about what happens to Israel - “They brought it on themselves”, so they say. Just as they described the victims of the first Holocaust. The White House is totally pro-Islamist.
Heh...Blood for votes...Blood for votes
No sweat.
Us old chiefs gotta hang together. (Even if I’m Navy, and merely an E-7)
This argument is available to anyone who wants to defend data mining—that only when relevant info is extracted from the big DB does the 4th amendment clock start ticking.
By the same argument, you could search every house in America looking for one suspected criminal and remain within the framework of the 4th.
Good analogy.
____________
And what did they do in Boston ? They searched for a criminal.
It also seems ineffective. They're prying into all of our private information, when only a handful need to be watched. It gets back to fear of profiling, doesn't it?
Well, considering the source, it could mean "an enemy of theirs"...a friend to the American citizens.
Well congratulations, AB! That is GREAT news. You’re healthier than you thought. Go out bungie jumping today to celebrate! (j/k).
In a way, if viewed tactically, it is consistent with Obama's embrace of wide-scale drone attacks. Obama favors remote-control drones, with no boots on the ground, to the sweaty, bloody, difficult chore of troops. And likewise, he probably likes the idea of data mining over the messy nature of human intelligence gathering. Hence walking away from Russian leads over the Boston bombers.
But there is a lot more to it than that. I think we now see why the Obama Admin has labored so hard to pin a terrorism label on conservative groups - so they can justify, to themselves, abusing these powers against their political enemies.
The first step the Soviets took after the Red Army captured Eastern Europe was to set up secret police in each country. We cannot allow the RINO pundits to pretend that there is a chance we are seeing the same thing with all this. We have to push for an end to this gross overstepping.
Data collection isn't the real issue. The question is how much data should be collected and whose data? We have Constitutional protections on unreasonable search and seizure. NSA is engaged in a huge dragnet encompassing phone records, credit card usage, and other personal information. They hold the data I presume for a very long time. It can be mined in the future for whatever purpose the government wants with our only protection being a secret court that acts as a rubber stamp.
Data collection sounds innocuous, but it can be the tool for a police state and tyranny. The people should have a say on what data is collected and what purposes it will be used for. Does "data collection" represent a more serious threat to our security and individual liberties than the terrorists? Does it pass Constitutional muster?
The best way to curb abuses of the system is to change and limit the system.
With all this “domestic surveillance” overkill...it should be no problem to “profile”, identify and deport all the wetbacks and other illegal aliens.
Nah, Janet N. is too busy profiling right-wingers as terrorists to worry about something as mundane as border security.
And, sure there is a document signed off by a judge in a one-sided request hearing only attended by the requesting agency.
_____________
On ABC This Week, Greta made great points about FISA and this was tweeted:
letter @gretawire just referenced #ThisWeek - showing the 1,789-0 govt record at FISA court http://t.co/qdZLgcvFE9 vis @propublica
‘This Week’ Transcript: Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Mike Rogers
Round table
Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN)
Greta of Fox News
George Will
Paul Krugman
Matthew Dowd
Yeah, I think I already said that in an earlier post.
Some check and balance.
The Reps can throw Obama a life preserver with immigration reform, which will hurt and divide the Rep base. And the Dems will then use the immigration issue against the Reps regardless.
The one issue that could hurt the Dems in 2014 is Obamacare, which will bring home to everyone the impact this Administration is having on their lives. One recent poll indicated that 42% of Americans didn't even know that Obamacare had already been partially implemented. The Reps could bail out Obama by mitigating the impact of the law or even delaying its complete implementation for a year as advocated by Rep. Marsha Blackburn.
Turnout will be key in 2014. A harbinger for the Reps chances will be seen in VA this year where we will be electing a Gov, Lt Gov, and AG. It is going to be a tough tight race. No doubt Obama and the Dems will be making a huge push to send a signal for 2014.
Seriously, this tells me the Constitutional checks and balances as we once knew them are utterly broken. What kind of oversight exists when the Executive gathers mass quantities of data without a warrant, it briefs a few select members of the Legislative who have to keep it all secret, and the courts craft a rubber-stamp body that approves all requests? There are NO safeguards here. They are so arrogant that they don't even occasionally toss out a request to pretend there is viable due process.
There is only one peaceful resort left. We have to get everyone we know understanding how bad this has gotten. Get them motivated and voting. And make the politicians learn to fear us once again. As long as we rubber-stamp their re-elections, they will set up rubber-stamp courts like this with impunity.
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.