Obama Is Starting To Make George Bush Look Like A Clipboard-Toting ACLU Volunteer
Glenn Reynolds writes at USA Today about Obama's power grab:
"How ironic is that? We wanted a president that listens to all Americans -- now we have one." That was Jay Leno's take on the Obama administration's expanding NSA spying scandal, which has gone beyond Verizon phone records to include Google, Facebook, Yahoo and just about all the other major tech companies except, apparently, for Twitter.The NSA spying scandal goes deep, and the Obama administration's only upside is that the furor over its poking into Americans' private business on a wholesale basis will distract people from the furor over the use of the IRS and other federal agencies to target political enemies -- and even donors to Republican causes -- and the furor over the Benghazi screwup and subsequent lies (scapegoated filmmaker Nakoula is still in jail), the furor over the "Fast And Furious" gunrunning scandal that left literally scores of Mexicans dead, the scandal over the DOJ's poking into phone records of journalists (and their parents), HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' shakedown of companies she regulates for "donations" to pay for ObamaCare implementation that Congress has refused to fund, the Pigford scandal where the Treasury Department's "Judgment Fund" appears to have been raided for political purposes -- well, it's getting to where you need a scorecard to keep up.
But, in fact, there's a common theme in all of these scandals: Abuse of power. And, what's more, that abuse-of-power theme is what makes the NSA snooping story bigger than it otherwise would be. It all comes down to trust.
...What we've seen here is a pattern of abuse. There's little reason to think that pattern will change, absent a change of administration -- and, quite possibly, not even then. Sooner or later, power granted tends to become power abused. Then there's the risk that information gathered might leak, of course, as recent events demonstrate.
Most Americans generally think that politicians are untrustworthy. So why trust them with so much power? The evidence to date strongly suggests that they aren't worthy of it.







I'm sooo free that the security blanket is smothering me.
Andrew Hall at June 11, 2013 6:22 AM
Yes, there are no perfect politicians, and Obama is worse than most, because his instincts are to crush all dissent with any means at his disposal.
Idealists voting for people like Gary Johnson, instead of recognizing the realities of a two party system, is how we end up with a POS like this in office.
We will not get rid of him without lasting damage to free enterprise and the rule of law.
Isab at June 11, 2013 6:36 AM
The thing is, most of the people who are complaining would vote for Obama again if they had the chance to. They don't really mind the security-apparatus state, as long as they feel secure that their tribe is in charge of it.
Cousin Dave at June 11, 2013 6:36 AM
Could this be by design? All these coming up at the same time, perhaps somebody believes that Obi's usefulness is over. The Dems won in 2012, now it's time to put an even bigger buffoon in power, like Biden, who can be manipulated even more.
Stinky the Clown at June 11, 2013 7:25 AM
Why do Americans trust them with so much power?
"In a Pew Research Center/Washington Post survey released Monday, 56 percent of those polled said the National Security Agency’s tracking of Americans’ phone calls to investigate terrorism was acceptable; 41 percent said it wasn’t. A slim majority — 52 percent to 45 percent — said the government should not be able to monitor people’s e-mail to thwart possible terrorism."
Because we're surrounded by idiots.
Pirate Jo at June 11, 2013 7:47 AM
@PJ: Because we're surrounded by idiots.
Since I haven't read the article, I can only guess at the reasons people feel this way. But I wonder if part of the reason is that people don't think the issue impacts them in a meaningful way, thinking they have nothing to hide from the government. This morning, the Instapundit provided a link to an essay at the Social Sciences Research Network dealing with this very argument.
Old RPM Daddy (OldRPMDaddy at GMail dot com) at June 11, 2013 9:17 AM
"But I wonder if part of the reason is that people don't think the issue impacts them in a meaningful way, thinking they have nothing to hide from the government."
But apparently the government has a lot it is trying to hide from us - otherwise, Edward Snowden wouldn't be in any trouble.
Pirate Jo at June 11, 2013 9:37 AM
Unfortunately, this is what you get when you put a Constitutional lawyer in charge. A constitutional lawyer who believes the constitution can and should be twisted this way and that at whim. Too many of his people still believe in him. They trust him with this power, and more power. Believing he will only or mainly use it to crush his enemies, not them.
The real shock is when you mention what happens to this power and the abuse when the Republicans take charge again. It is a concept that doesn't register.
Joe J at June 11, 2013 10:12 AM
Am I missing something? Help me out, here.
1) The government is spying on everyone.
2) This is perfectly legal, because the government passed laws that make it so.
3) This is something we already know.
4) Most people don't care, and
5) The rest are happy about it because they think it keeps them safe from terr'ists.
What's the worst thing that can happen? Edward Snowden informs the public that the government is monitoring their electronic communications, and like twelve people get upset? So the government can read your e-mails - it's no worse than my mother-in-law getting access to my Facebook page, right?
If I was the government, I'd be like, 'Yeah, we're doing it. It's no secret, and it's legal. If you don't like it, where were you twelve years ago when the Patriot Act was passed? Come talk to us again when it's up for renewal.' Then I'd sleep soundly at night, knowing everyone would have long forgotten about it by then.
Hey guys, did you know that if you don't pay your taxes, the government will come to your house and seize your assets? Yeah, shocker, right? Guess I'll be going to jail now for letting you know. Wooo, cat's really out of the bag now!
Pirate Jo at June 11, 2013 10:18 AM
To idiotic, blind-as-a-bat, cult-like Leftists everywhere, I have 4 shorts words for you:
I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!
Robert W. (Vancouver) at June 11, 2013 3:06 PM
The problem with idiotic blind-as-a-bat, cult-like Leftists everywhere, they have four words to reply:
I do not care.
Welcome to the apathy. Soak in it. Next is the dependence. Then, there will be bondage. I hope I'll be dead by then.
Cat at June 11, 2013 4:36 PM
Just a short while ago, anyone who spouted off about these things got called a "conspiracy nut". The mainstream media knew, but ignored it as hard as they could.
It does look like the Powers-That-Be have swung their agenda around, and turned the wolves loose. None of this is happening by accident.
jefe at June 11, 2013 4:39 PM
If it's the leftists to blame, why is the GOP lining up to support the snooping?
Because the GOP/DNC dichotomy you've been served is a construct. It isn't real.
There ARE two parties in America - the people with power and wealth, and everyone else.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at June 11, 2013 5:45 PM
I've got nothing to hide.
My view is this:
Remember that you voted for this, I didn't. That we're sinking in the same ship isn't because I opened the seacocks.
Jim P. at June 11, 2013 5:53 PM
Old RPM Daddy, thanks for the link. I have always felt that the "nothing to hide" argument is a load of BS but I've never been able to point out WHY. Hopefully the authors can clarify.
Denise at June 12, 2013 6:01 AM
"If it's the leftists to blame, why is the GOP lining up to support the snooping?"
That's a damn good question. It goes back to something that I wrote here several years ago about why I supported the Republican Party. What I wrote was that I didn't necessarily support the GOP as it existed, but I saw it as the one of the two parties where 21st-century libertarianism stood the best chance of gaining status. I saw it eventually (by now, actually) taking over the party leadership.
For whatever reason, that didn't happen. I haven't figured out yet how they did it, but the 1950s country-club segment of the GOP has successfully fought off the invasion, and they are now firmly in control. The Buckly Fusionism, the Gingrich wave -- all of that has been defeated. We're back to the Republican Party of Eisenhower.
The big problem: Both parties are now being led by people who regard civilized behavior not as the lifeblood of society, but merely as a weakness to be exploited. All of American politics has been reduced to a tribal war, in which neither side has, or is interested in, a moral claim. Just win baby, and to the winner goes the spoils.
(And in light of what I just wrote here, I should address what Jim P. wrote in another thread, because he makes some good points about party politics. No time now; will try to get something up this evening.)
Cousin Dave at June 12, 2013 7:19 AM
Look, having "nothing to hide" isn't the point. The point is, we've always, previous to this latest fiasco, had right to privacy. In our private lives. Not bothering anybody else. That the government is VIOLATING it to an extreme and NOT ASHAMED about it is the point. Because somewhere down the line, when some government hack decides that because you "had nothing to hide" they can turn around and misconstrue ANYgoddamnthing you posted or emailed or talked about on your cell phone as "something", then you WILL be screwed seven ways to Sunday, and nothing and no one will be able to help you. Including yourself.
WAKE THE FUCK UP, people.
Flynne at June 12, 2013 8:44 AM
I have to admit that I do have a vanity streak, so I would enjoy responding to what you have to say on it.
Jim P. at June 12, 2013 9:13 PM
Leave a comment