General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat we have here ...
Is not a conflict between those who love the POTUS, and those who hate him.
There is some of those who believe Obama could walk on water, make wine from water, and feed the multitudes from one loaf of bread. There were those during the Bush years too. So partisans are what they are...
But truly this is a conflict between constitutionalists, who know freedom can be risky, and have one risks to it, and those who prefer to live under an authoritarian state. This is exactly what we are seeing. And all insults will not change this.
Some of us bought into the American myth, to the point we chose to become citizens and took an oath to the constitution, not a man, or a party. I don't care what letter is behind a name, they are threatening the republic, and the freedoms granted as rights...among them is the 4th amendment.
My view does not change just because the guy who sits in the WH has a D or an R behind their name. These are fundamental attacks...
Oh and the myth is dead. Period. Full stop, end of discussion.
Such is life...and at this point I don't worry if you think it is due to melanin content, that is your problem, or some other form of derangement whatever. That is your problem. Making it personal is a way of distracting from the actual issue.
But, but...republicans will attack my rights as a woman!!!! Yup, and...attacking women's rights is a marker of totalitarian states, part of the same sauce, just a tad stronger. So the lesser of two evils will not be effective for much longer. I gotta wonder how many others have figured out that voting is really not going to be the major saving difference that we were promised?
I know I will vote, but care that much over federal elections? No, not really...at fundamental levels, such as issues of war and peace and spying on the population it matters little.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)
Autumn
(44,980 posts)rec
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)about voting and the downhill slide we are on as a nation. I was talking to one of the bosses where I work today, a man who I have had many "debates" for the last 15 years. He was a confirmed ultra-right wing Republican who is probably in the top 5% of income. He was telling me that he just doesn't care anymore about either party or politics. He pulled a request for a donation out of his trash for me to see, from Boehner. He said he is done. But he will still vote too, he just has no passion for it or for the process.
I have also begun to wonder if there is any way to stop this avalanche heading toward fascism or totalitarianism or oligarchy or whatever direction you want to think we are heading.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Occupy and other consciousness creating events...like October 1968 did in Mexico. It took almost two generations.
The first step is losing your innocence...I think we have.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)to see the fruit ripen. But every time I think of things like this, I think of Dickens' "A Tale of Two Cities". The people in France who were working toward their freedom from oppression did not expect to be alive to see it come to pass.....but they kept at it.
That is where I try to get inspiration to keep caring at all. I am ready to give up at times, I think that the job is too big to accomplish, I feel as if there is no one in DC who is working for us. I just have to have faith in the masses.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And I don't think we are anywhere close to hitting bottom yet.
malthaussen
(17,175 posts)Some cretin will immediately hand you a shovel and tell you to start digging.
-- Mal
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)hair on fire crowd vs. hair not on fire crowd. At least on the Left. The Rightwing very much favors an authoritarian state, like a theocratic-fascist state. I agree, principles are a great thing, huge fan myself. Personally, I draw the line at metadata collection, IF and only IF it truly is helping prevent terrorism. Anything beyond metadata collection to me would be a serious violation of the 4th Amendment in my opinion.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I won't bother taking the bait...just say, this is an excellent example.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I object, strongly, to this president accelerating these programs...that to be fair did not start with Bush, but Truman.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)That's why I agree having principles is a good thing. What I meant was no one on the Left is actually calling for an Authoritarian state. Some just believe that metadata collection doesn't cross the line. Warrantless wiretaps otoh most definitely do.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)In the federal rigged game.
tblue
(16,350 posts)it's all essentially warrantless. The "Court" is not made up of nonpartisan judges. It's appointed by Chief Justice Roberts. And it probably never refused a request for a warrant. I can't believe anyone here is defending that.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Almost never, 99.7% of all requests have been approved through the life of the court.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)2. The NSA doesn't need court approval each time it searches Americans' phone records.
NSA Deputy Director John Inglis said that 22 NSA officials are authorized to approve requests to query an agency database that contains the cellphone metadata of American citizens. (Metadata includes the numbers of incoming and outgoing calls, the date and time the calls took place, and their duration.) Deputy AG Cole also said that all queries of this database must be documented and can be subject to audits. Cole also said that the the NSA does not have to get separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) approval for each query; instead, the agency merely has to file a monthly report with the court on how many times the database was queried, and how many of those searches targeted the phone records of Americans.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/5-new-revelations-nsa-top-secret-surveillance-programs
So really, they believe they have blanket authority to search whatever records they'd like, so long as the log it. Which to me certainly sounds like warrantless searches.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But to some...what you posted is misinformation...I know, I know. But just FISA, the records of approval makes it a kangaroo court.
(And thanks for the mother jones article)
cali
(114,904 posts)madly.
like the op saying that Snowden could cause war with russia because of his disclosures. and the idiots who accuse all opposition to Obama on this issue as being rooted in racism and those running around screeching about how Snowden is a traitor.
lots of flaming hair on your side.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)Respect our rights.
What they are doing is so obviously wrong. I don't know in what reality collecting all that data would not be a violation. In light of their oh so convenient interpretations and oversight, I have no choice but to be on fire. Complacency is no longer an option.
SlimJimmy
(3,180 posts)another day. 
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)There is no principle in 'giving up just a little freedom for safety'. Ben Franklin was right when he said after being asked what they had been doing after writing the Constitution 'we have given you a Constitution ma'am, it is up to you to defend it'.
The oath of office taken by elected officials demands that they do only one thing, 'defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic'. Nowhere are they told 'except if there is a chance of a terrorist attack'. No because that is exactly when those freedoms will be most important, and also when ambitious, greedy individuals will use it to try to take them away.
You go right ahead and draw your line just around this threat. What will you give up when there is a real threat? I draw mine exactly where it belongs. No freedoms, so hard fought for with so many lives throughout history, should ever be given up because of a minor, or even a major threat.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Thinking ww2 here, total war, governments need to keep disposition of forces to themselves.
I get that.
But this, we both know it, is not about the comm...err my error, terrorist under the bed. It is about the terrorist on the bed.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)telephone co. is logging every call I make, to whom I make it, what time I made it and storing for possible future use.
In order to do that, we are told, they got a warrant. To get a warrant, we know that they must show probable cause of wrong doing. So what did I do wrong that enabled this warrant to be issued? I want to see what was presented and to what court that allowed them to do this without my consent or knowledge.
You are correct, we are not giving up freedoms, they are being taken and when we find out, we are told it is for 'our own good'. How chilling, that some Private Security Corporation decides what is good for us! That secret courts are rubber stamping requests like this. That members of Congress are gagged from telling us what they know, and in the case of many of them, oppose.
He also said that 'we cannot have 100% security WITHOUT giving up SOME of our freedoms'. Maybe they should ask us first no? I don't and never did expect to be 100% secure. So I don't need to give up even a teeny, weeny freedom, because even the teeniest one was fought for by people who gave their lives to preserve it. We don't want to have to go through that again.
And what are we being protected from?? Terror? How about preserving the lives of the 44,000 Americans who die every year from something that could easily be fixed, lack of Health Care. Spend the money being spent on logging calls on them and many American lives would be saved. If saving lives was what they are concerned about.
And if saving lives was the concern, why did they not use this convoluted system they are trying to explain, to get the Boston Bombers? They knew about one of them, even talked to him, watched him for two years, yet apparently were unable to find out who HE was calling. But they know who millions of innocent Americans are calling? Is there any logic in this? No, not for anyone who is capable of a minimal amount of logical thinking.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)makes you one of DUs most valuable voices. You have what is called situational awareness. This means you know your ass from a hole in the ground. Too bad so many others at DU lack a similar compass!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)
DearHeart
(692 posts)Lately, I don't have a thick enough skin for this place!
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)trust the government when it says it is not breaking the law and there are those who distrust the government's claims.
History would tend to side with the latter group, I'm very sorry to say. Those who maintain trust in the face of such a sordid historical past have far more sunny dispositions than I have.
The question, then as now, is what one does once one loses trust. That is what I have been noodling upon these past two weeks and will probably continue to noodle on in the days and weeks to come.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)Many people are beginning to recognize that there is more to this than traditional eavesdropping. If this is what you think this conversation is about, then yes, it might appear that the hair-on-fire folks have gone hyperbolic.
There are two separate concerns, for sure. One is the privacy issue, along with all the questions of whether or not the laws are constitutional or whether or not they are even being followed. This has always been the case with the 4th Amendment, ever since the country was founded.
The second concern is completely new, and it has to do with the use of metadata. Metadata is used to create the targets for a counterinsurgency operation. Sometimes (or according to research, in most cases) the most influential person in a social network, or insurgency, is not the most high profile, or the most vocal, individual in the group. With very large groups (OWS for example), this new technology identifies those individuals who's participation in the group is the most critical.
That, in a nutshell, is what the metadata is being collected and used for. It should be obvious how this information can be used/misused to affect our first amendment freedoms, specifically our right to peaceably assemble. There are a couple of stories floating around today about how the MIC is targeting opponents of the keystone pipeline. This counterinsurgeny technology and training is being used against law-abiding citizens right here in America.
Because the algorithms being used are easily handled by computers, and because no errors are introduced by trying to decode or translate any communication content, the system can create a very precise mapping of our social networks. Only actual metadata associated with each communication is logged into the software, and from that the algorithms sort out the social connections.
Almost everything about this particular type of surveillance is new. The science behind the algorithms that are used and the computers that store and sift the data are new. The idea behind controlling the pubic is not new, however. It has been done before, and very effectively, even without this new weapon.
This all fits into the bigger picture of the War on Terror. Remember that our country was founded by insurgents. Many, if not all of our heroes, would have been easily thwarted under this type of surveillance regime and folks have written about how Paul Revere could have been stopped.
For some basic info about how the science is implemented, google the keywords: thesis+insurgent+social+network
Basically, we are heading to place where you either support the 1% or else you are a terrorist. This path leads to the restoration of slavery. There is no doubt about it.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)You get it
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)administration and Justice (?) department can subpoena our communications as they wish with no public oversight, just a secret court, and read them?
Early this morning, Michael Hastings, an unconventional journalist for Buzzfeed who wrote the article on General McChrystal that finished the General's military career died in a car crash.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/michael-hastings-dead_n_3462278.html
He was known for ferreting out the truth and interviewing eyewitnesses to do it. He discovered facts other journalists did not even try to find.
Here is an article on him:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/michael-hastings-dead_n_3462278.html
The recent disclosures on surveillance and the collection of metadata pretty much make his very secretive work impossible. Any of the people, the sources, he called could potentially have been identified through this mega-surveillance system.
For him, interviewing as he did people in places like Afghanistan and other dangerous zones, the knowledge that all of his phone calls could be tracked would end his career. Worse, it could possibly end his life or the life of those with whom he developed relationships in order to report the news that no one else dared report. How many drone attacks could be based on the phone call list of an intrepid reporter seeking information from bad guys?
We need the kind of information and news that Michael Hastings provided. And with this surveillance of metadata it is no longer safe for reporters to develop the contacts they need to find that news. Above all, it isno longer safe for individuals in countries like Afghanistan or Syria or other hotspots or even here in the US to provide such information via any electronic media.
Does that help you to understand why this metadata surveillance is so dangerous?
Every phone number that Michael Hastings ever called, every e-mail address to which he wrote, was recorded and could be reviewed by the FBI which, as an agency, could also subpoena and review the contents of all of his calls and e-mails if it wished.
That kind of government capacity is incompatible with democracy because it will discourage reporters like Michael Hastings from talking to anyone whose life he might endanger just by talking to them and quoting them.
It will also discourage you and me from searching on the internet or placing our names on e-mail lists. All of our interests from the most commonplace to the most esoteric, from the most acceptable and conformist to the least, can be deduced from the phone numbers we call and the e-mails we receive and answer.
We are not free. This surveillance has ended our freedom.
You many not feel it yet. You may actually believe that the surveillance only applies to the bad guys, the "evil-doers."
But think one step further. The apparatus that collects all these calls and sorts the information is huge and costly.
Many, many people have been hired to set it up and man the system. And all those people and the companies that sell and service the equipment are going to want JOB SECURITY, above all JOB SECURITY.
And based on what has happened in other totalitarian states throughout history, that is why problems arise. In order to get that JOB SECURITY, those who administer and run the system will have to find, even create, more and more bad guys, more and more evil-doers whose identification and punishment justifies their JOBS and their JOB SECURITY.
So, right now, you look at a seemingly simple, innocent project. But beyond the fact that it is at this moment discouraging the reporting of controversial news and the provision of information that is vital to a democracy, history teaches us that the list of bad guys and the definitions of bad behavior that warrants surveillance will grow. It will be necessary for that list to lengthen in order to provide JOB SECURITY for the elite group that runs the system and, by its very surveillance of our communications, excludes us and our concerns from deciding whether to continue the surveillance. Anyone who threatens the JOB SECURITY of the surveillance elite will become the prey of that very surveillance elite. That is what has happened in country after country that succumbs to the temptation of securing itself by limiting the freedom of its people.
Many people who lived in Eastern Europe or the Soviet Union or NAZI Germany or China or any other totalitarian country including fascist countries during WWII know how this works, what this kind of surveillance inevitably brings.
If you are a person of color, GLBT, a member of a minority religion, Jewish, Muslim, any minority religion, or have unusual political ideas beware. You are part of a minority, so you may be fair game. Because the idea is JOB SECURITY for those who run the system.
This surveillance ends democracy. If it does not do it today, it will in ten years. Either the surveillance has to end or our democracy will.
Someone suggested that everyone should read the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William Shirer. If you think this is a good system, I suggest you read it.
I think that some of the propagandists for this system of surveillance who are posting on DU and defending it probably work in IT and are trying to get JOB SECURITY by persuading Americans and DUers that the surveillance is OK.
They have only caused me to suspect their motivations -- and I suspect that the primary one is JOB SECURITY. I suspect that some of them who seem to know so much about how the surveillance works and what countries are doing it work in the system themselves.
I have a fair knowledge of history (not an expert but a fair knowledge) and I have traveled and studied and read a lot in a number of fields. I feel qualified to express these opinions.
A lot of people who are OK about this surveillance and don't understand what the fuss is about need to do a lot of reading.
Where do you find a flaw in my argument?
I would like to know your counterargument. Why are you complacent about the surveillance?
forestpath
(3,102 posts)Chained CPI, the TPP - when people are hungry, sick, cold, and at the mercy of foreign corporations, it doesn't matter which party the president belongs to. They're all in it together.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)as you denigrate Obama-supporters but don't similarly denigrate Obama-nonsupporters. You have a problem only with the supporters, it seems.
As for me, I am on the fence on this NSA thing. We simply don't have the facts yet. I decided long ago that the Patriot Act wasn't good and pushed our country one step closer to a Big Brother state. So altho I hadn't thought about it in a while, I wasn't surprised to hear that the database and snooping is going on. We really knew that, didn't we? Because of the Patriot Act.
Now, however, at least there's a court involved. Sure, they're rubber stamping. But there is SOMEONE outside the administration who knows details and decides whether to okay the procedure.
From what I can tell, they are not listening to conversations or reading e-mails, unless it's a targeted person, and they get a warrant for it. I heard a guy on tv say that he and others listened to phone conversations that didn't have a warrant. But if that's true, then he was doing so illegally. He also didn't say it was the rule or that it was sanctioned or requested by a higher level.
So this whole thing is upsetting. Still. Just like it was years ago, when the Patriot Act was passed.
Did Obama pledge to do away with the Patriot Act? And later endorsed it? Maybe. I don't recall. I don't recall, because I didn't vote for him for that reason.
I think it's probably a waste of taxpayer's money and probably doesn't see much benefit in results for all the cost and efforts. Does it infringe on my rights? I dunno. It's a database that lists server info...what sites my internet address has visited, what ph numbers my ph number has connected with. Not content. Just the fact that the communication or visit happened. There's no consitutional right to privacy for that, I think. Internet servers & phone companies and other businesses already have that information. There's no expectation of privacy on the internet, I think.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)I agree with all of it.
pkdu
(3,977 posts)Tired of the hyperventilating on both extremes.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The claim is being made that only one side is running around with their hair on fire. I believe both extremes are doing that. I don't think you'll see either side admit that.
As I've said in another thread recently, I do believe there is a middle ground and it's not a black or white as some make it out to be.
Coccydynia
(198 posts)Do you know who appoints the members and how they are vetted?
Unknown Beatle
(2,672 posts)than supreme court justice John Roberts. Enough said.
Coccydynia
(198 posts)But not necessarily the next, and certainly no vetting by the third branch. Are there other courts that are populated in this manner?
More said.
mountain grammy
(26,598 posts)
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)Caretha
(2,737 posts)but you will....you are leaving out a lot in your analysis....keep thinking, you are on your way.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)No more justification for drones, Guantanamo, or the patriot act.
Put limits on the selling and sharing of information collected by service providers.
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . . is simplistic nonsense.
Most people just don't reason issues in those terms. If you come across someone like you describe, you should take all of this up with them.
The 'partisan, constitutionalist' crap just invites other labeling. I'll bet you're not really up for that tit for tat.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sorry
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . .with a simplistic, nonsense summary of how folks perceive and process these issues.
I'm not buying that.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Suffice it to say...I stand with the US Constitution...I took an oath and I take it seriously.
Have an excellent day
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)articulated very good reasons why they disagree with your castigation of those who do not have the same interpretation of events which you do. Perhaps a little less vitriol and a little civility would go further.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And the OP is about that godamed piece of fracking paper, to paraphrase little boots.
By the way, last answer you will get from me on this thread.
Nice variation on the bait though...make it about me, not what was posted. That bait ain't working no more.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)just pointed out that there were other reasoned responses which did not deserve the tone and tenor you apparently are invested in at this point.
That you apparently are content hang labels on others so freely is something I find shocking. I've found over the years that you tended to provide information to others. I agree with a lot of what you say but not all of it. I'm asking that you not essentially get any closer to labelling people who have made judgments slightly different than yours as somehow wanting in love for this nation.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)into the narrative that the NSA Surveillance thing is new and a betrayal by Obama. If you want to examine the facts, the DU contingent to which Nadin belongs has no use for you or for that examination.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This crap did not start wiith bush...though it accelerated under him. It will not end with this president not even president warren could stop it
It's a measure of empire
It started with truman...accelerated with the 1960s and contrielpro . It slowed down during the Church/Pike Committees, and went on steroids under Bush
Those are facts google up UKUSA agreement
But hey..."my side." I know...the experts who are currently horrified are racists and fools and traitors..
Oh and sonIi grew up in a dictablanda...this is one voting will not change it...
Have a good day. I stand with the oath i took...and like 2003 I chose to put the country ahead of party.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I'm aware of the history you brought up and discussed most of it during my show.
The difference is, I also brought the facts into the discussion in terms of the legislative and legal history (actual decisions and the judges comments behind those decisions) that frame the argument, things you haven't discussed in this OP or any comments under it.
I've also managed pretty well (not 100% but close) not labeling people or going ad-hominem. I know the facts are on my side. I don't need to do those things.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Have a good day
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)when your OP is all about YOUR take on things, YOUR opinion, YOUR interpretations, YOUR characterization of others, and YOUR insistence that whoever disagrees with YOU is a Constitution-hating authoritarianism-adherent?
Your OP is an opinion piece - not a piece of reportage which includes facts to be debated, discussed, embraced, or dismissed as inaccurate or misleading.
Get a grip, Nadin. If you want to post your OPINION (which you have clearly done here), you should be prepared to have that opinion discussed - and agreed with or disagreed with, as the case may be.
"Nice variation on the bait though ... make it about me, not what was posted"
What was posted IS all about you. The fact that you can't understand that is mind-boggling.
You have characterized those who disagree with your view of things in the most despicably condescending terms - and then you cry when there is push-back from the very people you've insulted.
Disagreement with your often terribly skewed (and very often incoherent) views is NOT 'baiting', it is NOT 'bullying', and it is certainly NOT a matter of attempting to 'kill the messenger'.
I don't know where you came up with the idea that YOUR opinion is sacrosanct, and anyone expressing THEIR opinion of YOUR opinion should defer to your better judgement and STFU.
To paraphrase an old adage: If you can't stand the heat, stay out of GD.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)transcript that I put out in both the GD forum and BOG and not one of these folks could refute a single fact I listed, I realized that we have a percentage of DU simply ranting and projecting their fears instead of really trying to understand what is going on.
It's not like there aren't some things that need to be fixed in the context of a greater national discussion of how we want to move forward on these issues, but this fact-challenged hyperbole we are getting from so many folks is not going to facilitate that.
Who would want to be part of a discussion with people for whom facts do not seem to matter?
Caretha
(2,737 posts)with a humongous amount of power.....
I had no idea she could "divide folks".
Thanks for your warning...or whatever.
Hehe
tit for tat? Now that is funny....thanks for my first laugh today.
bluedigger
(17,085 posts)Some men you just can't reach.
FailureToCommunicate
(14,007 posts)bluedigger
(17,085 posts)
FailureToCommunicate
(14,007 posts)(Can't help it!)
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)A corrupt corporate ass licking SCOTUS ...political campaigns financed by the 1% ...US diplomats shilling for Monsanto GMO ...a morphed right wing Democratic party ...might as well call it the Demoplican party ...congress with less that a 10 % approval ...more war on the way like that's what the US people want ...less transparency ...indefinite detention ...militarized police force used against protestors ...demonstrators jailed ...eco greens = terrorists ...unfulfilled POTUS promises ...buck being passed around or ping ponged ...reframing ...framing ...false equivalency ...attacks on journalists and their sources ...banksters continue to sell packaged bullshit as derivatives cause they know their buddies will bale them out with the tax payer fools money ...pffft
Yea I will vote Dem but I will feel like I am just another voting zombie.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But voting for judges still matters, the same for city council and local boards...these people live here...after that...not so much. I am considering writing in Eugene W Debbs.
GReedDiamond
(5,310 posts)Generic Other
(28,979 posts)
gulliver
(13,168 posts)But what is so bad about authors?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Oops, for my friends at NSA, Cemtex, 737, OPSEC, JSOC.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)FailureToCommunicate
(14,007 posts)Last edited Wed Jun 19, 2013, 10:13 PM - Edit history (1)
But I'm glad I did.
Well reasoned post Nadin.
I agree some days, but am still old fashioned enough to think there is a difference. I know, how quant.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts) 
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)DU'zy.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)At least I still have hope.
BeyondGeography
(39,346 posts)What utter tripe.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Mine this is so fundamental, people are taking sides...fundamental sides.
But I agree to disagree with you on this fundamental matter.
BeyondGeography
(39,346 posts)Slurring people is not disagreeing with them.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I take this as fundamental
You may disagree.
BeyondGeography
(39,346 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Back in 2006 we all did.
But there are degrees...and what this place still is, this country, is a dictablanda. Pray it is never keyed up.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)one day you re-visit this string and review your part in this exchange. I suspect you will come away not a little bit embarassed.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)play are saying. You might want to go to Der Spiegel and read it.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/europe-must-stand-up-to-american-cyber-snooping-a-906250.html
Why do you think they see this?
And this is the last thing I will tell you on this thread.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)When J. Edgar Hoover released the "dirt" on Martin Luther King, Jr. I screamed to high heaven about their tactics. Only in 1976 when the Senate investigated did the government acknowledge what COINTELPROs mission was: to "disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and neutralize" anyone the FBI suspected of being radicals.
According to political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson:
Driven by a grotesque mix of personal racism and paranoia, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover kicked the program into high gear in the 1960s. The FBI recruited thousands of "ghetto informants," for their relentless campaign of harassment and intimidation against African American groups. The bureau even organized its targets into Orwellian categories agents gave such labels as "Rabble Rouser Index," "Agitator Index" and "Security Index."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/the-fbi-walks-a-perilous-_b_3447225.html
And it never ceased. The FBI illegally monitored civil rights activists, peace groups, environmentalists, church groups, and others they considered subversive. I have yet to experience a moment's embarrassment over my vocal and extreme negative reaction to these activities.
The NSA used that freedom...to establish secret facilities in several cities, including New York, San Francisco, Washington DC, and San Antonio. In each city, NSA employees would go to the major telegraph companies and copy telegrams, with the companies’ permission but without warrants. http://www.vice.com/read/a-brief-history-of-the-united-states-governments-warrentless-spying
Yeah, a lot of people have been mad about this stuff for a long time.
Orwell's Winston Smith thought he could outwit them at the beginning of 1984:
But in the end he discovered that once they collect all your information, altering your feelings is the easiest trick of all. That is the whole point of Orwell's novel.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)If it didn't happen over the windmills, what are the odds of it happening at any point in the future? Over anything? Just saying...
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Rather than being the ones out there with their asses on the line, aa military SIGINT has done for decades, to keep this country free from authoritarian rule. Real authoritarian rule, not the imagined shit that's going on here. People have no clue how far they go and what they do with NSA's help to actually protect this country and the troops in the field now.
What's being imagined here is right on par with the RW's war on Christmas and the IRS targeting tea party groups. What's next? Obama's the Manchurian candidate?
BeyondGeography
(39,346 posts)
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Way back during the Cold War. I'm proud of my service. I'm proud that the system we created is still in use and is in its 5th generation now. I can look it up online and even see how much the last update cost and where the units are stationed that use it. Still on the front lines.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)and you know it
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)I see a lot of people pretending to be victims on the right and "left" whether it's modern-day "Christian martyrs" or people who like to imagine themselves living under authoritarian rule that dictates their every move and ties their tongues. The OP saying that people who disagree with her "like to live under authoritarian rule" is patently ridiculous on its face. And you know that. Shame on me, or any of us, for daring to point that out.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)This whole thread is gold...nice job.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts) zeemike
(18,998 posts)And it adds to the value....contrast just makes things stand out
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But I think it is actually this fundamental. It is the kind of thing that risks fracturing the illusion of the party.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)hilarious that the government is spying on everyone'. I just check the handles and see the emoticons, and skip right over them.
Great OP Nadin.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Discredit the messenger, gale 5 shitstorm
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)so I wouldn't complain ... you're doing great ... desperation has set in. I have some sympathy I suppose, it is becoming harder and harder to defend the policies and they are exhausted from the effort. So the last resort is to attack. They are firing duds, just so you know. And not even landing a blow!
treestar
(82,383 posts)And judging people more harshly than usual when their skin is darker usually brings up that question in the US.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Ain't taking the bait either. In many ways the argument is truly over
ReRe
(10,597 posts)Is that actually what the non-dissenters think? That RACE is at the bottom of this far-too-long debate on the Bill of Rights? You can't be serious. I will not believe that. That is totally sick.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)NSA memo handing out talking points yesterday? It was here somewhere. Hilarious, we've all those talking points here on DU. There is nothing so low it will not be reached down for so be prepared.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It must have gotten updated...since a few new talking points have emerged.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)Thank you for responding to me. This situation is so sickening here on DU. It's the first time anyone has ever ever called me a racist. Them's fighting words to me, sabrina 1. I'm going to start hitting the Ignore button. I will not allow them to waste my time any longer.
I can't wait to find what you describe as "talking points". 
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)of racism without a shred of evidence, is a new low even for them, it is merely a sign of the desperation they feel trying to defend the indefensible. I know about racism and it is crystal clear these people have no clue. But yes, a despicable thing to use something so tragic, so evil, against their fellow Democrats as a mere tool to try to distract from the real issues and failing. But that is precisely why I am unaffected by anything they say. They have zero credibility except among their own very small group.
No wonder minorities don't come here. People who know about racism are saddened to see something so important dimished to nothing but a political tool. I go to minority blogs, which are excellent btw, and as I have been told, when I asked why they do not frequent the big Dem forums, 'they do not represent our issues' There is as much criticism of this administration's policies on those blogs as there is everywhere else.
So true regarding not representing issues important to the poor and to minorities. We see people, the same ones insulting minorities with their cavalier use of other people's suffering to try to score a point, SUPPORTING cuts to SS and Welfare and Medicaid, Medicare, and excusing the bailouts for the wealthy for partisan purposes.
If you understand the desperation that is driving this, it won't affect you personally, people have to have some credibility to be taken seriously. I don't take them seriously at all.
Regarding the NSA talking points memo, I saw it here on DU yesterday.
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/713590-fisa-business-records-talking-points-6-6-13.html
Remember as you read them, the FISA Court has no authority to issue warrants on domestic intelligence. I am totally confused now with all their changing stories. Anyhow, this memo doesn't include the race card so there must be others, or they have updated them! Lol!
ReRe
(10,597 posts)You are very strong willed to "try" to communicate with them. What they do is very immature and mean. It's like trying to talk to Republicans. They will not listen, they will not learn. It's the very reason I would never have made a good teacher, and why I respect teachers so much.
Guess what. I clicked on your link to the memo and it wouldn't open up. It's probably because I have Java turned off? I went to the drop down a couple days ago and I have it enabled, but it still won't work. I use Firefox. Will run and use a different browser and will probably be able to get it open.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)that were mixed, Right Wingers and Dems. At first I was shocked at how nasty and mean and just plain ignorant they were and even cried after being attacked by a swarm of them once. But then I got mad. And I would not allow them to run me of the board, which they tried to do with all Democrats.
I was not very knowledgeable about politics at the time, I was a Dem and knew right from wrong. But to stay there, I had to do a lot of homework. And I have them to thank for what I know and for not backing down no matter how nasty they get, no matter how many times they threatened to kill me (that did scare me at first I have to admit). And oddly enough after a while some of them even said that 'while you are wrong about everything, we like you, you're not mean like some of the other 'lieberals' here'.
You are correct that we see here sometimes is no different. But there are rules here so they have to be more careful. There there were no rules, no mods, so they were free to do as they pleased. I am glad I had that two year experience before I found a Dem forum.
So what goes on here is old and familiar to me, it doesn't phase me in the least when they attack. So in my case, thanks to my old Right Wing adversaries, they are wasting their time. I do understand your reaction though. And don't blame you one bit for avoiding them. You're not alone, some of them are on huge ignore lists which is why you don't see too many people responding to them.
Sorry about the link, hope it works in a different browser.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)This is the return of the "Anybody But Obama" Hilbots.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This started well before bush, and will not stop after Obama. It's a tool of empire and social control. You know what? It really did not matter who you voted for in Mexico when I was growing up...insofar as these matters are concerned, it matters little who you vote for in the US at present.
This is way beyond who sits in the WH. If this was Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren or Romney, for that matter Rand Paul...it's the logic of empire. Knowing this means I give no money to any federal candidate. I get no investment in any federal candidate and I may just as well sit out federal elections. If I don't, well Eugene W Debbs sounds like a good write in...won't make a dent.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)People are pissed because there was a promise in 2008 to at least curb this crap.
That's what people are pissed about.
The Enabling act accelerated a 60 year old process...and then they made it legal.
I did not expect, and I think many others did not either, for this to be stopped, just curbed.
At this point people have lost faith, not in Obama, the rigged game in DC.
2014 will be bad for democrats, maybe 2016 and on and on. I am willing to predict a lot of folks will simply no longer vote...the game is tat rigged. I know that I don't intend to, in federal elections...the lesser of two evils is dead.
Oh and in true tinfoil fashion, it explains all those votes, no reps are not getting blackmailed, they fear us...but they think they can control the violence.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)The Democratic Party is not the party of racists! That is the most disgusting insinuation that I have heard in the last couple weeks on DU. Maybe it was being said, but it went right over my head because it was so effing foreign to me.
You don't know it, but you have just made the best argument yet for the use of File #86, i.e., the ignore file. That accomplishes a whole lot, doesn't it?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)way more than allegations. They are facts. And if you think this is about Obama, you have a very narrow view of what is important to this country. Facts were revealed, one of the biggest surveillance program in history, and aimed at the American people. There is simply NO defense for that. There is NO law that permits a blanket surveillance of innocent Americans. WE ARE NOT THE ENEMY.
Stop with the 'Obama' and 'Snowden' nonsense. Are people so blinded by partisanship that they actually do really think nothing is wrong with this?
The allegations that followed the revelations are against the NSA, populated still with Bush holdovers, and the Private Security Corporations who are accountable to no one but who received BILLIONS of tax dollars to do they job CONGRESS should be doing.
Then we have yet another Bush man, how many more are there in this administration, Clapper, former CEO of one of those Private Security Corps, going through the revolving door into a powerful position in our government, he is now Director of Intelligence. And he LIES to Congress. He is a Republican.
Why is Obama appointing and keeping so many Republicans in his administration? Are there no Democrats smart enough to appoint to these positions?
There needs to be hearings and Nadler along with other Democrats have called for those hearings.
Whey you have Cheney and Bolton and Fleischer on your side, on Obama's side, you need to seriously ask 'wtf is going on here' instead of accusing your fellow Democrats falsely of, essentially not caring about this country. Enough with the defensiveness. I could not care less about any politician unless s/he is standing up for our rights.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)An allegation that Obama, the NSA, and Nadler have denied - and that the preponderance of evidence has shown to be unfounded.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Verizon (the corporation named so far in the leaks) COLLECTING AND STORING PHONE DATA, numbers, numbers called, time of calls, place of calls made and to who is at the other end.
They claimed to have a warrant to do this. Why would they need a warrant for something that is easily accessible if they had no intention of using the information? And what court would issue a warrant for data on Americans making calls? The FISA Court cannot issue warrants for domestic intelligence.
The president has confirmed these facts, stating that we have nothing to worry about. Well, I am worried, sorry. If there is no purpose to this, then why are they wasting our tax dollars, billions of them, collecting this information?
You may be willing to trust a bunch of Republican Corporations with your 'phone data'. I am not, I did not trust Republicans when they were doing this before, and now they are doing it again, only on a larger scale, I trust them even less.
Obama may trust Republicans, apparently he does, he has appointed so many of them to powerful positions in his cabinet after we threw them out. That is his business, they still hate him, so I have no idea why he still trusts them, but WE Democrats do not trust them and their Security Corporations with our phone data.
Is that understandable to you now? We know what they are doing and we want to know what probable cause they used to get this warrant. What wrong doing are millions of Verizon customers suspected of? We have a right to know this. And there will be lawsuits by millions of people to find out if the Government doesn't explain it themselves.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)
Hydra
(14,459 posts)It was leveled against the NSA and the FISA court- which the President decided to throw his support behind after the initial shock.
Personally, I was hoping the President would at least direct a little scolding at the NSA, but he may as well have had Bush talking points supporting them.
He threw in with this, and he says the buck stops with him. If that wasn't the case, why would the President even be dragged into this, beyond being Clapper's boss and Holder's pointer?
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)He and his administration's policies do that for us.
midnight
(26,624 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)you can hear the sounds of desperation down thread.
-p
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And shall remain there. Given their past performance though, I can almost predict the posts...ranging from denial, to bully behavior, to what shit will stick in the personal assassination dept.
It s what it is.
At least others find them entertaining.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)"Favorite targets for abuse by authoritarians" seems to coincide rather closely to "most eloquent and well informed posts"-- there's a ghastly site devoted to stalking progressive DUers, and the frequency with which they drag your name through the mud shows just how bothered they are by someone they can't answer with reason and evidence.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)would prefer to live under an authoritarian state? Really?
When I read your first sentence, I thought, "Okay" ... then you proceeded to cast the argument, exactly contrary to that first line. And based on what ... not turning a blind eye to the snowden inconsistencies and a refusal to rever him as a national hero? Because some prefer to base their conclusions on FACT under the law, as written; as opposed to speculation and opinion of how the law should be interpreted? Really?
Some of us have known from day one that the American myth never was intended to apply to us and have lived under a system that has never represented our interests, except to further the interests. So with that realization, some of us are not tied to a man or a party, no matter what you wish to to believe ... those of us born as "others" are just quicker to judge but slower to condemn ... Our, literal, lives depended on it.
And those of us born outside of the myth know ... the lesser of two evils (if there is two evils) is the only game in town ... to deny that reality by not voting in/care about Federal/National elections (which BTW is the only mechanism short of revolt to correct the state you detest) is to, both, deny political reality, and to guarantee that you will, not only be subject to the state your detest; but alos subject to the "same, just a tad stronger sauce."
While I understand this matter has people on fire, let's not be consumed.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Yes, partisans are putting party before country. It's clear as the midday sun, and no way around it.
Suffice it to say, that is all you will get. I won't take the bait. We are, at least I am, done taking the bait.
To wit, same arguments I remember from partisans in 2003 and 2004.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)It is sad to witness your devolution.
BeyondGeography
(39,346 posts)So many beautiful minds here.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)And sometimes people notice this, and say so.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)only if those things agree with what s/he already has decided is true.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)this crap has not been established as true or fact ... and as more information comes out, most people take notice; all except those that had already decided.
I remember a time when DUers used to laugh after those types of people. Times change, huh?
Caretha
(2,737 posts)only been here and posting since 2011 according to your profile.....your memory is relatively new and not to be relied on.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)long before your profile has you here.
I left, when I could no longer abide having white people telling Black people what is, and is not, racist conduct. I came back because I moved to a different place ... I decided to ignore such condescending posts.
BTW, your attempt at a slap down should, directly inform your thoughts on this discussion ... information is almost always incomplete; so with that knowledge, it is wise to temper our certainty.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)perhaps you need to rethink some of your own paradigms
just saying
edited to add the following:
btw, I'm not sure why race has anything to do with anything about this topic, perhaps you could clue me in - you see...I only see peoples, maybe you see just colors of peoples.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I have an idea ... But puzzle me this: where did your race, whatever it might be, enter into this discussion?
Caretha
(2,737 posts)but you are the one who brought up race
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)you are wrong ... context is important.
My "bring up race" was to explain why I left DU ... and had NOTHING to to with my longevity here or my subsequent comment.
Understand?
Caretha
(2,737 posts)what you said...
I can't get the smile off my face. Just a little advice, please don't take it wrong, but don't join any debate teams until you join the amateur crowd and practice a bit first.
Otherwise the pros would chew you up and spit you out.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)rather than admit your error?
Let's recap ...
I said:
(No mention of race)
You responded:
(Questioning my longevity/tenure on this site)
I responded:
I left, when I could no longer abide having white people telling Black people what is, and is not, racist conduct. I came back because I moved to a different place ... I decided to ignore such condescending posts.
BTW, your attempt at a slap down should, directly inform your thoughts on this discussion ... information is almost always incomplete; so with that knowledge, it is wise to temper our certainty.
(Yes. I mentioned race; but note ... I indicated why I left and that I came back ... thereby explaining my registration date and relatively low post count; but clearly not injecting race into the discussion.)
You responded (even on edit ... that didn't help you):
Last edited Thu Jun 20, 2013, 02:13 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
perhaps you need to rethink some of your own paradigms
just saying
edited to add the following:
btw, I'm not sure why race has anything to do with anything about this topic, perhaps you could clue me in - you see...I only see peoples, maybe you see just colors of peoples.
(Race didn't have anything to do with my post, except to explain my registration date and low post count ... it was you, having that having not read/ignored/unable to comprehend, what I wrote that focused like a wayward laser on it ... )
I responded:
You continued the crazy by posting:
(Well, No ... I didn't.)
I attempted to give you an out by responding:
My "bring up race" was to explain why I left DU ... and had NOTHING to to with my longevity here or my subsequent comment.
Understand?
Then you went all the way to the crazy by posting the above.
So I ask again ... do you normally smile (and give "debate warnings"
, rather than simply say, "Oops, I jumped the shark"?
{Edited to add: But that's Okay ... this is par for the new DU course.
}Number23
(24,544 posts)I'm surprised every single response to it isn't just a string of question marks.
From the OP's really nasty dismissive attitude and branding everyone 'authoritarian' (judging by how much this word is getting tossed around lately, I'm wondering if people just learned how to spell it or something) who dares to disagree with her, to the person running around claiming to read minority blogs and this gives them some insight into our thoughts and how accusing Obama detractors of being racists is the reason so few people of color post here instead of the non-stop shrieking that this president endures at every step, I'm scratching my head and trying not to simultaneously laugh and cry so hard I'm about to burst wide open.
Weird, WEIRD stuff.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)You can keep a running tally on the OP's "iggy list".
Fun for the family, too!
Number23
(24,544 posts)I've seen another person mention they have something like over 400 DUers on ignore.
I mean, I shake my head every time they post that because 1) I can't believe they believe that anyone truly gives a crap how many people they're ignoring and 2) considering there are probably only a couple of hundred regular DUers that post on a regular basis anyway, having that many people on ignore is the equivalent of looking at an empty screen. And I can't imagine any even moderately intelligent person enjoying that.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)on display?
DemoTex
(25,390 posts)Love your posts. Keeps me pumped, like I really need THAT!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sort off.
DemoTex
(25,390 posts)
madfloridian
(88,117 posts) WillyT
(72,631 posts)
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)It's when a Conservative claims the People are in charge of this country.
Then scoffs at the idea that the Congress is bought off.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)But the grammatical errors, perfumed prose, and vacuity made my teeth hurt.
Rex
(65,616 posts)
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)There are many who foolishly believe that what has happened in the past can never happen again. They are wrong. History repeats, it's repeating even now.
We are becoming complacent about our liberties. That's how it always starts.
Uncle Joe
(58,282 posts)Thanks for the thread, nadinbrzezinski.
tridim
(45,358 posts)
I stopped taking your post seriously as soon as I read that hyperbolic crap in the second paragraph.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Never mind.
tridim
(45,358 posts)Why did you say it then?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)And why you are still defending it.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Have an excellent day.
(this s another way about making it about the person and not the issue at hand..it's done by partisans everywhere. It's a basic tool of distraction).
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . . which operated under these types of us and them principles. There's always an insistence that there's some moral imperative in dividing folks in our minds (and politically) between those who share our every belief and those who question some of them. She's casting herself as some sort of libertarian hero by casting anyone outside her narrow and inaccurate beliefs as 'authoritarian.'
Talk about 'bait.' It's hilarious, such subjective reasoning about our fellow Democrats will never achieve anything other than marginalization, because it relies on a closed mind to defend and protect its innuendo and slander from scrutiny and correction.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Bait...to your frustration, won't take it
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . . bemusement, rather, at your complete obliviousness to your own baiting behavior in this thread.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)Why?
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)Anyways, back to the main point of the thread, well stated. 
treestar
(82,383 posts)The ones who think Obama is God are the ones who think he can manipulate Congress and should sign executive orders, a la Bush, to have done what they want.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Jamie Foxx did refer to the president as 'our lord and savior' last year at the Soul Train Awards.
So there are people out there who can get a bit wacky with the hero-worship.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/jamie-foxx-obama-lord-and-savior-furor-soul-train-awards_n_2199439.html
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)(nadin, this response is prompted by the interactions above and the myriad other threads here, not by your OP. Just FYI.)
Now, I admit that, even though I am a long-time DUer, I haven't quite grasped who's who regarding "sides" and cliques here. Maybe it's because I don't want to; I've always been more focused on content shared. When arguments ensue specifically talking about sides here within DU, I lose interest because it becomes more of a personality conflict than anything.
Rational discourse when we disagree is hard to be found.
I suppose that's natural with any family or community; personal animosity is the underpinning of a lot of disagreements.
So much of the interaction at DU, in my humble opinion, has become part of the same white noise we see everywhere nowadays.
If you don't feel you're part of a "side" and don't lean toward one way of thinking over another but approach each issue with fresh eyes, so to speak, you're not alone. Right now, I feel very much alone and alienated on DU (not whining, just a factual statement), and wish the family squabbles could be set aside so we could find the common ground that MUST exist and can be built upon.
It's harder and harder to weed through the personal BS and attacks (not to mention the twitter-like personal broadcasting posts) in order to glean helpful information -- and DU has always been a GREAT source of helpful information and content.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I cannot see the taints, attacks and the rest...thanks to the ignore list.
I know it is happening. In my case I can post the weather report outside my window, and it will generate it...so as you said, some of it is white noise.
Some folks like to avoid the constitutional issue at hand by trying hard to personalize it. Whether it is here in DU or Snowden. All this has also led to another epiphany, I can't talk to partisans (regardless of party). And Americans are cowards, at least a good percentage.
Their fear, they are correct, is that voting will collapse...I almost predict it. And that the eeeevvvviiiilllll republicans are not that scary anymore, or scary enough to force people to vote for lesser evil. In that they are correct.
What should be telling in a meta level (hi NSA, just triggered your dictionary) is that the republicans are still screaming IRS and Bengazi, but dare not touch this...that should be at least a big wtf momemt. Both sides want the tools of a police state and we cannot vote our way out of this.
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . .and refuse to acknowledge your own broad brush attack on people who support Obama by insinuating that any disagreement with you over these issues you've mentioned is out of some sort of loyalism to the president, rather than out of the same principled reasoning that you say you employ.
You made a deliberate attempt to divide DUers, in order to to elicit support for your weak, inaccurate, and subjective premise. Talk about, rah-rah . . . All you accomplished was a dissolution of whatever point you originally thought to make here (albeit, a tired and misdirected one).
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Nice shiny you got there
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . . same divisive nonsense that you started with.
Scorn for baiting the bait(er)? How surprised are you, really, that someone would defend against your careless slander? Without it, of course, you're just stating things which may, or may not, be shared by the very individuals you've categorized in your little, subjective boxes. More productive to just state your views on the issues at hand and leave those premises open here to debate, as this forum intends. Instead, you've fed into the divisiveness which infects these debates here as if we are mere politicians instead of thinking, reasoning individuals who sometimes disagree.
. . . and oh, Nadine, you cynically provided responders 'bait', right from the start of this fractured op. Feigning surprise that someone would throw it back at you is classic DU . . . baiting.
dionysus
(26,467 posts) nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Of partisans in 2003-4 or so.
It used to work...not any more
The bait you are using is not working.
Many of us are beyond these games.
For the record, as you try to make it about me (old technique) you have yet to face to the meat of the post...like those partisans back then.
I used to think you could have reasonable discussions, now I know better.
So you will need, and your friends will have to as well, to go return the old bait.
Have an excellent day.
This is my last response to you on this thread, but I do look forwards to the excellent photos you will post, especially of Bo. He's really a cute dog. And as a news photographer myself, I appreciate good photos.
bigtree
(85,975 posts). . . this isn't some political campaign or a legislature. We're not politicians. We are a diverse and disparate coalition of interests and concerns.
Stick to the issues at hand and the discussion will flow like water. Muddy it with personalization and it gets personal . . . but, you knew that, didn't you?
Btw, I'll bet we agree on the issues at hand.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Look at the exchange I had with Nadin downthread. She repeated the canard that we didnt know this was going on and I provided an article with link in USA Today in 2006, one of many actually, which clearly indicates we did know and it was reported in one of the largest mainstream media publications in the country. I can provide more, but then she moved the goalposts and made a weird comment and that was that.
They cannot engage on the facts here. That much is certain.
Number23
(24,544 posts)to breeze by anyone who dares to ask you a question? What is the point of this?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Now that's the spirit!
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)"Snowden revelations".
If you didn't immediately think this was brand new information, if you didn't immediately think Obama was betraying you, if you sought to understand how we got here and look at the facts to determine whether Obama made this better or worse, you were labeled an authoritarian and a fascist and that was it.
Now, of course, if you are attacked like that, most people are going to attack back.
What I did, since I have a radio show, is I spent a few days researching the issue as much as possible, then talked about it on my show and released the transcript here. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981244
None of the folks here including the OP, who think that this is such a big deal and its horrible and if you don't agree you are an authoritarian, could refute any of the facts I talked about on my show. You can read the OP and see the replies. Neither the OP here or any of the folks who say they agree with her could refute any of the facts I listed. That's because that is what they are, facts. They're not hyperbole, they aren't fear mongering, they're not ad-hominem attacks on fellow DUers, they aren't projection of fear of the government from decades past, they are facts.
But while the OP and others who agree with her on DU couldnt refute the facts I laid out, that did not stop them from continuing to label me and those who agree with me "authoritarians" as she has done again here in her OP.
They didnt stop to think that, hmm, yunno, if you cant refute the facts put out by the folks who you disagree with, you might be on shaky ground as far as your own position is concerned.
So, here we are. We have the folks like the OP and their supporters who have been attacking and labeling their fellow DUers who disagree with them as authoritarians from day one and whose argument is 30%-50% based on fear and supposition. And you have me and the folks who agree with me whose position is based on facts that are generally unassailable.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/11/18887491-fbi-sharply-increases-use-of-patriot-act-provision-to-collect-us-citizens-records?lite
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
By Leslie Cauley, USA TODAY
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.
The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Have a good day.
I will take the ACLU and others who are actually experts, sorry.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)It's all irrational hyperbole. The moment someone actually starts providing facts with links, the folks on your side run off on an ad-hominem based rant and stop engaging.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)For starters this did not start with the bush administration...it greatly accelerated under little boots. Nor will it stop with this, or the next, or the next three presidents regardless of party. It's about Empire.
Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.
The farce has been exposed.
Have an excellent day...this is my last response, you may have the last word.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)If you had the facts to disprove my assertions, you would provide them. You don't, so you fall back on labeling people "authoritarians" and other ad-hominem attacks and passive aggressive nonsense. You have done that repeatedly with people who disagree with you under this OP.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)I see people reference "bad blood" from several primaries ago. Lots of interpersonal BS.
That's what I mean, there's a lot underlying things here, way beyond disagreeing about one issue or how people are labeling one another about this NSA/Snowden issue.
I will say, however, that the Snowden issue seems to be the straw that is breaking the camel's back. It has definitely been leading toward this for a while though. There is a lot of animosity here between enough members that it impacts the health of this particular online community.
Again, I tend to shut down and don't absorb who's who as far as the sides (for lack of a better word), so I couldn't begin to place blame even if I tried. I'm commenting on a general observation, my own personal opinion.
Since I choose to remain clueless about this aspect of DU life, I'll shut up now.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Narcissistic, divisive, tendentious, preening, false flame bait.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)It should have a little section over on the side that says ...
People who are ignoring you, are also ignoring: (list of DU names)
You'd see some familiar names I'm sure.
And then you'd also have to wonder why person X has yet to make the list!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts) 
DCBob
(24,689 posts) nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Thank you
I looked under the bed and that loud scary monster is a mouse.
Now the view behind the curtain is just damn scary.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)you are either clueless or confused or just plain lying.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The scary monster, no not really... We are continuing the same policies. To be fair, did not start with bush (but Truman) and will not stop with the next three presidents either.
It is party independent. It is a tool of empire.
And all the lofty language to the contrary won't change that.
For the record, the penchant to control women's bodies on the part of republicans...is a classic of authoritarian states.
But sorry, lofty rhetoric won't fix this.
As I said, I will still vote, pay attention to local elections where it still makes some difference...federal...well kids you will have to go on without me. From now on I intend to leave the slate blank, vote my conscience, or write in people I agree with...voting for the PRI back in the day did not matter either.
You must fear this is not just me concluding this.
Go ahead call me a fool, for all I care. Lived through some of this movie as a kid, and this is the dictablanda we now live in. Pray, if you believe in such things, it never becomes something you will actually recognize. Suffice to say, others have noticed who have lived through this as well.
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)
Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)
PB
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)
LiberalLovinLug
(14,164 posts)Authoritarians exist in both parties, but much more so in the Republican party. Makes sense that there are more fundamentalist religious types there as well.
But I'm always taken aback a bit actually witnessing Democratic Authoritarians. I don't know if they are actually Cons who are deluding themselves or that they are so far left they are Stalinists. 
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)They are what they are...it's a percentage of the population. I will no longer make the mistake of believing one party, whatever means in a failed state, has more than the other.
Frank Zappa was right, and all we need is to remove the scenery...that process is under way.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Maybe both rolled into one!
I mean, if we're going to go there, let's really "go there".
Having said that ... me ... I'm always amazed by the Democratic Libertarians.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)is yet another simple-minded assessment of things, whereby everything is either black or white, no shades of gray exist anywhere, with a HEAVY dose of the "you're with us or against us" attitude we all despised during the Dubya years.
"Is not a conflict between those who love the POTUS, and those who hate him."
You're right, it's not. I'm sure there are those who actually do love Obama, and certainly there are those who hate him. But the vast majority of people don't even come close to thinking in those terms. They support Obama on some issues, and not on others. People agree with his actions anywhere from 100% of the time to 0%; the percentage for most people is somewhere in between those two ends of the spectrum.
"There is some of those who believe Obama could walk on water, make wine from water, and feed the multitudes from one loaf of bread."
This is the popular myth among a certain contingent, that Obama supporters are basically mindless idol-worshippers. And a myth it is, with no basis in reality - as anyone who actually participates in real life knows.
"But truly this is a conflict between constitutionalists, who know freedom can be risky, and have one risks to it, and those who prefer to live under an authoritarian state."
And there we have it, yet again: the absolute bullshit declaration that these are the only two types of people engaging in discussion - about the NSA, or any other topic - along with the black-and-white, simpleminded, self-serving characterization of brave, risk-taking freedom-fighters up against timid, mealy-mouthed authoritarian-lovers.
"So the lesser of two evils will not be effective for much longer."
Here's a news flash for you: The vast majority of people who voted for Obama (both in 2008 and in 2012) did not drag themselves reluctantly to the voting booth in order to elect what they perceived to be "the lesser of two evils". They campaigned for the man they believed was the right man for the job - and they did so knowing that there would be times when they disagreed with his policies. Mature people DO understand that one man is not going to please all of the people all of the time, themselves included, and actually expect that to be the case.
"I gotta wonder how many others have figured out that voting is really not going to be the major saving difference that we were promised?"
Well, I'm not sure what alternatives you think are viable - but you are free to pursue them. Maybe you can start by dividing the populace into your cutesy little categories, and try to appeal to the sensibilities of those who love the Constitution as opposed to those who don't care about it, which seems to be how you think these things line up. That BS will undoubtedly play well in your black-and-white world here on a message board - in the real world, not so much.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)exposing the dangers of what privatization is doing to the free function of our government a traitor or domestic terrorist!
They do not allow any dissent or compromise-- private corporations answer to no one but their owners-- how is being against this unAmerican or traitorous? I think many people cannot or refuse to see how entrenched private interests have become in government.
The American people do not want to be silenced, intimidated or dismissed anymore. Look around the world to see where this strategy leads.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)With no doubt on that.
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)Thanks for all your work here Nadin
Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)
mother earth This message was self-deleted by its author.
akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)that some DUers say that President Obama walks on water? That is so infantile to say the least.
President Obama is doing his best! He inherited the Patriot Act.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)For partisans (on both sides, same shit happened with bushies) POTUS, as long as he is on their side, with a proper letter behind their name, can't do no wrong. We call this...a literary device, which fell too close, and touched a few nerves.
True believers, partisans if you will, are not people that can see any problem with their chosen leader.
At this point I do not care what "party" they claim to be members off. This place reminds me...hard, of the 2003 aol boards...except back then it was Republicans. Well, now it is partisans on the other side.
Me, I don't intend to ever again believe the lofty words of anybody at the Federal level...this will not be fixed with the play every two years, and a play it is.
