Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
Fairweather

Obama and his Lying Issues

Recommended Posts

Niether of these are possibilities. But that doesn't mean the GOP wackos will not waste more time having hearings, standing in front of the podium ad nauseum, and voting - for the what? the 45th time to repeal the act.

 

Democrats lost the vote for Medicare Drug coverage not too long ago - rembmember that big pharma give-away? But after it passed, they buried the hatchet and actually help tweak the act instead of grandstanding.

 

If the GOP put 1/10th the energy spent on this show towards actually legislating something might actually happen that was useful.

 

Not trying to hit too hard here, but you were boderline hysterical back in the day, and I recall that you were calling for impeachment over wiretapping among other things. How 'bout now?

 

Here's one of the many reasons in detail:

 

US President George Bush admitted, in his weekly radio address on December 17, 2005, that he ordered the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct electronic surveillance of US citizens without seeking warrants. The admission followed the publication of the story in the New York Times on December 16 that approximately 500 such warrantless searches were being conducted at any given moment continuously for the last 4 years. The New York Times admitted knowing about the story for "a year," but sat on the story at the request of the Bush Administration.

 

 

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." For decades, at least until the Supreme Court ruled the practice illegal (United States v. United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan 407 U.S. 297, 313 (1972)) the NSA routinely violated the Fourth Amendment by conducting warrantless surveillance on US citizens.

 

In 1978, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Despite the law's Orwellian and unconstitutional secret court proceedings, it did codify into law the bedrock principle that warrants are necessary to legally eavesdrop on US citizens.

 

The law included a provision declaring that using the FISA process of obtaining warrants from the FISA courts is the "the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance…may be conducted." Fewer than ten of the over 15,000 requests for warrants to the FISA courts have been denied since 1978.

 

President Bush, in a press conference on December 19, claimed that he ordered the electronic surveillance because, "this is a different era, different war. It's a war where people are changing phone numbers and phone calls, and they're moving quick." Yet, Joshua Marshall's Talking Points Memo of December 17 pointed out, FISA has an "Emergency order" provision allowing a wiretap to proceed immediately in "emergency situations" as long as the Attorney General retroactively applies for a warrant within 72 hours. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted this point on Nightline on December 21.

 

Lawyer Martin Garbus, on Democracy Now, December 19, 2005, said that ordering such wiretaps without warrants, "Is a crime.... it is an impeachable offense." Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office, said, "Eavesdropping on conversations of US citizens and others in the United States without a court order and without complying with the procedures of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is both illegal and unconstitutional. The administration is claiming extraordinary presidential powers at the expense of civil liberties and is putting the president above the law. Congress must investigate this report thoroughly. We also call upon Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to appoint a special prosecutor to independently investigate whether crimes have been committed." A special prosecutor could refer a case to the House for possible impeachment.

 

Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), on WAOK radio on December 20, 2005, reminded listeners that Bush is "Not King, he is president." Since, "He deliberately, systematically violated the law," Lewis recommends proceeding directly to impeachment.

 

 

Well you get my vote for becoming the CC.com historian and archivist.

 

Before I address the dodge question - I wonder why you shifted gears from the topic at hand, Obamacare. It seems to captured the imagination of the American Taliban, I mean Tea Party wackos. I hope it was worth the $2 billion lost during that political theater.

 

While I think our NSA-fed, chicken shit, government has gone way overboard after 911 - you are missing a clear distinction between what I was complaining about Bush and what Obama is doing (all of which I don't agree with)

 

The FISA court was set up for a review of data collection of communications AND it also had an emergency system set up for quick review of requests. Bush and Company said the hell with these minor safeguards and just started yanking data off communication systems WITHOUT A WARRANT. That's what it was referred to as warrantless wire-tapping.

 

I think the FISA court is not transparent and needs some major tweaking, Obama has offered some changes, not enough. But he never took the privilege of deciding to do a run around the FISA court.

 

I agree with KK - stop the nonsense on Obamacare, try and make it better. If the voters really don't like the whole mess then they can put the Taliban in change and I'm sure we'll get on the right track quickly. Cheers. :brew:

 

Go Hillary!

Edited by Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bush never threatened my personal freedom in a big way--or stole my health insurance coverage.

 

Now this[\i] is worth archiving. "Selective memory", "historical amnesia", and "willful ignorance" hardly begin to cover it.

 

Oh, and as far as substandard insurance being cancelled: A. Companies had plenty of time to fix them to be in compliance. B. Those customers were never going to get a penny out of those companies if anything happened to them anyway. At least their not throwing their money down a hole anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, Carter was a stand-up guy. And I think Christie will be a great president in the same vein, although with more economic savvy.

 

In what way do you think Carter missed the mark with his economic policies?

 

It was before my time, and this assertion seems to have established itself as an oft-repeated meme, but I've never had anyone who repeats it give technical details as to how exactly Carter was so incompetent.

 

And regarding his stand-uppedness, wasn't his support for Suharto unwavering during that dictator's brutal oppression and murder of Indonesians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely, some of those customers would have gotten something out of those companies. Moreover, it may have been what they wanted. 8D

What I'm saying is, sometimes we are too quick to discount what people are choosing, just because it doesn't jibe with our own preferences and orientation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing how 'consumer freedom' has come to mean a company's right to part a fool from his money with impunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bush never threatened my personal freedom in a big way--or stole my health insurance coverage.

 

well, he did send us into a series of needless and costly wars, while simultaneously lowering taxes and borrowing money (lower taxes during a time of war? neat! It's no big, we'll just charge it), turning our hard-fought budget surplus into a massive deficit and thus doing his part to shepherd our great nation into one of the worst recessions our our times -- but I guess that doesn't count. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh...

 

What matters a lot is not so much the moral value of an evil deed itself, but the consequences of that action to other people. Sure, Obama is said to have lied about "you can keep your existing insurance" in order help pass a law that provides medical insurance to millions of Americans. But a lot of people are against that way of providing insurance, so that's what the complaints are really about--not the lie itself, but the consequences of that lie. But seriously, what's the big deal about finally getting some change underway to fix our health care system?

 

And then there's Bush, being compared in this thread. Bush is said to have lied about "weapons of mass destruction" in order to sucker Congress and provide his buddies with a multi-trillion dollar war in Iraq. But a lot of us are against that war, sacking our national treasure, killing a lot of people, and all that. But again, seriously now, mostly all those killed over there are brown people who don't even speak good American, pretty much, so what's the problem, really?

 

Obama or Bush, a little lie here and there. So what? What it comes down to is really just a fair and balanced political debate between Republicans and Democrats, that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course, you are one of the guys who was calling for GW to be put on trial and "burned." Yea, you're real civil. :rolleyes: Don't like my opinon? Don't read it.

 

"burned"? Put the post up there mr archivist. Should be an easy little project for you. You do jump around man, I was lamenting folks calling folks liars without giving them the benefit of doubt for possibly making a mistake and you come up with this… wow

 

Yes, I was one of the many Americans advocating trials for bush, cheney, and anyone else involved in in any way, the torture of prisoners captured in the "war on terror"… Others have been convicted in past for waterboarding people as a war crime. Put them in the justice system and let them defend that. A lot of us were wondering why not these guys? Why not now? That ship has sailed. It ain't gonna happen. Our current president didn't feel that would have been worthwhile somehow. I disagreed with him on that. Still do.

 

dubya's presidency for the most part is difficult to defend IMO but you go ahead on… I didn't agree with much of what he did, or tried to do. He was without a doubt the worst president I have seen in my lifetime. Truth is, none of these guys are gonna be anything close to perfect. It's a tough job for a lot of reasons. I did like his strong push for Immigration Reform toward the end of his second term. That bill should have passed. He fought hard for it too. He also gets credit for fighting the scourge of AIDS in Africa along the way…

 

I try not to pine for the good old days as I age but it's tough sometimes. I will commit to trying harder to heed your request not to read your posts though. I find you often make little sense, and it is a waste of time for me.

 

d

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the FISA court is not transparent and needs some major tweaking, Obama has offered some changes, not enough. But he never took the privilege of deciding to do a run around the FISA court.

 

 

Really? What changes has he offered? and he almost certainly has ignored FISA. Of course, we have no way of knowing since he hasn't bothered with the "transparent" government he promised. You can absolutely say that Bush opened the door, but Obama has not only walked through it, he's having a party on the other side where anything goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dub had a military record. Then again all he did was fly around and snort cocaine. Combat? No Sir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course, you are one of the guys who was calling for GW to be put on trial and "burned." Yea, you're real civil. :rolleyes: Don't like my opinon? Don't read it.

 

"burned"? Put the post up there mr archivist. Should be an easy little project for you. You do jump around man, I was lamenting folks calling folks liars without giving them the benefit of doubt for possibly making a mistake and you come up with this… wow

 

Yes, I was one of the many Americans advocating trials for bush, cheney, and anyone else involved in in any way, the torture of prisoners captured in the "war on terror"… Others have been convicted in past for waterboarding people as a war crime. Put them in the justice system and let them defend that. A lot of us were wondering why not these guys? Why not now? That ship has sailed. It ain't gonna happen. Our current president didn't feel that would have been worthwhile somehow. I disagreed with him on that. Still do.

 

dubya's presidency for the most part is difficult to defend IMO but you go ahead on… I didn't agree with much of what he did, or tried to do. He was without a doubt the worst president I have seen in my lifetime. Truth is, none of these guys are gonna be anything close to perfect. It's a tough job for a lot of reasons. I did like his strong push for Immigration Reform toward the end of his second term. That bill should have passed. He fought hard for it too. He also gets credit for fighting the scourge of AIDS in Africa along the way…

 

I try not to pine for the good old days as I age but it's tough sometimes. I will commit to trying harder to heed your request not to read your posts though. I find you often make little sense, and it is a waste of time for me.

 

d

 

 

I think your context is a bit off. I have no problem with folks who say "this was the worst president in my lifetime, blah, blah, blah..." I do it too. But when you compare the often criminal legacies of LBJ/McNamara or, say, Nixon against the war criminal Bush I lose you. You can maybe make a weak case that they are equivalent. No doubt LBJ condoned the killing of soldier/citizens who crossed over in Vietnam. (And then there's the war itself.) And, of course, Bush never carpet bombed Bagdhad with B52s. Finally, not a peep here over Obama's massive escalation of drone killings in places we're not even at war with.

 

My point here is not so much the lies. Rather, it is the silence these last 5 years from guys like you on an ever-growing list of Obama indiscretions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point here is not so much the lies. Rather, it is the silence these last 5 years from guys like you on an ever-growing list of Obama indiscretions.

 

On the contrary, Obama has become increasingly unpopular among his liberal base -- I myself consider him a republican, basically. Ask prole how much he likes Obama.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dub had a military record. Then again all he did was fly around and snort cocaine. Combat? No Sir

 

But if he snorted coke at the Muir Hut he'd be cool.

 

Only if he shared -- I bet Dub can get his hands on some quality yay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finally, not a peep here over Obama's massive escalation of drone killings in places we're not even at war with.

 

the drone killings are atrocious. and obama ain't my hero. jesus, is he anybody's?

 

and "over here"?

 

in this cyber-room populated by 5 people? what are you looking for?

 

 

and, tell me about jimmy carter's missteps with the economy.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point here is not so much the lies. Rather, it is the silence these last 5 years from guys like you on an ever-growing list of Obama indiscretions.

 

Did you ever stop to think that more Democrats and liberals would critique the President if it weren't for the fact that the alternative party is a batshit crazy, carnival freakshow they are scared to death to lose any ground to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the FISA court is not transparent and needs some major tweaking, Obama has offered some changes, not enough. But he never took the privilege of deciding to do a run around the FISA court.

 

 

Really? What changes has he offered? and he almost certainly has ignored FISA. Of course, we have no way of knowing since he hasn't bothered with the "transparent" government he promised. You can absolutely say that Bush opened the door, but Obama has not only walked through it, he's having a party on the other side where anything goes.

 

Well, now you're back to makin' stuff up. There is no evidence that Mr O has gone rouge and run around the FISA as the Bushies did. Friggin' A - you and the American Taliban are going ape shit over a medical plan that was passed by Congress and then vetted by your handpicked majority of the SCOTUS. Jesus, get over it and try and come up with an agenda that people might actually vote for instead of trying voodoo and storm the Bastille tactics.

 

And just for giggles - here's what Obama has proposed for FISA improvements. At least he recognizes it is a rule of law.

 

________________________________________________________

The president's proposed measures focused on reforming Section 215 of the Patriot Act and Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, under which the NSA's surveillance programs are considered lawful. The reforms would focus on creating more oversight and greater transparency, particularly through modifications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which currently authorizes the surveillance through highly classified opinions.

 

Obama specifically discussed creating a special advocate who could challenge the court on the basis of privacy and constitutional concerns. He also expressed support for making more information public, and upon his directive, the Department of Justice released the legal rationale for the government's collection activities under Section 215 of the Patriot Act.

 

The president added that the NSA would be creating a civil liberties and privacy officer, as well as launching a website to serve "as the hub for further transparency." And finally, Obama announced an independent task force of outside experts that would review the government's surveillance efforts, in terms of both privacy rights and impact on foreign policy. The group would produce both an interim report within 60 days and a final report by the end of the year with findings and recommendations

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell, it's thanks to Bush that we even have the Patriot Act. Thanks for that, GeeDub! What a legacy of shit he's left behind for the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hell, it's thanks to Bush that we even have the Patriot Act. Thanks for that, GeeDub! What a legacy of shit he's left behind for the rest of us.

 

your guy should fix it, especially after all the whining your side did during GW's years in office.

 

he hasn't, and you are silent. sorry, but your complaints now are just crocodile tears

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hell, it's thanks to Bush that we even have the Patriot Act. Thanks for that, GeeDub! What a legacy of shit he's left behind for the rest of us.

 

your guy should fix it, especially after all the whining your side did during GW's years in office.

 

he hasn't, and you are silent. sorry, but your complaints now are just crocodile tears

 

First of all, Obama is not "my guy" -- have I ever said he was? I'm certainly not a democrat. But, regarding being silent -- I can't speak for most democrats, but most liberals are furious at his domestic surveillance and drone programs. At least, I am, and so are most of the liberals I know. We certainly don't consider Obama to be "our guy" -- and I think most of his base is similarly disappointed in him.

 

Just because you think things doesn't make them true. It amuses me that you and FW can't seem to have an honest critique of both presidents, but instead have to pick "sides." Defending Bush is a pretty hard sell, so I have to give you guys credit for sticking with it. Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hell, it's thanks to Bush that we even have the Patriot Act. Thanks for that, GeeDub! What a legacy of shit he's left behind for the rest of us.

 

your guy should fix it, especially after all the whining your side did during GW's years in office.

 

he hasn't, and you are silent. sorry, but your complaints now are just crocodile tears

 

Shite - the House can't even agree to get a Farm Bill passed. What makes you think they can manage anything beyond the 41 (or 43rd?) vote to appeal Obamacare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hell, it's thanks to Bush that we even have the Patriot Act. Thanks for that, GeeDub! What a legacy of shit he's left behind for the rest of us.

 

your guy should fix it, especially after all the whining your side did during GW's years in office.

 

he hasn't, and you are silent. sorry, but your complaints now are just crocodile tears

 

First of all, Obama is not "my guy" -- have I ever said he was? I'm certainly not a democrat. But, regarding being silent -- I can't speak for most democrats, but most liberals are furious at his domestic surveillance and drone programs. At least, I am, and so are most of the liberals I know. We certainly don't consider Obama to be "our guy" -- and I think most of his base is similarly disappointed in him.

 

Just because you think things doesn't make them true. It amuses me that you and FW can't seem to have an honest critique of both presidents, but instead have to pick "sides." Defending Bush is a pretty hard sell, so I have to give you guys credit for sticking with it. Good luck!

 

Randomly read political posts from Spray 6-8 years ago. Look at the volume and hysteria of the anti-Bush "outrage". You may find you posted some of those posts yourself.

 

And now? For those same issues now that Barry is running the show. That's right, crickets. That's the point.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×