Patterico's Pontifications

I can tell the difference between a pig and a man. But it may be an insult to pigs to call Obama one. Pigs are useful animals.

nk (875f57) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:43 am

It’s a clever picture, but it wrongly indicts GWB for crimes he didn’t commit, and bestows unearned honors on a cruel and oppressive Tyrant.

ropelight (e45149) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:05 am

Farm, an apt metaphor.

Former Conservative (6e026c) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:06 am

We need one of those red and blue images, a boar wearing a top hat, “Change”.

htom (412a17) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:09 am

Yeah, this is just like SWIFT or FISA. (Sarcasm)

nk (875f57) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:18 am

It’s a clever picture, but it wrongly indicts GWB for crimes he didn’t commit, and bestows unearned honors on a cruel and oppressive Tyrant.

This. Obama is actively doing everything he ranted about and imagined Bush to be doing.

When Sen Obama finds out what President Obama is doing, by reading the newspaper, he is gonna be pissed.

JD (129489) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:24 am

No, this is Bush’s fault too. He set up this security state and did lots more beside. Doing so on the basis that the next President would have a good character was evil folly, and Bush violated people’s civil rights as well.

Former Conservative (6e026c) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:40 am

you can’t honestly equate Bush with the JEFH.

redc1c4 (403dff) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:43 am

He’s not as bad, but he positioned Obama perfectly for this.

Former Conservative (6e026c) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:46 am

I was unaware Bush took FISA to mean anything but FOREIGN intelligence. Where’s the evidence?

Bush violated people’s civil rights as well.

Uh-huh. And what else do the voices tell you?

Rob Crawford (e6f27f) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:51 am

Teh One just quietly changed the carbon cost of regs, which greatly helps enviro wackos challenge traditional power sources.

We are going into a very dark time here.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-12/tougher-regulations-seen-from-obama-change-in-carbon-cost.html

Patricia (be0117) — 6/12/2013 @ 9:10 am

Obama never cared about whether most of the positions he supported was right or wrong, good or bad – he had these poositions, for the most part, because it was politically expedient for him to have them – and then, afterwards he did care about consistency. He only to modify some of that in a direction away from hate and personal attack.

Now about “civi liberties” I think he probably never violated any campaign promise, because he never made any. It’s true he didn’t close Guantanamo (in itself meaningless) but then he couldn’t.

Sometimes Obama gets highly impractical, or self-defeating, in the positions he takes.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/12/2013 @ 9:47 am

Interestingly, there is no evidence that the NSA under the Bush admin undertook to collect purely US to US resident data. They may have, but we did not see that ever revealed.

We do know that during the Bush admin, we had an attorney general willing to push back on the NSA in favor of our rights – John Ashcroft.

SPQR (768505) — 6/12/2013 @ 9:56 am

Finkleman, horse manure. Obama could close Guantanamo tomorrow. If he actually had the will.

SPQR (768505) — 6/12/2013 @ 9:57 am

It is possible that there is a bright side to all this? GWB was no doubt irresponsible and foolish to support the litany of “compassionate” policies that he did, and giving NSA the means to spy on all of was dangerous. However, he may have accidentally given us the means to fix Hte One’s responsibility for many of the scandals that are now being obfuscated and obscured … The phone and email records stored in the NSA database could be the equivalent of Nixon’s secret tapes.

If this is correct, look for a major flood of unknown origin in the Utah facility in the near future unless steps are taken by Congress immediately to secure the facility. But who would secure it? The FBI, Secret Service, Homeland Security? Hmmm …

bobathome (c0c2b5) — 6/12/2013 @ 10:04 am

you can’t honestly equate Bush with the JEFH.

Comment by redc1c4 (403dff) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:43 am

You can’t because Bush’s motives were more honest, and you could see that by how he conducted programs I still believe were excessive.

Finkleman, horse manure. Obama could close Guantanamo tomorrow. If he actually had the will.

Comment by SPQR (768505) — 6/12/2013

SPQR is right, and this is one of a million good examples of Obama’s bad faith. He offers us principles that he refuses to live by, hoping the media won’t call him out. The hysteria about Bush helps a lot, because privacy violation is now part of the GOP brand when really is part of both political party’s brands.

The problem with democrats is that their goal is singular: more power. There is no other consistency to the party’s goals over the years. We all knew that when a democrat took over his administration it would find ways to exploit all this new power for political ends. The IRS abuses of conservatives is the tip of the ice berg. DOJ’s electioneering (stubborn obstruction of voter reform) is another painful example.

No, Bush is not like Obama at all. But he did open doors for Obama.

Dustin (303dca) — 6/12/2013 @ 10:12 am

Bush kept us safe from Islamic terrorism, Obama keeps Al Qaeda terrorists safe from retaliation.

ropelight (e45149) — 6/12/2013 @ 12:32 pm

Dustin #16 – did Dubya “open doors for Obama” ? Or did Dubya open doors for honourable Presidents – and Pres’ent Obama went through said doors anyway ?

Alasdair (e7cb73) — 6/12/2013 @ 1:31 pm

7. No, this is Bush’s fault too. He set up this security state and did lots more beside. Doing so on the basis that the next President would have a good character was evil folly, and Bush violated people’s civil rights as well.

Comment by Former Conservative (6e026c) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:40 am

This is positively asinine. Bush didn’t “set up this security state.” It already existed. Just to jog people’s memory (which has apparently been destroyed by crack usage) I’ve linked to articles about “Carnivore,” which was essentially the precursor to PRISM, and that was during the Clinton administration. Yeah, Bush oversaw the expansion of the surveillance state. But the expansion wasn’t as great as the know-nothings would have you believe. Or at least it was no greater than it would have been even without the “War on Terror” or the Patriot Act.

The government wants what it calls total information awareness, and if can’t get it using one pretext it will get it using another. The real problem is that Congress is creating monsters it can’t control. By design.

Steve57 (7895a0) — 6/12/2013 @ 1:56 pm

Snowden’s most recent comments seem at this point to be bordering on Chinese propaganda. Maybe he is angling for more favorable treatment from an extradition hearing or something. The claims are also getting more ridiculous. Prism was an analysis platform, not a collection platform.

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1259508/edward-snowden-us-government-has-been-hacking-hong-kong-and-china

crosspatch (49bf90) — 6/12/2013 @ 2:40 pm

He does remember Christopher Boyce, who used the revelation of the Pine Gap facility, as an excuse
to start selling secrets to the Soviets.

narciso (3fec35) — 6/12/2013 @ 3:02 pm

Prism was an analysis platform, not a collection platform.

An important observation and a vital distinction. But I have to say that it’s common to use the name of the processing environment as shorthand for the information being processed and ultimately becomes output.

But this is why I wasn’t surprised that Google et al said they had never heard of PRISM. Why would they?

Steve57 (7895a0) — 6/12/2013 @ 3:04 pm

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100221535/is-edward-snowdens-story-unravelling-why-the-guardians-scoop-is-looking-a-bit-dodgy/

narciso (3fec35) — 6/12/2013 @ 3:09 pm

I think it is pretty well established at this point that the claim of real time access to providers’ servers is bunk. Much of the anxiety people have is rooted in speculation made by William Binney. Binney is on a crusade against NSA ever since they terminated his pet project and funded a rival project (Trailblazer) for development. He left in 2001, knows nothing about what has gone on there since 2001 and it is also likely that the projects he is familiar with are long gone.

crosspatch (49bf90) — 6/12/2013 @ 3:27 pm

Wrong picture. Obama is a lying dipstick pure and simple. It has nothing to do with Bush.

Comanche Voter (f4c7d5) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:10 pm

SPQR says:

Interestingly, there is no evidence that the NSA under the Bush admin undertook to collect purely US to US resident data. They may have, but we did not see that ever revealed.

I am interested in the answer to that, because I have seen a lot of people assert that. But the way I read this USA Today article from 2006, Bush did have such a program:

The NSA’s domestic program, as described by sources, is far more expansive than what the White House has acknowledged. Last year, Bush said he had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop — without warrants — on international calls and international e-mails of people suspected of having links to terrorists when one party to the communication is in the USA. Warrants have also not been used in the NSA’s efforts to create a national call database.

In defending the previously disclosed program, Bush insisted that the NSA was focused exclusively on international calls. “In other words,” Bush explained, “one end of the communication must be outside the United States.”

As a result, domestic call records — those of calls that originate and terminate within U.S. borders — were believed to be private.

Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers’ names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA’s domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.

Can anyone explain to me if this article was shown to be wrong, or if I am misreading it in some way?

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:24 pm

I’m interested in the evidence out there that shows Obama is doing something different/worse than Bush. So far, it sounds like most of this stuff started under Bush — but the facts are so fuzzy to me that I’m not sure. Perhaps it’s because I’m busy at work, but it could also be that the reporting I have read has not been clear.

Any help readers can give me, with quotes and links to back it up, would be appreciated.

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:26 pm

Were those claims verified, or were they as they say, ‘too good to check’

narciso (3fec35) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:27 pm

Easy peasy

Bush focused on Terrorists

Obama focused on Tea Partiers

E.PWJ (c3dbb4) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:29 pm

Were those claims verified, or were they as they say, ‘too good to check’

To what extent have Snowden’s claims been verified? Some of what he says sounds like bull to me.

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:31 pm

It’s been seven or eight years,

narciso (3fec35) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:32 pm

i think it is unfair to compare obama to bush.

obamas is like 200 times worse. at least bush was somewhat selective in his surveillance. obama takes everyone’s info.

if the reporting can be trusted…

Aaron "Worthing" Walker (23789b) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:34 pm

Lay the quotes and links on me…

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:39 pm

Meanwhile, I have a new post where I raised exactly this question. Perhaps that is the best place to discuss it.

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:40 pm

Easy peasy

Bush focused on Terrorists

Obama focused on Tea Partiers

With the phone metadata?? Is there any actual evidence anywhere to substantiate that claim, or are you just voicing your suspicion? (Which is a suspicion I share — but I recognize the difference between a suspicion and a proven fact.)

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:41 pm

I found this, Patterico. Litigation by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the NSA starting in 2006. A lot to wade through but it seems the same allegations as now were made against AT&T for sure and then other communications were added.

nk (875f57) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:41 pm

They went after Yoo, who crafted the surveilance as well as the interrogation rules, he was replaced by that weasel Goldsmith, they sought to charge him, even have him disbarred, for something a tiny fraction of what we see here.

narciso (3fec35) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:41 pm

This is certainly not the “proof” you seek, Patterico. But anecdotally there is no possible way that whatever domestic monitoring and data collection might have been secretly “put in place” after 9/11 under Bush can be at the same level as the current meta data scoop-up. That is because technology has changed and its forms increased so much since then. Think about it. Zuckerberg was still in college. Facebook was a small internal internet social group at Harvard. Twitter did not exist. Smartphones in infancy and held by only a few people. Android? uh uh. Google was still mostly just a search engine. Paypal and online banking in infancy. GPS not in all cars. On and On. It’s just a different technology world. And what “they” can know and connect together about innocent average citizens in 2013 is just so much more invasive now.

elissa (e42687) — 6/12/2013 @ 7:58 pm

Elisa – especially when google and Facebook and Verizon are just rolling over for their fellow traveler.

JD (b63a52) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:09 pm

But you guys are complaining about domestic surveillance, and PRISM is supposed to be foreign. The domestic stuff is the phone metadata, right?

Patterico (9c670f) — 6/12/2013 @ 8:30 pm

Pat

it would be interesting to see where exactly this domestic metadata is stored – if its offshore then is that a game changer…

Also replied in the wrong thread – but essentially – How do we know?

Obama would have used the Bush program in 2010 – 2012 to strengthen his party’s electoral chances the house, more governorships, a veto proof senate were all at his fingertips if Bush was spying

So that’s my rationale

E.PWJ (c3dbb4) — 6/12/2013 @ 9:22 pm

Patterico – in re phone metadata, it is my understanding that Bush did not get daily downloads of all domestic cell traffic on Verizon, for example. It is my understanding that his access related to suspected terrorists and their contacts, not a general warrant on the American people.

JD (129489) — 6/12/2013 @ 9:32 pm

JD: “It is my understanding ….” is not evidence, therefore unconvincing to Patterico, or to me either. Patterico is asking the same question which I ask repeatedly: Where is the evidence? You people give opinions, which is fine, but not nearly as convincing as evidence, except for those who are perfectly satisfied with the opinions they want to hear, then vilify those who present either opinion or evidence they do not want to hear.

Gramps2 (4df89c) — 6/13/2013 @ 7:30 am

Perry (cowardly hiding behind new IP and name)

Your comments must follow our copyright policy. Commenters who do not use a consistent name, and/or who use a proxy to post, are subject to banning. Profane language will place your comment in moderation.

JD (04b3a3) — 6/13/2013 @ 7:32 am

Perry – do not dare to presume to speak for Patterico. Your little “evidence” schtick is old and tired, and not at all what he is asking for. As is, he actually wants more info. You, in almost every instance, ignore all evidence presented that refutes your nonsense, while continuing to make things up.

JD (04b3a3) — 6/13/2013 @ 7:35 am

The height of hypocrisy is a guy demanding evidence from others while he’s concealing the evidence of his own identity.

Perry, if it’s possible for anyone to make a bigger fool of yourself than you already have, I’m confident you’re teh man for the job.

ropelight (80be4e) — 6/13/2013 @ 7:39 am

Wow, suddenly Bush has transformed into a saint who could do no wrong, but the facts beg to disagree. He was a nice man but not a great leader. Obama is not good too but we have the opportunity of judging his presidency because he is president now. Going by this thread, who knows, maybe in the next five years after 2016, Obama would be a god! Everything looks beautiful on hindsight.

The Emperor (3195bd) — 6/14/2013 @ 5:53 am

You remain an idiot, both in real time, and in hindsight.

JD (b63a52) — 6/14/2013 @ 6:14 am

More on the link, nice article, I totally agree. I believe that, in the future, aspirants would do well not to talk about or condemn policies of the incumbent they don’t understand. Only the man wearing the shoe really knows where it pinches him. I believe it is the responsibility of the commander in chief to do whatever he deems necessary, so long as it is right, to protect the lives of Americans. National security issues should not be subject to popularity polls and public opinion. For this I give credit to George Bush Jnr. He was not really interested in polls when it came to doing what he felt was the right thing to do, whether good or bad. Commendation should also be given to Obama for being humble enough to adopt policies of the his predecessor that he felt was good for the nation. It is a win-win for all. America wins.

The Emperor (ca9435) — 6/14/2013 @ 6:31 am

Only a true idiot calls someone an idiot because his intelligence is not able to grasp the words of that other person.

The Emperor (d25300) — 6/14/2013 @ 6:40 am

I have never, ever seen a better example of unintended irony. Hilarious.

Simon Jester (fa6bd1) — 6/14/2013 @ 6:50 am

I believe it is the responsibility of the commander in chief to do whatever he deems necessary, so long as it is right,

Nope. How about protect and defend the Constitution, and faithfully execute the laws of the US?

I completely understood what you said, lovie. You slaughtered a strawperson, as nobody is arguing Bush was a saint, or could do no wrong.

maybe in the next five years after 2016, Obama would be a god!

You and your fellow travelers elevated him to Lightworker god-like status a long time ago.

JD (b63a52) — 6/14/2013 @ 7:34 am

@jd
That is why you have the clause, “so long as it is right”, added there. Meaning as long as it does not break the laws of the land. Try reading with your mind next time. And it is typical of you to take my words totally out of context in your haste to attack another “enemy commenter”.

The Emperor (9229cf) — 6/14/2013 @ 7:47 am

6/12/2013

Surveillance Farm

53 Responses to “Surveillance Farm”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out