If you have "no place to go," come here!

Blame the voters!

Balloon Juice:

No, you want to see the villain, look in the mirror. It’s the pants-wetting populace of the United States, who votes for these assholes who pass bad laws in moments of crisis, because we have to do something and because Americans, unlike every other nation in the world, have a god given right to be safe at all times from all things.

Fuck you all. The only thing that might save this country from a couple more weeks of this partisan bullshit obscuring important issues is maybe we’ll get lucky and a cute young blonde girl will get kidnapped and we can move on to something else.

The "cute young blonde girl" is the world weary cynicism -- once they are realists, but that rotted -- that seems to be the most powerful defensive mechanism left in the Obama supporter's arsenal. Not with a bang, but a collective shrug, as it were.

Thing is, some of us don't have to "look in the mirror" at all. Some of us saw Obama for what he was and called him out on it at the time, right when he flip-flopped and voted for retroactive immunity for the telcos. And some noticed, though not, of course, the Obama supporters.

Yeah, and who said the Fourth Amendment and a government of secret law are "important issues," anyhow?

NOTE Of course, it's not Obama's fault:

Obama is not the villain here, he’s just dealing with the laws as they were passed, and it looks like they did everything correctly and followed the letter of the law.

RIght, right, which some unseen force just made Obama do. Because Obama can never fail. He can only be failed.

NOTE Hat tip, joe6pac.

No votes yet


jo6pac's picture
Submitted by jo6pac on

would like the reason given why this happen from bj.

Notorious P.A.T.'s picture
Submitted by Notorious P.A.T. on

So many things to comment on. Do the BJ folks really believe this is a partisan issue, leaked by the Republicans to discredit Obama? If so, why wouldn't the Republican-controlled House be holding hearings? Does the fact that wiretapping everyone is legal mean the NSA *must* do it, thus keeping Obama blameless? And if voters are to blame for this state of affairs, isn't an attempt to change voters' minds like what Mr. Snowden is doing a commendable effort?

jo6pac's picture
Submitted by jo6pac on

the bj crowd has moved on to bashing GG for making all about him and the other guy well he might just be leading GG on and he not that bright any way

Then there's this were this guy couldn't have this much access. I known a few people with this kind of access and their only goal was to have tunnel vision and stay away from were they didn't need to be.

The spin is just getting better and better and if you read comments at yahoo or hufferposter then we are doomed as a nation. There's just to many that believe it's OK to give up your rights here in the New Amerika.

Jay's picture
Submitted by Jay on

Wrong. It's not legal by black letter law. When a case came up to the Supreme Court, they said that since the program is secret, the plaintiffs couldn't sue, and therefore had no standing. But you can't vacuum this info up, or call it "metadata," as though your phone number doesn't have anything specifically to do with you, in particular. Give me your phone number and I will tell you whether you have an innie or an outie, how much your medication for depression cost and which pharmacy you buy it from, and the basis for which your employer may terminate your employment on grounds of moral turpitude.

Don't buy into the "it's all perfectly legal" bullshit. There's no metric for an appropriate degree of proctological freedom from the NSA. Three inches isn't too much, one inch isn't too little, and two inches isn't "just riiiiight." They need a warrant, and for a warrant they need cause. There is no cause for millions of individual Americans.

tom allen's picture
Submitted by tom allen on

[Big Brother] is not the villain here, he’s just dealing with the laws as they were passed, and it looks like they did everything correctly and followed the letter of the law.

You just have to love the "Hey, it's all legal!" defense. I doubt that all the surveillance is legal, but even if it were, that makes it worse. Orwell's Thought Police were totally within the law too -- hell, they enforced it.

"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized."

-- 1984

Submitted by MontanaMaven on

Last night on "Left Jab" radio show, Mark Walsh said that he did not want an open debate on this subject. Because to open it up to debate would involve low information citizens and would not be productive. Wow, a very straightforward elitist position said without a blink.
To his credit, the very good sports writer, Dave Zirin was a guest. He said, "But that would make it a self-fulfilling prophecy". To not include all citizens and give them all the information needed to make decisions would continue to promote "infantilization". The people will stay infantile if they are treated that way. I was relieved that he made that point.

wanderindiana's picture
Submitted by wanderindiana on

That there is even a "debate" on the violation of Constitutional rights shows just how far down the rabbit hole we are, and how much will be required to take back those rights.