Obama, telecom lobbyists, and the Patriot Act

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
So. It seems our new POTUS is taking the same position as Bush on the Patriot Act. Not only has his administration strenthened it, he is now officially protecting the industry, and it's lobbyists. How he can talk about change and transperancy and continue many of the same policies Bush did shows he is nothing more than...a politician. He is really not different. He should be impeached and tried as Bush should have been for this.

Oh well.

Obama Protects AT&T, Verizon Lobbying Records

A Federal Judge has demanded, three times now, that the Obama Administration hand over documents that highlight how major phone companies AT&T and Verizon lobbied for legal immunity for their involvement in the government's warrantless wiretap program. The government, with no real legal footing to stand on, has now tried to delay that release three times in order to keep those documents out of the ongoing Congressional discussion about domestic wiretapping.

Interestingly, Politico has obtained a leaked government e-mail that suggests that even if and when the Obama Administration releases the documents, they may continue to protect the names of the companies involved in the lobbying. A government filing from yesterday offers Uncle Sam's murky position on why:
"Disclosure of such information would assist our adversaries in drawing inferences about whether certain telecommunications companies may or may not have assisted the government in intelligence-gathering activities," Justice Department lawyers argue in the new motion. "Disclosure of the identities of those individuals and entities that may have assisted, or in the future may assist, the government with intelligence activities could impede the government's ability to gather intelligence information."
Of course leaks have already suggested AT&T and Verizon are the major players here, though there may be dozens of other companies involved. If the Obama administration is acting to shield these companies from financial damage, that raises questions about whether that's the government's job (and a good use of tax dollars). It also obviously violates the administration's transparency campaign promises. Given how hard the government is fighting against the release of these documents, you have to be curious about what new information they might contain.

UPDATED: Once Again, Government Moves to Delay Release of Telecom Lobbying Documents

October 15th, 2009
This evening, the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice filed yet another emergency motion with the Ninth Circuit, asking for a stay of the deadline to release telecom immunity lobbying documents, less than 24 hours before the documents are due to be released to the public.

Almost simultaneously, a report appeared on Politico.com, claiming that the government will be releasing some documents, while fighting in court to hide the remainder. Despite this report, the government's motion seeks to delay disclosure of all the documents, and no new documents have been released just yet.

For those following this saga, this is deja vu all over again. Last week, when the documents were due to be turned over by Friday, October 9, the government asked the Court of Appeals for a stay, a motion that was denied by the Ninth Circuit in short order. Later that same afternoon, the government asked Federal District Court Judge Jeffrey White for an additional delay, a request that Judge White ultimately denied, giving the government a new deadline of Friday, October 16, by 4 p.m. Pacific time.

This has been a long fight -- since 2007, EFF has been working towards the release of these records after media reports revealed an extensive lobbying campaign seeking immunity for telecoms that participated in the government's unlawful surveillance program. As we've said before, we look forward to receiving the documents and making them public so that they can play a much-needed role in the active congressional debate over repealing telecom immunity.

UPDATED October 16, 3:15pm: Friday morning, EFF filed opposition to the government's motion. The government then filed a reply.

3:50pm: In order to give itself more time to decide whether to grant the requested stay, the Ninth Circuit Court has extended the deadline for disclosure of documents another week, until 5pm PT on Friday October 23.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
This is wrong, telcom immunity is wrong, and Obama should stand up and say so. I don't know why he's not, but I wish he would, stopping stupid police state crap is a big part of why I voted for him instead of McCain.

But seriously, enough of the self-serving "outrage" from people. You love to beat up on Obama for this...but I doubt many people making this argument really WANT Obama to be different from Bush, they just see it as a convenient way to attack him. If Obama DID reverse all PATRIOT ACT and telcom immunity (or at least lead the charge in Congress, I think people forget being President doesn't give you absolute power), no doubt most of the same people attacking him now would start attacking him for "endangering the nation" or some such. The real issue here is that some people don't like Obama.

Part of me would like to believe that a lot of folks have been turned around on telcom immunity and the excesses of the Bush administration in the name of keeping us safe, and they want Obama to really do something about it. But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
chucky lol

but what did people expect? that obama was really going to be a real change? lol
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck

Pretty much sums it up.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Rainsford
This is wrong, telcom immunity is wrong, and Obama should stand up and say so. I don't know why he's not,

Obama (rahm) is very good at holding his cards. If you have been paying attention, the only time he releases info on the prior administration, or changes his position on some of their policies, is when he has his ass backed into a corner. He calls on and controlls the fringe element in his party with this tactic.

Watch closely during his Health care sales pitch....
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
It's too early to make too many enemies if he has any hope for a second term. I hope he's just stalling and will drop a lot of these bombs after re-election. The opposition has set a low bar for him to stay above. Unless that changes there's no reason to make any larger waves than he's already made. Though I expect some considerable waves at some point and will be upset if they don't materialize.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Rainsford
This is wrong, telcom immunity is wrong, and Obama should stand up and say so. I don't know why he's not, but I wish he would, stopping stupid police state crap is a big part of why I voted for him instead of McCain.

But seriously, enough of the self-serving "outrage" from people. You love to beat up on Obama for this...but I doubt many people making this argument really WANT Obama to be different from Bush, they just see it as a convenient way to attack him.

Really, the OP is wetting in his shit soiled pants that the Messiah isn't able to change his hero's buddies lock on the Industry and the Government.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Rainsford
This is wrong, telcom immunity is wrong, and Obama should stand up and say so. I don't know why he's not, but I wish he would, stopping stupid police state crap is a big part of why I voted for him instead of McCain.

But seriously, enough of the self-serving "outrage" from people. You love to beat up on Obama for this...but I doubt many people making this argument really WANT Obama to be different from Bush, they just see it as a convenient way to attack him.

Really, the OP is wetting in his shit soiled pants that the Messiah isn't able to change his hero's buddies lock on the Industry and the Government.

Well, I was kinda hoping Obama would be different.

 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's too early to make too many enemies if he has any hope for a second term. I hope he's just stalling and will drop a lot of these bombs after re-election. The opposition has set a low bar for him to stay above. Unless that changes there's no reason to make any larger waves than he's already made. Though I expect some considerable waves at some point and will be upset if they don't materialize.
Yep, esp if those enemies would be lobbyists aka corporate whores. See Ausm's post.

 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck

That's pretty hypocritical...you're the forum macro now, you're just irritating in a different way. You are EXACTLY what you hated about the foaming at the mouth crowd constantly attacking Bush during his Presidency.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck

That's pretty hypocritical...you're the forum macro now, you're just irritating in a different way. You are EXACTLY what you hated about the foaming at the mouth crowd constantly attacking Bush during his Presidency.

Attacking the messenger isnt always a bright plan.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Rainsford
This is wrong, telcom immunity is wrong, and Obama should stand up and say so. I don't know why he's not,

Obama (rahm) is very good at holding his cards. If you have been paying attention, the only time he releases info on the prior administration, or changes his position on some of their policies, is when he has his ass backed into a corner. He calls on and controlls the fringe element in his party with this tactic.

Watch closely during his Health care sales pitch....

That's probably part of it, honestly. But I also wonder how much of it is the ever present concern among Democrats of being attacked as "weak on national security".

Obama is also very good at paying attention to popular response, and I wonder what he learned from the "closing Gitmo" debate early in the year. He took a, IMHO, principled stand on the issue, and Republicans IMMEDIATELY started attacking him like he was going to release terrorists into your backyard, waging a campaign as fear-mongering as it was ridiculous. Even months later I STILL can't believe the idiotic things said by, among other people, actual Congressmen about the supposed evils closing Gitmo would bring. And rather than being laughed out of town, people BELIEVED the Republicans, to the point where it is becoming very difficult to find an alternative place to house the Gitmo detainees because of people protesting every site that's considered.

My point is that as political savvy as Obama is, he must realize that people apparently still don't have the capacity to think intelligently about terrorism related issues. And while I would admire him for falling on his sword trying to reverse all of Bush's bullshit, I can understand if he'd rather be able to govern. Obama may be President, but he's still President of a Democracy, and The People are pretty braindead when it comes to national security. Those of us on the left wanted a lot of change on that front, but I unfortunately still think I'm in the minority there.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck

That's pretty hypocritical...you're the forum macro now, you're just irritating in a different way. You are EXACTLY what you hated about the foaming at the mouth crowd constantly attacking Bush during his Presidency.

Attacking the messenger isnt always a bright plan.

If he had a message, I'd be more than happy to discuss it. Just trying to start trouble and derailing a thread in a post complaining about derailed threads does, in fact, seem pretty hypocritical to me.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck

That's pretty hypocritical...you're the forum macro now, you're just irritating in a different way. You are EXACTLY what you hated about the foaming at the mouth crowd constantly attacking Bush during his Presidency.

Nah, I'm not derailing nearly every thread here with a meaningless list of links that are taken out of context and don't touch upon what was going on at that time, with that info, with those type of internal and external forces acting on those decisions.

What I do like is watching, or in this case not watching, all the folks who were so Enlightened, "non-partisan", "fair", etc. when 'Bush&Co' was in power, and, who were/still are sucking Obama's c0ck at every opportunity pre and post election, choke on it as Obama does what 'Bush&Co' did, and in some cases, is even worse.

After watching Obama&Co play these suckers for an election, it's poetic justice.

:thumbsup:

Chuck
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Cool. Now just revive every thread from when 'Bush&Co' was in power, and call out every Lefty in those threads as they derailed them.

When you do that, then maybe I'll entertain your concern for my supposed derailment of this thread.

Deal?

Chuck
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Rainsford
....

But the more cynical part of me thinks those folks are just playing politics with security issues...again. Bush part 2 indeed.

It's weird, I haven't seen the forum Macro kick in with 345u348ty456y4564e30584586y4568456 links with Obama and everyone on his team talking transperancy, "repeating mistakes", etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc........

What do you think happened to the forum Macro? I remember during the Bush days, nearly every thread would become sidetracked and polluted with it's tripe, but, weirdly, Obama gets elected, does the same things as 'Bush&Co', and.......silence.

Weird huh?

Even more weird is all the rest of the Enlightened who were posting frothing at the mouth posts of rage when 'Bush&Co' were in charge, well, they aren't derailing threads with their inane behavior either. At most I see an occasional, 'I'm not happy with this.". No 10 paragraph rants? No spittle flying posts questioning Obama's intelligence and qualifications for being POTUS?

Maybe all these folks are still at the Obama got elected circle jerk...hands must be too slick to type I guess...

Chuck

That's pretty hypocritical...you're the forum macro now, you're just irritating in a different way. You are EXACTLY what you hated about the foaming at the mouth crowd constantly attacking Bush during his Presidency.

Nah, I'm not derailing nearly every thread here with a meaningless list of links that are taken out of context and don't touch upon what was going on at that time, with that info, with those type of internal and external forces acting on those decisions.

What I do like is watching, or in this case not watching, all the folks who were so Enlightened, "non-partisan", "fair", etc. when 'Bush&Co' was in power, and, who were/still are sucking Obama's c0ck at every opportunity pre and post election, choke on it as Obama does what 'Bush&Co' did, and in some cases, is even worse.

After watching Obama&Co play these suckers for an election, it's poetic justice.

:thumbsup:

Chuck

People take sides in politics, often at the expense of actual discussion of the issues. Which sucks, but the folks on Obama's side are hardly the exception. This forum is FULL of people who care about nothing but attacking Obama. Maybe not with the link macros, but it's just as annoying.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: chucky2
Cool. Now just revive every thread from when 'Bush&Co' was in power, and call out every Lefty in those threads as they derailed them.

When you do that, then maybe I'll entertain your concern for my supposed derailment of this thread.

Deal?

Chuck

I think politics should be about issues, not people. But while we're at it, why is your concern just for lefties, not the Bush supporters currently being irritating in every Obama related thread?
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Attacking the messenger isnt always a bright plan.

It is when the messenger is not so bright

I filled up my tank today at BP...I tell ya, that F'ing $10 gas is a killer.

Chuck