Live data from Hacker News

Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

politico.com

41–50 of 107 posts

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#41
post #13

There is another scary explanation, is that they have collected enough dirt on him and other politicians to become "untouchable"

It's not an explanation, it's probably the truth.

John Edgar Hoover did this with the FBI almost 100 years ago. Why would it have stopped? There's no reason for them to have stopped blackmailing folks. In fact there are several buildings bearing his name in DC

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#42
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't knock that approach - it's known as Sortition ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition ) and I'm personally convinced that it's a much better way of achieving democracy than any other.

I've argued for it for a few years but most people are aghast at the suggestion...

I have seen the same thing. I now firmly believe that most people understand that voting for representatives is a sham, but go along with it either for unstated reasons like tribalism and hero worship, or out of a deep seated misanthropy common to both the left and right wing.

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#43
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. In theory he has enough power, but if you look at how the whole system works, you don't get to become a president if you aren't a) owing a lot of people favours, and b) a kind of person that would be disruptive. If you're the uncontrollable type that would pose the risk to the status quo, you won't be allowed to rise high enough to become a president.

Except this is Obama at the peak of his hope and change moment, he'd just been comprehensively elected as an alternative to the Bush years. This was the perfect opportunity to essentially blame even more things on Bush and even cement his position, this was an opportunity to bury the GOP if he had broken this news. Ironically he was in a position to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize if he had taken action against this, G…

Didn't he stop the torture program?

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. In theory he has enough power, but if you look at how the whole system works, you don't get to become a president if you aren't a) owing a lot of people favours, and b) a kind of person that would be disruptive. If you're the uncontrollable type that would pose the risk to the status quo, you won't be allowed to rise high enough to become a president.

That is a very absurd argument, one I have heard several times in liberal circles. President of United States of America is the most powerful man in the world. He doesn't owe anyone anything. We elect him thinking he will do what he promised and the only retribution for him is that he will either be impeached or not get re-elected. That's it. That is democracy. Unless he had 'an offer he could not refuse', he is guil…

You did not elect Obama. The major news networks, in combination with the major holders of political and economic powers, did - by allowing you to be aware of a few handpicked candidates, and regulating the stories spinned around them.

If they did not want Obama in office, you would not even have seen his name anywhere on screen or in print.

Democracy in its true form has never existed in history as it is not really sustainable for many kinds of reasons, that all lead to disasters (people tend to vote for what is only good for them short-term leading to long-term losses, too many different groups arguing over X and Y and Z leading to stand-stills, etc).

I'm not saying we have it good right now, but it was for a while (last 150 years). But nothing lasts forever and eventually all systems decline and collapse.

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#45
After reading the book: Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President. I truly believe that the president (and maybe more so this president) is simply a figure head. Being surrounded by people of strong character he's been unable to be a commander and instead became someone with nice rhetoric.

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#46
post #43
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except this is Obama at the peak of his hope and change moment, he'd just been comprehensively elected as an alternative to the Bush years. This was the perfect opportunity to essentially blame even more things on Bush and even cement his position, this was an opportunity to bury the GOP if he had broken this news. Ironically he was in a position to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize if he had taken action against this, G…

Didn't he stop the torture program?

But that's as far as he went. He's hardly been shouting from the rafters about how America should not be a country which tortures, and especially in the light of the Congressional findings re the CIA's activities I'm amazed there haven't been prosecutions. Honestly McCain, on this particular issue, would have been a better president.

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#48
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A more reasonable explanation is that irrespective of what he might /want/ to do, he doesn't actually have sufficient power to do anything about the actions, assuming he's actually being accurately briefed on the matter. It's probably more a symptom of how absolutely useless and ineffective at doing anything than consuming money to be elected for corporate interests the US congress has become. I think at this point I…

> It's probably more a symptom of how absolutely useless and ineffective I truly don't believe this. Any popular uprising that gets large enough, or loud enough, has the capacity to demand change. Sure, the corporate, moneyed interests will push their agenda as hard as possible to try to sway opinion (which isn't always misaligned with the public good, by the way). But at the end of the day politicians will do what t…

The whole electoral process is so flawed and corrupt that a politician wanting to save their job has little to do with voting, and thus little to do with popular demand.

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very absurd argument, one I have heard several times in liberal circles. President of United States of America is the most powerful man in the world. He doesn't owe anyone anything. We elect him thinking he will do what he promised and the only retribution for him is that he will either be impeached or not get re-elected. That's it. That is democracy. Unless he had 'an offer he could not refuse', he is guil…

You did not elect Obama. The major news networks, in combination with the major holders of political and economic powers, did - by allowing you to be aware of a few handpicked candidates, and regulating the stories spinned around them. If they did not want Obama in office, you would not even have seen his name anywhere on screen or in print. Democracy in its true form has never existed in history as it is not really…

Your 3rd and 4th paragraph are a very poor excuse for this undemocratic system. Other countries are doing much better. But attitudes like this won't get you there.

Re: Why Obama did not stop NSA domestic surveillance

#50
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've argued for it for a few years but most people are aghast at the suggestion...

I have seen the same thing. I now firmly believe that most people understand that voting for representatives is a sham, but go along with it either for unstated reasons like tribalism and hero worship, or out of a deep seated misanthropy common to both the left and right wing.

Who is "most people"? Almost 2/3 of voters in midterm congressional elections are over 45--are you really considering a representative pool of people in forming your belief?

The majority of voters have the representatives they want (approval rates for peoples' own Congresspeople are extremely high). If you keep in mind the demographics that bother to vote (my 65 year old mom, but not my 30 year old wife and I), they have the government they want too. My mom is super excited about Hilary and would vote for life imprisonment for drug dealing if anyone put it on a referendum.

Post reply on HN