Live data from Hacker News

Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

nytimes.com

101–110 of 199 posts

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#101
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a really sad and poor way to concern yourself with how our society governs itself.

There's just no way to do it from the bottom. All these protests, all this (sl)activism, it doesn't do anything. You either need to dedicate your life to politics and get into the club and start working from the inside, and pray some holy fucking deity that there are others like you, or nothing will change. Maybe severe violent revolt but I literally don't ever see that happening. There isn't enough time in the day t…

If you want long-term results, the bottom is the place to do it from. Popular culture and social taboos are pretty much the only way to influence a power structure that's not interested in being influenced.

In 2014, there simply isn't any way a lawmaker or bureaucrat could start a program aimed at punching babies (for example). Legal or not, sensible or not, it would never pass because that's not something you do. Likewise: If people really valued liberty and there was social pressure to support it, there would never be mass spying even if in theory it were legal—because no one would propose it, no one would support it, and no one would associate with anyone who did.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#102
It is not probably a good idea surround yourself with the people you need to control.

Obama spends most of his time going to eat-dinner with the same rich people that benefit from printing money. The rest of the time it is with the praetorian guard that "protects" him.

Anybody believes he is going to make the same people he surrounds most of the time furious? The same people that put him in charge?

This people are the eyes and ears of the "king of the world". He is living in a bubble.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#103
post #83
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, the American people are and have been the most heavily propagandized people on Earth. I sympathize with your desire to tell people to step up and take personal responsibility, but the truth is that many people can't even think straight. Look at how many people consistently vote against their own interests, identify with their oppressors, etc.

> the American people are and have been the most heavily propagandized people on Earth You have heard of North Korea, I hope?

Can you spot the irony?

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#104
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is fascinating how people lay blame. The most common thing I see is my fellow Americans blaming politicians, bankers, school teachers, lobbyists, cops, unions, almost anyone... except themselves. The truth is, the American people are the problem, and they've spent the last few decades doing everything possible to avoid personal responsibility for the shape of the country.

> It is fascinating how people lay blame. Oh, yes, very much so! For example, you seem quite effortlessly to lay blame on three hundred or so million people, and that's only counting those alive right now, with no consideration for those who've predeceased us, at least some of whom presumably could be expected, in your formulation, to have had a hand in creating the situation you so readily decry. But laying blame, w…

Wiggle out of what? I didn't say blame is bad, I said it's fascinating how people lay blame, and specifically what / who they choose to blame (anybody but their own self typically).

I have absolutely no problem taking my share of responsibility as an aware American, for the state of the country (I never said otherwise, you merely incorrectly inferred it). I don't see a very large percentage of people willing to do that these days.

Accepting personal responsibility in a democracy is a critical requirement to then taking action to change the conditions of a nation. So I strongly disagree that laying blame rarely does anything (throwing false blame around at every object you can, however, does nothing)

I say the buck stops with the American people. I'd argue that far more often than not, a country reflects its people. This isn't North Korea, we're not a Communist slave pen.

I believe it's blatantly obvious why America is eroding across nearly every measurement - and has been for decades - and I think it's obvious The People must be the root of it. Politicians come and go, Presidents come and go, Fed chairpersons come and go, corporate leaders come and go, educators come and go. The culture is created by and evolves with the people of a nation. The politicians that get elected are a direct reflection of the culture. The people set the standard for the culture, and that culture is what rules a nation, on its ethics, its beliefs, its standard of 'the good' or fairness, or whatever else you want to refer to.

If the ~250 million adult Americans are not responsible for the state of their country, who exactly would be? The Russians? The Chinese? The British?

Who voted Obama into office? Who voted Bush into office? Who voted Reid into office? Who voted Boehner into office? Who voted Pelosi into office? Who voted all their priors into office? Who allowed that to happen by inaction? And on and on it goes, encompassing the radical majority of Americans, either directly or indirectly by willful inaction. Who else is at fault for the net value of the elected representatives of the last ~50 years, if not the people of America?

How many are standing by, not saying a word, not lifting a finger, even while they disagree with what's happening? How many don't even disagree? My personal observation and opinion say that's a scary number as well.

Who has failed to rise up and protest or take action (voting, informing, etc) against the endless wave of scandals and violations going back decades leading to our current condition as a country? That would be: the extreme majority of Americans.

Who bought into the fear pandering? Who is still buying into it?

Who has bankrupted the country financially by more than happily licking up all the obviously fraudulent political promises? And then going back to the trough to ask for more. What do you think the soon to be $20 trillion in public debt that can never be repaid (or even reduced) went to? To buy votes of course, on both sides of the aisle.

Meanwhile the Republicans blame the Democrats, and the Democrats blame the Republicans, and the majority sit and watch Leno instead of doing something about the politics and shape of the country (both of which they supposedly think are terrible per polls). Inaction, complaining and paralysis rules the majority - all by choice.

Who favored the war response after 9/11? The radical majority of Americans, blatantly.

The security policies since 9/11? Where's the wide spread protesting? Didn't exist, doesn't exist. Where was the large scale outrage over the Patriot Act? Didn't exist.

Who doesn't show a bit of outrage at the droning - murder - of innocent civilians overseas? The radical majority of Americans.

Who is numbing themselves 24/7 in a endless orgy of consumerism - which has been going on increasingly for decades - while the core fundamentals of the economy just keep rotting out from under them (you of course realize the actual unemployment rate isn't 6.7%), as they stay perpetually hooked on cheap consumer financing?

Who's supposedly wildly unhappy with Congress? And what have they done about it the last few elections? Well a quick check on the voter turnout numbers tells you all you need to know: the majority mostly complains and not much else.

It's a culture that can't wait to put itself to sleep so it doesn't have to think (see the hyper self-medicating that Americans are doing for example).

Who is looking the other way as the NSA, FBI, DEA, CIA, TSA, DHS and an endless parade of agencies violate an endless list of laws and Constitutional lines in the sand? Where were the American people as Hoover reigned for decades? Willfully absent in their give-a-shit of course. Well Hoover set the standard for illegal spying on the American people.

Who is not caring one iota about the cause of their health problems, and just keeps on gorging the soda and fast food, not exercising, ballooning in obesity, and whining about health care costs, looking to blame anyone and everyone but themselves for their condition? It's the insurance companies, it's the doctors, it's the hospitals, it's Obamacare, it's the politicians. No, it's the majority of Americans.

Who was happy to borrow an ever increasing amount of easy money for college? Whose fault is that? The politicians? The Fed? Educators? Bankers? Or the people that take out the loans and the system they haven't cared to do anything about? Zero personal responsibility, find someone else to blame for it. It's unfair they forced Joe to sign up for $80,000 in student loans, obviously. Americans are unhappy with education costs? I've got a brilliant idea: take action - 20 years ago - and work on a solution instead of whining about it and putting it off.

The housing bubble? The corporate leaders blame the people that took out the loans, the people that took out the loans blame the greedy corporate leaders, others blame the Fed, or real estate agents, or brokers, or or or. Oh look, turns out it's the fault of the American people mostly as a whole for doing absolutely nothing about their broken system. It's a bankrupt culture of consumerism.

They don't want the budget cut, they don't want entitlements cut, and they don't want to pay higher personal taxes, and or they want someone else to foot the bill, and so on. They want a much higher minimum wage, but they don't want to pay 25% more for the things they buy at McDonalds or Walmart. I believe this general attitude represents the vast majority (not every single person).

This attitude of blame someone else pervades nearly every aspect of American culture. I say: start with taking personal responsibility for your role (however big or small), and then do your best to take actions to correct the problems you see. It's about America becoming an involved democracy.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#105
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a really sad and poor way to concern yourself with how our society governs itself.

Roughly 125 million people voted in the last presidential election. Had I been among them, I'd therefore have had roughly 1/125,000,000 of a say in who gained the office. Perhaps, to a homeopath, such a marvelous dilution of political power might leave something meaningful in its wake. Not being a homeopath myself, I find it somewhat less than compelling. I fail to see how resignation in the face of inevitable powerl…

Your analysis does not take into account the 2000 election.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it really have to be that cynical? Don't you think it is entirely possible pre-2008 Obama's opinions were formed with the same information as the rest of us and post-2008 Obama received more information (national security briefings) that completely blew away his belief system? I don't agree with much of what the Obama administration has done regarding domestic and international surveillance but I always feel lik…

Good point. I used to be more sympathetic to that line of reasoning. It's tightly coupled to the argument for the existence of state secrets... granting the state the power not to act in a fully transparent manner. How might any institution act if it wanted to earn the credibility to behave in a way that was non-transparent to its constituents? A firm might pay out consistent dividends or go public and comply with th…

I agree with your points, I'd personally prefer full transparency over anything else but that is something that needs to be hashed out by the legislative branch, which conveniently gets very little blame. If any of us have an issue with the way government surveillance is performed we shouldn't be looking at the President, we should be looking at Congress since they control the budget and can pass laws to limit actions they find are in legal grey lines.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#107
post #3

The headline might as well be a more Onionesque "After gaining power, politician turns out not to actually hold the strongly principled views he expressed while campaigning". I'd be surprised if Obama holds any of the views he expressed during his campaign. A campaign is a marketing effort intended to install a team of people in power. Generally speaking, the vast majority of power holders agree that aggressive spyin…

Does it really have to be that cynical? Don't you think it is entirely possible pre-2008 Obama's opinions were formed with the same information as the rest of us and post-2008 Obama received more information (national security briefings) that completely blew away his belief system? I don't agree with much of what the Obama administration has done regarding domestic and international surveillance but I always feel lik…

If so it took about 3 days.

http://c-spanvideo.org/videoLibrary/transcript/transcript.ph...

See the question and non-answer at 17:36.

The first time I saw that live on C-SPAN my heart actually sank. It was huge wasted opportunity for the people, through their direct donations to a candidate, to make things better. In that moment the President-Elect proved one of two things: he had no idea what was going on, or he willfully misrepresented the notion of reform through the election. A third possibility is even more frightening, something or someone changed his position for him.

But more than that, the President-Elect laughed it off as a joke, as if asking a question about the state of intelligence reform was the same thing as asking the contents of the PDB, as if the plebs simple weren't entitled to a straight answer on something affecting the function of 'their' government. And this wasn't a nobody asking, it was Candy Crawley (I believe, the transcript did not state that but her first name was given as Candy.)

We elected an former Constitutional scholar as President, and he appointed a Civil Rights division lawyer as Attorney General, and they have seriously damaged both the Constitution (whose spirit remains the saving grace of this nation) and Civil Rights and Liberties.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#108
post #51

From the article: "Mr. Obama was acutely aware of the risks of being seen as handcuffing the security agencies. 'Whatever reforms he makes, you can be sure if there’s another incident — and the odds are there will be in our history — there’ll be someone on CNN within seconds saying if the president hadn’t hamstrung the intelligence community, this wouldn’t have happened,' Mr. Axelrod said." And so, the wheel keeps tu…

If theres ever a time to do the right thing, it's in the President's second term: it's all downhill, what the pundits say doesn't matter to re-electability, since there is none (unless you plan on going to another office later on...)

If the President wants to accomplish anything in his second term -- which is the point of holding the office -- than he still needs to maintain popular support. The public can't (generally) vote him out of office any more, but they can vote out his allies in the House or local/state government.

Unless the President is just hoping to shut everything down. Almost by definition he can do that without cooperation.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not current and it's not a crisis. It's working exactly how it was designed to work. We changed, not them. The Internet disrupted the popular perception of democracy by creating a massive global communication channel that is not under the control of the people in power.

It is fascinating how people lay blame. The most common thing I see is my fellow Americans blaming politicians, bankers, school teachers, lobbyists, cops, unions, almost anyone... except themselves. The truth is, the American people are the problem, and they've spent the last few decades doing everything possible to avoid personal responsibility for the shape of the country.

A system that relies on all of it's constituents being informed and politically active in order to be successful is structurally unsound. This in my opinion is the true problem with our representational democracy. I am wary of blaming people who have difficulty day to day making ends meet for not caring enough about spying, etc.

Re: Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

#110
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it really have to be that cynical? Don't you think it is entirely possible pre-2008 Obama's opinions were formed with the same information as the rest of us and post-2008 Obama received more information (national security briefings) that completely blew away his belief system? I don't agree with much of what the Obama administration has done regarding domestic and international surveillance but I always feel lik…

If so it took about 3 days. http://c-spanvideo.org/videoLibrary/transcript/transcript.ph... See the question and non-answer at 17:36. The first time I saw that live on C-SPAN my heart actually sank. It was huge wasted opportunity for the people, through their direct donations to a candidate, to make things better. In that moment the President-Elect proved one of two things: he had no idea what was going on, or he wil…

You realize The President got his very first intelligence briefing the day before that press conference right?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/05/obama-to-rec...

Post reply on HN