Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 199 posts

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

#111

Post by grandalf »

ilovepolitics wrote: post #94
psaintla wrote: post #71

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…

It's a combination of hubris and intentional ignorance on the part of OP and others like him. It's really fascinating to see otherwise intelligent people completely unable to challenge their own beliefs about the nature of the world. Is Obama simply reacting to new information he has been made privy to since becoming the president? Is it possible that there are genuine threats to America that are not made public? Is…

Your comment reads like some kind of passage from scripture, offering humble ignorance of reality and blindly placing trust in some entity to take care of your best interest.

In the real world, it's clear that institutions become corrupt. Enron is one example. So is GroupOn. So is the NSA.

I suppose you think we should not let our faith be shaken by the revelation that corruption has been found in some NSA programs. The Catholic church has made a similar argument about why its members should still continue to support the institution even though it was found that it systematically placed priests accused of child abuse in other parishes.

We have new information, and so it's perfectly reasonable to reconsider our previous worldview. Sure we can just accept the institutional response at face value, but if we hope to reform the system we ought to be critical and expect actual change to occur.

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

#112

Post by aaronem »

TelmoMenezes wrote: post #103
aaronem wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

I can spot a few different things at which you might be aiming the word "irony", but I'm not sure at which one of them, if any, you actually are.

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

#113

Post by aaronem »

mturmon wrote: post #105
aaronem wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In saying this, you seem to express the opinion that I've missed something crucial. Would you like to explain what that is?

If anything, I should think that having seen the express popular will set at naught, by the actions of a few professional gerrymanderers, would add even more point to my analysis.

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

#114

Post by chongli »

nsns wrote: post #9
grandalf wrote: 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…

" A campaign is a marketing effort intended to install a team of people in power. " You've just described the current crisis of representational democracy.

No, just the current crisis in a subset of electoral systems. A voting system such as Range Voting[0] would go a long way towards solving these problems, predominant among them being the issue of spoilers.

[0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_voting#Example

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

#115

Post by collyw »

mcv wrote: post #58
aaronem wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> What would you have us do? -- all three hundred million of us, of course. Vote. For for better people. That is the basis of any democracy. You don't blindly follow your leaders, and you don't blame them for their mistakes and carry on as if there's nothing you can do about it, because you can do something about it. You can vote them out, and vote better people in. The fact that those three hundred million Americans…

> Vote. For better people.

Obama was the best option was he not?

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

#116

Post by downandout »

grandalf wrote: 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…

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.

Usually we at least get to learn about candidates' fundamental views before electing them. A pro-life candidate, for example, isn't suddenly going to change that view after taking office. Even the much-maligned George Bush generally acted in keeping with the fundamental beliefs that he told the country he held prior to his election.

This is what is so disturbing about Obama and his supporters. He told them bald faced lies about his fundamental views, and is fairly unapologetic about it. Even worse, the vast majority of his supporters are OK with that. They have shown politicians that lying to us is fine as long as the lies are delivered with enough polish. That paves the way for even more egregious activities going forward.

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

#117

Post by grandalf »

psaintla wrote: post #106
grandalf wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 action…

> we should be looking at Congress

I 100% agree. However I am not sure whether what the NSA has been doing had any kind of congressional oversight. It certainly should.

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

#118

Post by joering2 »

grandalf wrote: 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…

> We should not be surprised that Obama did not reverse any of Bush's controversial decisions because they were not actually controversial among those with power or with the potential to gain power.

We are not surprised out of the blue; we are deeply disappointed, as he clearly won elections based on promises he pretty much knew he cannot keep.

Similarly this would be like getting into relationship based on trust and someone shows you their big house, their boat, their company, claim they can have children and care about animals, while within a time, it turns out that person is a neutered scumbag that runs a horse-kill house and that house and boat was his friend. And then he tells you "what do you expected honey, I wanted to be with you, this is normal that I lied otherwise I wouldn't win your affections".

Sure, plenty of us could do that; its just a matter of choosing one or another side of life: good or bad. If Obama knew he cannot change anything and continue anyways, he's just a scumbag like any other scam artist.

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

#119

Post by rummikub »

His administration's descent on this issue has been disappointing. I mean how is the quote any different than something that would have come out of the previous administration?

“There are people out there every day who are plotting. The notion that we would put down a tool that would protect people here in America is hard to fathom.”

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

#120

Post by quaunaut »

crusso wrote: post #96
clarkmoody wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's high time to repeal the 17th Amendment and return a fair bit of power to the states. This would ease the democracy crisis and decentralize some of the power from D.C.

Yeah, the power structure in DC has gotten way too comfortable for the people living there. Look at how unaffected the DC housing market was by the crisis over the last 6 years. The people in Washington aren't going to relinquish any of their power, though. An Article V convention of the states is about the only hope. http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/enacting_the_liberty_...

> Look at how unaffected the DC housing market was by the crisis over the last 6 years.

You mean the same way most American cities went?

http://timiacono.com/wp-content/uploads/10-11-30_cs-hpi.png

Post reply on HN