Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying • Hacker News Board

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

#161

Post by wmeredith » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:21 PM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #157

wmeredith wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NSA existing in a state that doesn't stop terrorist attacks is the status quo (it's the same as them not existing at all). It doesn't need proving. If they want to spy on everyone in the world all the time and their reasoning is that it makes Americans safer, then the burden of proof is very much on them.

the burden of proof is very much on them But who do they have to prove it to? The public, or the people they actually report to?

They're salaries are paid in tax dollars. The public is who they report to.

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

#162

Post by wylee » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:25 PM UTC

adventured wrote: post #33

TelmoMenezes wrote: post #18

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.

When I was born, on the day of my birth, how much personal responsibility did I have for the state of the USA and the world in general? (None)

When did I start to have the even the most basic understanding of what's really going on in the world?

At what point did I become culpable?

At that point, what power did I have to actually influence anything (given 400+ years of policy, expansion, entrenchment, racism, etc).

I agree to an extent that individuals can and should take some personal responsibility, but that doesn't address systemic effects. And the mere notion that we should take some responsibility doesn't lead to an effective course of action.

Suggesting that we vote (which someone else suggested).. well, that's almost comical given the premise of the thread, which is that you can't trust politicians, no matter how progressive or sincere they might seem.

As much as I do take responsibility (and feel guilty about not doing more), I still haven't figured out how to have any real influence.

I've spent plenty of time complaining about other people and their lack of participation too, and I'm not sure what difference that has made. Merely pointing out the problem (or what I perceive the problem to be) doesn't change anything by itself.

Edit: Added a word. Formatting.

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

#163

Post by eof » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:27 PM UTC

dllthomas wrote: post #82

eof wrote: post #78

My heart sunk when Obama won the election the first time; not because I wanted McCain to win, or that I had any actual hope that one of the third-parties could win; but because everyone was so happy. I was in Burlington, VT; about as liberal a town as you will find in the USA; and there was a strong anti-war movement. That anti-war movement bought Obama's promises hook-line-and-sinker and the same people that were ou…

So, if your analysis is correct... what do we do about it?

vote third party only

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

#164

Post by United857 » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:29 PM UTC

psaintla wrote: post #71

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…

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…

A good test of this hypothesis is this: if Hillary Clinton runs for President, what would be her take (support or oppose)?

Unlike Obama the Senator, as Secretary of State she would have served on the National Security Council and would have been privy to much of the same intelligence info. Therefore, if she's still opposed on surveillance issues vs. Obama, that would be a very telling sign.

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

#165

Post by afterburner » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:38 PM UTC

aaronem wrote: post #85

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…

Well, to be sure, the job always seems to turn their hair white. On the other hand, I'm easily cynical enough to wonder whether a modern president's staff hairdresser is expected to have an unusual degree of skill with dyes and bleaches.

Or:

Before election: dye hair, look energetic.

After election: don't bother dyeing, look like you're settling into the position.

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

#166

Post by afterburner » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:42 PM UTC

equalarrow wrote: post #74

Sigh, I guess this is nothing new. Obama's the ultimate (in my mind) say one thing, do another. At least with Bush we knew he was just a bad guy that didn't give a shit for anything other that war, greedy buddies, and a good walk on the ranch. With Obama, yah, he came in as the 'outsider' (typical of all candidates I suppose) with all these things he would 'Change' (Shepard Fairey anyone?). But alas, it's been one di…

"At least with Bush we knew"

The vast majority of people took Bush at his word for a long time, especially on matters of war. The recognition of the deceit in the mainstream came long after.

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

#167

Post by aaronem » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:49 PM UTC

mturmon wrote: post #152

aaronem wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You could take the outcome as indication that the popular will is always thwarted -- I'm not here to convince you otherwise, and your wording indicates you are up on the soapbox (Augean stables, really?). There's no outer bound to cynicism. My interpretation is that a thousand votes in Florida would have swung the election, so Florida voters and abstainers were quite powerful indeed. Often it's hard to tell for sure…

I'm not terribly much in favor of mob rule in the first place, but even if I were, it wouldn't further enamor me to see events like the result of the 2000 election. Yes, a relative few voters in Florida found themselves, by accident of history, in possession of political power far outstripping what their numbers would suggest, but given that no one can either plan for or expect such historical accidents, how can they possibly benefit anyone who desires either political power or predictable government? (If predictability isn't considered a cardinal virtue of government, I'm not sure why it isn't.)

And, yes, Augean stables, really. Call it soapboxing if you like, but I'm hardly the only one to express a similar opinion of Baltimore city politics.

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

#168

Post by rfnslyr » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:49 PM UTC

brown9-2 wrote: post #125

rfnslyr wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How do you think that movements to legalize marijuana or the increasing acceptance of same-sex marriage work? These were bottom-up political movements.

Legalizing a plant versus fixing the political system are two completely different devils. Existing in the same "realm" hardly compares the two.

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

#169

Post by sliverstorm » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 8:53 PM UTC

wmeredith wrote: post #161

sliverstorm wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the burden of proof is very much on them But who do they have to prove it to? The public, or the people they actually report to?

They're salaries are paid in tax dollars. The public is who they report to.

Indirectly, yes, but you are oversimplifying.

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

#170

Post by res0nat0r » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 9:24 PM UTC

fit2rule wrote: post #43

What I'd really like to know is what process does the President-elect endure that turns him into an alien lizard from hell? I mean, seriously .. its like black and white with Obama. Pre-Presidentiality, Obama was real. After-President'ness, he's become some obscure caricature of all other Presidents who came before him.. So is there some sort of secret Presidential chamber that all the past Presidents get to donate t…

> What I'd really like to know is what process does the President-elect endure that turns him into an alien lizard from hell?

I'm going to go with it's the /r/politics and HN echo chamber.

The President's approval ratings are at all time lows right now and it has nothing to do with the NSA (which the majority of the USA is just fine with right now btw), it is due to the rollout of the ACA. I'm sure once things related to the ACA smooth over and keep improving between now and his end of term his ratings will slowly be climbing back up, barring anything major going on in the world.

Just because every other post in /r/politics is about how terrible everyone that works for the government is, and every NSA post (way too often here now unfortunately) on HN is evil, does not mean the majority of the USA thinks that way. Actually it is quite the opposite.