April 10, 2009

As the lingo goes, all you can do is "L.O.L."

Remember how "progressives" and libertarians were all up in arms about the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program -- you know, the one that allowed the gov. to listen in on a convo if one party was in a foreign country?

Imagine -- just IMAGINE -- what they'd have screamed had Bush done this:

Civilian libertarians were apoplectic over former President George W. Bush’s “warrantless wiretap” program, which sought to monitor communications from terrorist networks overseas. So why are they not screaming bloody murder now that President Barack Obama appears slated to receive unprecedented power to monitor all Internet traffic without a warrant and to even shut the system down completely on the pretext of national security? The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 - introduced by Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-WV, and cosponsor Olympia Snowe, R-ME - bypasses all existing privacy laws and allows White House political operatives to tap into any online communication without a warrant, including banking, medical, and business records and personal e-mail conversations. This amounts to warrantless wiretaps on steroids, directed at U.S. citizens instead of foreign terrorists.

As could easily be predicted, not a peep from our local gaggle of moonbat bloggers. They're too busy being concerned with the amazing theory that conservative talkers are "causing" people to turn violent. Amazing, that, considering how often they used to post about Bush "trashing" the Constitution.

Tell me again how our own governor saw fit to meet with these intellectual midgets??

Only our local libertarians have consistently been ... consistent, 'tho certainly Dana Garrett -- a real progressive -- and never-can-put-into-a-niche Mike Matthews surely have been too.

This all neatly fits into the paradigm I've long argued: It's not "bad" if liberals do it (or are for it) because the cause is "good" and "just." Any cause to the contrary, therefore, is inherently "bad" and must be demeaned and defeated at any cost. Even if, amazingly, it's picked up by a liberal shortly thereafter!!!

Posted by Hube at April 10, 2009 10:34 AM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

Well, I raled against Bush's wire-tapping and feel exactly the same about Obama's internet monitoring. And to be honest, I don't care who's holding the reins of power...mostly because it's been a long time since any of them were worth a damn. I need to play the lottery, win big and buy my own little island.

Posted by: Nancy Cleveland at April 10, 2009 05:18 PM

I heard that, Nance!

Posted by: Hube at April 10, 2009 05:25 PM

Hey, Perry, no comment on this one?

Posted by: Joe Stein at April 11, 2009 10:34 PM

No, he's too busy pretending to be Monica to Obama's Bill.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 12, 2009 09:08 AM

Of COURSE he has no comment on this one -- just like ALL phony self-righteous liberals.

He'll probably blame Karl Rove.

Posted by: Hube at April 12, 2009 09:18 AM

The continued silence in here from "Mr. Consistent" -- Perry -- is quite telling!

Posted by: Hube at April 12, 2009 05:31 PM

Be patient, Hube!

First of all, although the Bushies claimed to be monitoring only US-Overseas phone calls, it turned out they were doing domestic wiretaps as well. Moreover, they did not get warrants from the court to do so, therefore they were breaking the law -- pretty serious!!!

In this case, this is not Obama, it is Congress attempting to to enact a law to permit monitoring internet traffic, so if passed and signed by Obama, there would be no hiding what they are doing, as was the case with Bush.

Now is the time to write Congress and Obama, asking them not to approve this legislation or have it signed. Have you written anyone yet, Hube, or are you just screaming and yelling?

I oppose this legislation. I believe the authorities should still be required to go to court for a warrant. I will be contacting my Congressional representatives on this one.

Posted by: Perry at April 12, 2009 10:15 PM

"First of all, although the Bushies claimed to be monitoring only US-Overseas phone calls, it turned out they were doing domestic wiretaps as well"

Source, please.

"In this case, this is not Obama, it is Congress attempting to to enact a law to permit monitoring internet traffic, so if passed and signed by Obama, there would be no hiding what they are doing, as was the case with Bush."

So, to cut to the chase, even though this legislation goes way beyond anything Bush did, you make excuses for it because it has a "guise" of "better" legality. Just as I KNEW you would.

"Have you written anyone yet, Hube, or are you just screaming and yelling?"

Um, let's see ... I regularly write on and maintain a blog. Idiot.

"I oppose this legislation. I believe the authorities should still be required to go to court for a warrant. I will be contacting my Congressional representatives on this one."

That's mighty nice'a 'ya. But considering all your screaming and yelling (pot=kettle) about George Bush's "illegalities," "Karl Rove" this and that, etc., here you are making qualifications (again) for The Messiah and nicely stating "I will contact my representative!"

How quaint.

And don't forget we know why: Because you are FAR from the objective "even-handed" observer you claim to be.

Posted by: Hube at April 12, 2009 10:24 PM

Hube, your response is weak, immature, and meaningless! You can do much better!!

Nevertheless, here is one source of many.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5665192

Should I be surprised that you didn't know about Bush's domestic wiretapping? Where were you several years ago??

Posted by: Perry at April 12, 2009 10:40 PM

Actually, my response is right on the money.

"Should I be surprised that you didn't know about Bush's domestic wiretapping?"

Yes. Because your source states precisely what this post says (and what I've freely acknowledged in the past) -- that Bush and co. monitored traffic where at least one party was overseas. Taken from this link from the page you provided:

At issue is the extent to which the NSA has the legal authority to eavesdrop inside the country. The NSA conducts wiretapping outside the United States all the time, but after Sept. 11, the Bush administration directed the agency to include phone calls that started or ended in the United States, if one person was believed to be linked to al-Qaida.

How'd you miss that? Oh, that's right. You're Perry. Always making excuses for Obama; never at a loss to blame Bush, even when you can't adequately back up your point!

Posted by: Hube at April 13, 2009 08:13 AM

"...that started or ended in the United States...."

That's domestic, Hube, get real! And how do we know their criterion for "...believed to be linked to al-Qaida"? Knowing the slippery Bushies, would anyone expect them to adhere to that criterion?

And why was it warrantless? Did the Bushies have something to hide, something that would not pass the scrutiny of the FISA Court?

You are just as slippery as they, Hube!

Posted by: Perry at April 13, 2009 11:49 AM

Look troll, YOU said it was a "domestic surveillance program." In your first comment you first wrote "First of all, although the Bushies claimed to be monitoring only US-Overseas phone calls, it turned out they were doing domestic wiretaps as well."

But your link only states that the Bush admin. engaged in the FIRST type of surveillance -- US-foreign calls or the reverse!! In other words, you CLAIMED Bush was tapping domestic lines ONLY and supposedly provided a link to support that, but said link proved OTHERWISE.

Or, to put it more succinctly, you're a freakin' moron.

Who's slippery, troll?

Posted by: Hube at April 13, 2009 04:53 PM

Hube, you are quibbling. "Hayden defends domestic wiretapping" Enough said!

Moreover, why didn't the Bushies get warrants from the FISA court, Hube? You forgot to respond to this.

Posted by: Perry at April 13, 2009 05:11 PM

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5665192

Posted by: Perry at April 13, 2009 05:12 PM

Perry: Why is it so incredibly difficult for you to admit you f***ed up? There was NO [purely] domestic wiretapping program. You clearly said there WAS and attempted to show a link proving such. Showing headline is not "enough said." What it does is show you as the idiot that you are b/c you never READ the actual story.

Fact: You were WRONG. And now you continue to engage in BDS even though he's long gone, and ignore the ISSUE that Obama and the Democrats aren't only KEEPING the program going, they're taking even further!!

You're such a convenient ridiculous hack. Obama ought to hire you. Oh, wait. He's wants SMART people.

Posted by: Hube at April 13, 2009 05:18 PM

"First of all, although the Bushies claimed to be monitoring only US-Overseas phone calls, it turned out they were doing domestic wiretaps as well."

The article in your link -- NOT just the headlines, Perry! -- only cite the FORMER. You backtracked and said, "But oh -- 'domestic' MEANS uh, uh, part of the call was in the US!! Right, that's it!"

As for the FISA bit, I'm not arguing that. It's done. Bush and his lawyers had his reasons for skirting it; the issue now is why Obama wants to continue and EXPAND what Bush did. And all you can do (besides to cite recent BDS-infected history) is say "I'm gonna write my congressman!"

Terrific. Maybe being as vocal on the blogs as you were about Bush would be nice too, especially for one who claims not to be partisan and to be "consistent."

Posted by: Hube at April 13, 2009 05:24 PM

When will Perry condemn the evil ObamaHitlerBiden Regime?

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 13, 2009 07:41 PM

Hube, you continue to quibble. That which is perceived is reality. As my link demonstrates, many, including I, perceived that the Bushies were carrying out domestic wiretapping. I will grant you that my wording was careless, in fact, inaccurate. However, with the phone calls of American citizens being tapped, that, Hube, is domestic wiretapping.

Now that you have faced up to Bush's circumventing of the FISA Court, obviously against the law, I find myself in agreement with you if, yes, if Obama also skirts the FISA Court. We don't know that yet!

Posted by: Perry at April 14, 2009 10:05 AM

Rhymes, you disgust me with your constant spin, actually lies, about my consistent pro-life position. I can't help but think that you do this to mask your own inconsistency, since you adamantly support executions, and then claim the moral high ground. Unbelievable, therefore unconvincing!

Posted by: Perry at April 14, 2009 10:16 AM

"That which is perceived is reality."

And that says it all. OK, great -- I perceive you as a total, blubbering idiot. Therefore, it is reality.

Case closed.

Posted by: Hube at April 14, 2009 10:36 AM

Right, Hube, you got it!

Now shall I state my perception of you?

Posted by: Perry at April 14, 2009 11:18 AM

Whatever. That statement is the perfect encapsulation of your whole worldview. Whatever one perceives IS reality -- even if it blatantly is not so.

How can one even argue/debate someone who thinks that? So, it's all crystal clear now as to why it's so frustrating to engage you. No matter WHAT a situation actually is, merely because you PERCEIVE it "differently," that IS reality to you.

Thanks but no thanks. You're done.

Posted by: Hube at April 14, 2009 11:26 AM

What you fail so far to see, Hube, is that perception is reality to each individual.

I'm very surprised that you did not know that, and had to be told.

You youngins are still a bit wet behind the ears, and between the ears, well you still have a lot of learning to do, as do I too!

Posted by: Perry at April 14, 2009 02:59 PM

There's nothing in what I wrote that contradicts that, Perry. Note I said "Whatever ONE perceives IS reality -- even if it blatantly is not so."

You're out there, old man. As I said, with such a view, conservation is beyond futile. Troll here you will no more ...

*poof*

Posted by: Hube at April 14, 2009 03:09 PM

Well, Perry, you have certainly made it clear how you can call yourself "pro-life" for opposing capital punishment for murderers (even Hitler) while insisting upon legal protection for the extermination of the unborn -- you live in your own bizarre alternate reality!

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 15, 2009 06:05 AM