Obama’s Path From Critic to Overseer of Spying

Gerald · 01-16-14, 03:05 PM

Quote:

WASHINGTON — As a young lawmaker defining himself as a presidential candidate, Barack Obama visited a center for scholars in August 2007 to give a speech on terrorism. He described a surveillance state run amok and vowed to rein it in. “That means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens,” he declared. “No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.”

Way to go,you talking with double tongues Mr.Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/us...ref=world&_r=0

Note: JAN. 15, 2014

Ducimus · 01-16-14, 03:12 PM

There's a whole litany of things he said in the past, and then did the exact opposite later. If one is bored, look around youtube, it's well documented on video. After all the reversals, i have come to the reasonable (yes reasonable) conclusion that If Obama says one thing, expect a high likelihood of the opposite of what he said to happen.

vienna · 01-16-14, 03:35 PM

Not all that unusual: the history of the office of President is rife with changes of position by officeholders once they are sworn in as President. This is true of both parties. Sometimes it is a case of deliberate deception on the part of the candidate pre-election, but in many cases, the change results from a sudden awareness of actual situations faced once one sits in the Oval Office. It is one thing to criticize the person in office while campaigning or make unknowledgeable promises based on perceptions; once faced with the facts, limitations, or aspects hidden, for one reason or another from public knowledge (or sometimes from the actual Presidents themselves), not to mention the myriad of political cosiderations, the old saw of "the best laid plans" has a harsher ring of truth. I have often tried to imagine what it must be like to be a newly elected President and get the first official status briefings from the various Cabinet members, Department chiefs, national security/military chiefs, etc. Imagim=ne the things the new President hears we have no concept of...

<O>

Ducimus · 01-16-14, 04:40 PM

The actions of past office holders needs to stopped being used as an excuse for the actions of current office holders. Just because Soandso did something doesn't give justification for doing it as well. "W" deciding to jump off a cliff or saying "stop shoving the constitution in my face it's just a damn piece of paper", doesn't mean it's ok for Obama to do so as well.

People need to stop towing their party lines and start demanding integrity and accountability from all ALL office holders. The "they all do it" excuse just doesn't wash anymore in my opinion.

01-16-14, 05:05 PM

Shocking news, it appears that politicians are suspected of not telling the truth

Gerald · 01-16-14, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Shocking news, it appears that politicians are suspected of not telling the truth

the_tyrant · 01-16-14, 05:35 PM

Of course not, he is an addict.
For decision makers, there is nothing more addicting than information.
A friend of mine who is ex-stasi tells me that information is the greatest addiction, far more addictive than heroin or nicotine.
Think about it like this:
before we had easy access to information through channels like the internet, we make many decisions blind. Should I buy this car, or that car? Well back in the day all I had was magazines and what the dealer tells me to base my decision on. Nowadays with the internet, I can literally read millions of reviews, and check every little detail of the car in question. I would never buy a car without checking the internet now.
Imagine playing an RTS game, but with you as the only player who can see every unit on the map. Thats what the politician feels like.
Imagine the same thing with a politician. Why would he make blind decisions when he has a powerful source of information? Why would he “go blind” into a decision making process?
This is why at most I believe Obama would pay lip service to limiting the NSA, but not actually do anything about it. After all, if my buddy in the Stasi can find work post Berlin wall in intelligence (he is private sector now), and most of his Stasi and KGB buddies can still find work (mostly with successor organizations), I believe the same thing with happen with the NSA. Maybe some of them will get “fired”, some would end up working for the private sector, but most will be rehired as an “outside consultant”

vienna · 01-16-14, 05:36 PM

I didn't say one president was using the actions of a predecessor as justification for his own actions. I said there are some aspects of some situations a new president might use as campaign fodder only to be hit with the harsh realities once he actually is sworn into office. Neither he nor any of us would know, to full extent, the many variables, "ifs, ands, or buts", or the posiible delicacies and tipping point of particular issues until he sits in that chair in the White House. This lack of full knowledge of the nature of situations is not limited to the realm of politics; it exists in everyday life. There are a great many situations where persons have siad "Well, if I were in charge, things would run differently" only to backtrack once they found out what the situation really is all about. I was once the Accounting Supervisor at a large Beverly Hills law firm. The high level financial decisions were made, originally, by a committee of senior partners. However, it became difficult to assemble all or the majority of committee members at any given time, so they hired a Controller. The Controller would then oversee both the Senior Accountant (my boss) and myself. THe new Controller came in and immediately went into meetings with the Senior Accountant to design new methods for dealing with his new position and the operations of the Accounting Department. I was not asked to be involved mainly beacuase I did not have a college degree (actually, no college at all and only a high school education with no accounting courses) and the Controller did not consider me "qualified". I actually thought one of his first actions would be to fire me. However, I did run the entire Accounting Department and the Senior Accountant merely received final figures on various aspects of the Department and really had know working knowledge of the flow of work or the ramifications of various Department activities. She just took my "bottom line" figures and created financial reports for the committee.

One day, the controller called me into his new office. The Senior Accountant was there, also. THe Controller started to lay out his new plans. Near the beginning of his presentation, I saw a major problem and tried to bring it up; he told me to shut up and wait until he finished. I had the sense he was going to use whatever objections I might have as an excuse to fire me. I waited as he continued, with the Senior Accountant nodding along her agreement with his plan like some sort of bobblehead doll. He finnaly finished and said "I want you to implement this immediately!" I said "I can't", and he shouted back "Are you saying you refuse to do as I say?!" The specter of termination was in the room. I calmly told him "I am saying your system is incompatible with almost all the reporting structures and the way the senior partners have demanded accounting operations be conducted". He was stunned. I thena asked if he had tolked to certain of the senior partnerswhose names I listed off; he had not I then asked if he was aware of the intricate relationship between the varios reports and the manner in which they interwove. He was not. I left his office and came back wirth several binders report binders. I laid out the entire process, showing him where his plan would conflict, and the various pitfalls that would draw the ire of the Senior Partners and the Chairman of the Board, in particular. The Senior Accountant had ceased bobbling and was now a bit panic stricken. She realized I was right and, with a bit of hesiataion and fear, told the Controller I was actually correct.

I was able to help the Controller to understand how the Department functioned in relation to the whole of the firm itself and aided him in coming up with a better plan that would achieve most of his goals and avoid any confrontations with the Seniors or any one else in the firm. If he had taken the time to become more aware of what existed before he got the job and consulted with the people who actually do the work, he could have avoided any turmoil.

But, in the situation of the Presidency, there is no real opportunity to do deep research. There is very little briefing when one is a candidate. The out going POTUS or defeated incumbent is not likely to tip his hand and play it close to the vest. The candidate never really knows where all the tendrills reach until he wins the vote and becomes the POTU-elect. It is only then he gets the briefings by the various agencies; it is only then he sees what is really behind the curtain of the great and mighty OZ. We don't know what sorts of highly classified, "need to know" situations exist beyond the data we get in the media and, really neither does he until the briefings. It is one thing to make a promise based on suppositons and another thing to realize you can't because of some very hard, cold facts. It is really not fair to make blanket condemnations about "failure" to keep rpomises when we don't really know the landscape of the entire situation. It is not an excuse, it is a fact of life, a fact at all levels...

BTW, I wasn't fired and actually had my salary increased by 60% over the next year after the arrival of the Controller. I also had the satisfaction, when I did decide to move on, of having the Controller thank me and tell me I had really "saved his ass" several times during our time working together. Knowledge is powerful; supposition is not...

<O>

Admiral Halsey · 01-16-14, 05:45 PM

Time to grab some popcorn it seems.

Armistead · 01-16-14, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna

Not all that unusual: the history of the office of President is rife with changes of position by officeholders once they are sworn in as President. This is true of both parties. Sometimes it is a case of deliberate deception on the part of the candidate pre-election, but in many cases, the change results from a sudden awareness of actual situations faced once one sits in the Oval Office. It is one thing to criticize the person in office while campaigning or make unknowledgeable promises based on perceptions; once faced with the facts, limitations, or aspects hidden, for one reason or another from public knowledge (or sometimes from the actual Presidents themselves), not to mention the myriad of political cosiderations, the old saw of "the best laid plans" has a harsher ring of truth. I have often tried to imagine what it must be like to be a newly elected President and get the first official status briefings from the various Cabinet members, Department chiefs, national security/military chiefs, etc. Imagim=ne the things the new President hears we have no concept of...

<O>

I don't buy that. I think any one with common sense knows a lot is going on behind the scenes and pretty much what is going on, most us average types can figure that much. I think he preached a hard party line to get in office and knew he would play the game in office. It's pure politics, say one thing, do another. We all knew Bush was doing a lot of spying and why he was, but the fact is Obama expanded it more to spy on Americans than the enemy.

Jimbuna · 01-17-14, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Shocking news, it appears that politicians are suspected of not telling the truth

Far too quick for me.

Ducimus · 01-17-14, 06:46 AM

The most adept at bypassing and going around the supreme law of the land, is a constitutional lawyer turned Politican.

01-17-14, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

We all knew Bush was doing a lot of spying and why he was, but the fact is Obama expanded it more to spy on Americans than the enemy.

Is it a fact, and can you define "the enemy"?

Take jihad jane and the marathon nuts for starters.
Americans or "the enemy"?

Wolferz · 01-17-14, 12:17 PM

http://news.msn.com/us/nsas-control-...-be-terminated

Gonna cut it all back like a hedge that's become overgrown.

Now, let's see what he trims and what he lies about trimming.

With age comes knowledge, with knowledge comes wisdom

Ducimus · 01-17-14, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolferz

http://news.msn.com/us/nsas-control-...-be-terminated

Gonna cut it all back like a hedge that's become overgrown.

Now, let's see what he trims and what he lies about trimming.

With age comes knowledge, with knowledge comes wisdom

If you like your Privacy you can keep it.

01-16-14, 03:35 PM	#3
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Not all that unusual: the history of the office of President is rife with changes of position by officeholders once they are sworn in as President. This is true of both parties. Sometimes it is a case of deliberate deception on the part of the candidate pre-election, but in many cases, the change results from a sudden awareness of actual situations faced once one sits in the Oval Office. It is one thing to criticize the person in office while campaigning or make unknowledgeable promises based on perceptions; once faced with the facts, limitations, or aspects hidden, for one reason or another from public knowledge (or sometimes from the actual Presidents themselves), not to mention the myriad of political cosiderations, the old saw of "the best laid plans" has a harsher ring of truth. I have often tried to imagine what it must be like to be a newly elected President and get the first official status briefings from the various Cabinet members, Department chiefs, national security/military chiefs, etc. Imagim=ne the things the new President hears we have no concept of... <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __

01-16-14, 05:35 PM	#7
the_tyrant Admiral Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 2,272 Downloads: 58 Uploads: 0	Of course not, he is an addict. For decision makers, there is nothing more addicting than information. A friend of mine who is ex-stasi tells me that information is the greatest addiction, far more addictive than heroin or nicotine. Think about it like this: before we had easy access to information through channels like the internet, we make many decisions blind. Should I buy this car, or that car? Well back in the day all I had was magazines and what the dealer tells me to base my decision on. Nowadays with the internet, I can literally read millions of reviews, and check every little detail of the car in question. I would never buy a car without checking the internet now. Imagine playing an RTS game, but with you as the only player who can see every unit on the map. Thats what the politician feels like. Imagine the same thing with a politician. Why would he make blind decisions when he has a powerful source of information? Why would he “go blind” into a decision making process? This is why at most I believe Obama would pay lip service to limiting the NSA, but not actually do anything about it. After all, if my buddy in the Stasi can find work post Berlin wall in intelligence (he is private sector now), and most of his Stasi and KGB buddies can still find work (mostly with successor organizations), I believe the same thing with happen with the NSA. Maybe some of them will get “fired”, some would end up working for the private sector, but most will be rehired as an “outside consultant” __________________ My own open source project on Sourceforge OTP.net KGB grade encryption for the rest of us

01-16-14, 05:36 PM	#8
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	I didn't say one president was using the actions of a predecessor as justification for his own actions. I said there are some aspects of some situations a new president might use as campaign fodder only to be hit with the harsh realities once he actually is sworn into office. Neither he nor any of us would know, to full extent, the many variables, "ifs, ands, or buts", or the posiible delicacies and tipping point of particular issues until he sits in that chair in the White House. This lack of full knowledge of the nature of situations is not limited to the realm of politics; it exists in everyday life. There are a great many situations where persons have siad "Well, if I were in charge, things would run differently" only to backtrack once they found out what the situation really is all about. I was once the Accounting Supervisor at a large Beverly Hills law firm. The high level financial decisions were made, originally, by a committee of senior partners. However, it became difficult to assemble all or the majority of committee members at any given time, so they hired a Controller. The Controller would then oversee both the Senior Accountant (my boss) and myself. THe new Controller came in and immediately went into meetings with the Senior Accountant to design new methods for dealing with his new position and the operations of the Accounting Department. I was not asked to be involved mainly beacuase I did not have a college degree (actually, no college at all and only a high school education with no accounting courses) and the Controller did not consider me "qualified". I actually thought one of his first actions would be to fire me. However, I did run the entire Accounting Department and the Senior Accountant merely received final figures on various aspects of the Department and really had know working knowledge of the flow of work or the ramifications of various Department activities. She just took my "bottom line" figures and created financial reports for the committee. One day, the controller called me into his new office. The Senior Accountant was there, also. THe Controller started to lay out his new plans. Near the beginning of his presentation, I saw a major problem and tried to bring it up; he told me to shut up and wait until he finished. I had the sense he was going to use whatever objections I might have as an excuse to fire me. I waited as he continued, with the Senior Accountant nodding along her agreement with his plan like some sort of bobblehead doll. He finnaly finished and said "I want you to implement this immediately!" I said "I can't", and he shouted back "Are you saying you refuse to do as I say?!" The specter of termination was in the room. I calmly told him "I am saying your system is incompatible with almost all the reporting structures and the way the senior partners have demanded accounting operations be conducted". He was stunned. I thena asked if he had tolked to certain of the senior partnerswhose names I listed off; he had not I then asked if he was aware of the intricate relationship between the varios reports and the manner in which they interwove. He was not. I left his office and came back wirth several binders report binders. I laid out the entire process, showing him where his plan would conflict, and the various pitfalls that would draw the ire of the Senior Partners and the Chairman of the Board, in particular. The Senior Accountant had ceased bobbling and was now a bit panic stricken. She realized I was right and, with a bit of hesiataion and fear, told the Controller I was actually correct. I was able to help the Controller to understand how the Department functioned in relation to the whole of the firm itself and aided him in coming up with a better plan that would achieve most of his goals and avoid any confrontations with the Seniors or any one else in the firm. If he had taken the time to become more aware of what existed before he got the job and consulted with the people who actually do the work, he could have avoided any turmoil. But, in the situation of the Presidency, there is no real opportunity to do deep research. There is very little briefing when one is a candidate. The out going POTUS or defeated incumbent is not likely to tip his hand and play it close to the vest. The candidate never really knows where all the tendrills reach until he wins the vote and becomes the POTU-elect. It is only then he gets the briefings by the various agencies; it is only then he sees what is really behind the curtain of the great and mighty OZ. We don't know what sorts of highly classified, "need to know" situations exist beyond the data we get in the media and, really neither does he until the briefings. It is one thing to make a promise based on suppositons and another thing to realize you can't because of some very hard, cold facts. It is really not fair to make blanket condemnations about "failure" to keep rpomises when we don't really know the landscape of the entire situation. It is not an excuse, it is a fact of life, a fact at all levels... BTW, I wasn't fired and actually had my salary increased by 60% over the next year after the arrival of the Controller. I also had the satisfaction, when I did decide to move on, of having the Controller thank me and tell me I had really "saved his ass" several times during our time working together. Knowledge is powerful; supposition is not... <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __ Last edited by vienna; 01-16-14 at 06:09 PM.

01-17-14, 12:17 PM	#14
Wolferz Navy Seal Join Date: May 2007 Location: On a mighty quest for the Stick of Truth Posts: 5,963 Downloads: 52 Uploads: 0	Now he's saying this... http://news.msn.com/us/nsas-control-...-be-terminated Gonna cut it all back like a hedge that's become overgrown. Now, let's see what he trims and what he lies about trimming. With age comes knowledge, with knowledge comes wisdom __________________ Tomorrow never comes

01-16-14, 03:12 PM	#2
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	There's a whole litany of things he said in the past, and then did the exact opposite later. If one is bored, look around youtube, it's well documented on video. After all the reversals, i have come to the reasonable (yes reasonable) conclusion that If Obama says one thing, expect a high likelihood of the opposite of what he said to happen.

01-16-14, 04:40 PM	#4
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	The actions of past office holders needs to stopped being used as an excuse for the actions of current office holders. Just because Soandso did something doesn't give justification for doing it as well. "W" deciding to jump off a cliff or saying "stop shoving the constitution in my face it's just a damn piece of paper", doesn't mean it's ok for Obama to do so as well. People need to stop towing their party lines and start demanding integrity and accountability from all ALL office holders. The "they all do it" excuse just doesn't wash anymore in my opinion.

01-16-14, 05:05 PM	#5
Tribesman Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Shocking news, it appears that politicians are suspected of not telling the truth

01-16-14, 05:45 PM	#9
Admiral Halsey Best Admiral in the USN Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: USS Enterprise (CV-6) Posts: 1,740 Downloads: 317 Uploads: 0	Time to grab some popcorn it seems.

01-17-14, 06:46 AM	#12
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	The most adept at bypassing and going around the supreme law of the land, is a constitutional lawyer turned Politican.