Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants....appears to extend to e-mail and text messages too
1 view
Skip to first unread message
MattB .
Jun 16, 2013, 1:50:18 PM6/16/13
to
NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants
National Security Agency discloses in secret Capitol Hill briefing
that thousands of analysts can listen to domestic phone calls. That
authorization appears to extend to e-mail and text messages too.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-admits-listening-to-u.s-phone-calls-without-warrants/
The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified
briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to
domestic phone calls.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed this week that
during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the
contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst
deciding that."
If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is
sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler
said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney and
congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.
Not only does this disclosure shed more light on how the NSA's
formidable eavesdropping apparatus works domestically, it also
suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal
surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to
eavesdrop on phone calls.
Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply
to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, Nadler's
disclosure indicates the NSA analysts could also access the contents
of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking
approval.
The disclosure appears to confirm some of the allegations made by
Edward Snowden, a former NSA infrastructure analyst who leaked
classified documents to the Guardian. Snowden said in a video
interview that, while not all NSA analysts had this ability, he could
from Hawaii "wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal
judge to even the president."
There are serious "constitutional problems" with this approach, said
Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier
Foundation who has litigated warrantless wiretapping cases. "It
epitomizes the problem of secret laws."
The NSA yesterday declined to comment to CNET. A representative said
Nadler was not immediately available. (This is unrelated to last
week's disclosure that the NSA is currently collecting records of the
metadata of all domestic Verizon calls, but not the actual contents of
the conversations.)
Earlier reports have indicated that the NSA has the ability to record
nearly all domestic and international phone calls -- in case an
analyst needed to access the recordings in the future. A Wired
magazine article last year disclosed that the NSA has established
"listening posts" that allow the agency to collect and sift through
billions of phone calls through a massive new data center in Utah,
"whether they originate within the country or overseas." That includes
not just metadata, but also the contents of the communications.
William Binney, a former NSA technical director who helped to
modernize the agency's worldwide eavesdropping network, told the Daily
Caller this week that the NSA records the phone calls of 500,000 to 1
million people who are on its so-called target list, and perhaps even
more. "They look through these phone numbers and they target those and
that's what they record," Binney said.
Brewster Kahle, a computer engineer who founded the Internet Archive,
has vast experience storing large amounts of data. He created a
spreadsheet this week estimating that the cost to store all domestic
phone calls a year in cloud storage for data-mining purposes would be
about $27 million per year, not counting the cost of extra security
for a top-secret program and security clearances for the people
involved.
NSA's annual budget is classified but is estimated to be around $10
billion.
National Security Agency discloses in secret Capitol Hill briefing
that thousands of analysts can listen to domestic phone calls. That
authorization appears to extend to e-mail and text messages too.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-admits-listening-to-u.s-phone-calls-without-warrants/
The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified
briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to
domestic phone calls.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed this week that
during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the
contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst
deciding that."
If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is
sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler
said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney and
congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.
Not only does this disclosure shed more light on how the NSA's
formidable eavesdropping apparatus works domestically, it also
suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal
surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to
eavesdrop on phone calls.
Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply
to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, Nadler's
disclosure indicates the NSA analysts could also access the contents
of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking
approval.
The disclosure appears to confirm some of the allegations made by
Edward Snowden, a former NSA infrastructure analyst who leaked
classified documents to the Guardian. Snowden said in a video
interview that, while not all NSA analysts had this ability, he could
from Hawaii "wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal
judge to even the president."
There are serious "constitutional problems" with this approach, said
Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier
Foundation who has litigated warrantless wiretapping cases. "It
epitomizes the problem of secret laws."
The NSA yesterday declined to comment to CNET. A representative said
Nadler was not immediately available. (This is unrelated to last
week's disclosure that the NSA is currently collecting records of the
metadata of all domestic Verizon calls, but not the actual contents of
the conversations.)
Earlier reports have indicated that the NSA has the ability to record
nearly all domestic and international phone calls -- in case an
analyst needed to access the recordings in the future. A Wired
magazine article last year disclosed that the NSA has established
"listening posts" that allow the agency to collect and sift through
billions of phone calls through a massive new data center in Utah,
"whether they originate within the country or overseas." That includes
not just metadata, but also the contents of the communications.
William Binney, a former NSA technical director who helped to
modernize the agency's worldwide eavesdropping network, told the Daily
Caller this week that the NSA records the phone calls of 500,000 to 1
million people who are on its so-called target list, and perhaps even
more. "They look through these phone numbers and they target those and
that's what they record," Binney said.
Brewster Kahle, a computer engineer who founded the Internet Archive,
has vast experience storing large amounts of data. He created a
spreadsheet this week estimating that the cost to store all domestic
phone calls a year in cloud storage for data-mining purposes would be
about $27 million per year, not counting the cost of extra security
for a top-secret program and security clearances for the people
involved.
NSA's annual budget is classified but is estimated to be around $10
billion.
Mitchell Holman
Jun 16, 2013, 2:48:11 PM6/16/13
to
MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote in
news:ifurr85pjtl32o0k0...@4ax.com:
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks,
President Bush secretly authorized the National Security
Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the
United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity
without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required
for domestic spying, according to government officials.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html
news:ifurr85pjtl32o0k0...@4ax.com:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks,
President Bush secretly authorized the National Security
Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the
United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity
without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required
for domestic spying, according to government officials.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html
MattB .
Jun 16, 2013, 3:24:05 PM6/16/13
to
going to change things for the better not just use the past as a
excuse.
Didn't Obama claim this???
http://gopcampaigner.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/obama.jpg
Was that just another lie?
Robert Fitzgerald
Jun 16, 2013, 4:37:00 PM6/16/13
to
misunderstand..
My personal guess would be the NSA is storing the audio of all calls, and
does speech-to-text analysis of it.. Software goes through it, and
alerts analysts etc.. Then, with whatever court order - which might be
as simple as sending an email and getting a reply back in a minute - the
can listen to it if they want to.
Reading the text might be considered legally something else..
Maybe it's just looking for Arabic and not too good at the Chechen
language..
In any case, the officials are willing to lie/etc. on the details
clearly.. Plus, it doesn't seem to work out so well overall.. But might
serve as a deterrent to terrorists if nothing else.. as I see it..
So, who knows which version is true..
hotair:
http://tinyurl.com/lqyvecn
Update (AP): Did the NSA really say in a classified briefing that it can
listen in on calls without a warrant, or did Nadler simply get confused?
Here’s his new statement to BuzzFeed:
“I am pleased that the administration has reiterated that, as I have
always believed, the NSA cannot listen to the content of Americans’ phone
calls without a specific warrant.”
Read the transcript of his exchange with Mueller to see where he erred.
The NSA told him that they could get “specific information” about a
suspicious phone number without a FISA warrant. Nadler somehow took that
to mean that they could tap that phone number and listen in. As Kevin
Drum and Julian Sanchez noted last night, though, “specific information”
may simply have meant metadata and phone records for the number, not the
actual contents of phone calls. To actually tap a line, they need FISA
approval. That’s what Mueller was trying to tell him.
--
Bobby - I remember Bill (Evans)
MattB .
Jun 16, 2013, 4:57:41 PM6/16/13
to
My concern is that such a system is easily used by corrupt and overly
zealous federal employees and politicians.
Think of it if you are bidding on a contract against a politicians
buddy what might he learn if he has access to this system. Then
encrypted phones might be a problem. well unless they have back
doors.
I'd like to know if there is a blanket warrant that lets them record
your houses private security cameras. Then there are those TVs with
Cameras and Mics. 1984 for real ;-)))
I have many question no answers.
I can see the benefits to the system but also how easily it could be
abused.
Mitchell Holman
Jun 16, 2013, 6:25:01 PM6/16/13
to
MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote in
news:v14sr8tkmbpo2qstg...@4ax.com:
are they wrong when Obama continues them?
Ditto for the other programs Obama is
continuing from the Bush years - the drone
policy, the Gitmo trials policy, the Bush
tax cuts, the Afghan war, the raids on
medical marijuana clinics, the support for
Israel, the military support for Saudi Arabia,
the support for more nuke power plants.
It is like Bush never left, and yet
conservatives are outraged at a mythical
"radical socialish agenda".........
MattB .
Jun 16, 2013, 6:39:36 PM6/16/13
to
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 17:25:01 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Yes they are wrong. Obama didn't just continue them he expanded on
them.
>
>
Campaign Slogans of Barack Obama in the USA
1. "Yes We Can"
2. “Change” versus “More of the Same”
3. "Vote for Change"
4. "Change We Can Believe In"
5. "Our Time for Change"
6. "It's about Time. It's about Change"
7. "Stand for Change"
8. "Organize for Change"
9. “We are the change we’ve been looking for. Change can’t happen
without you.”
10. "I’m asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about
real change in Washington . I'm asking you to believe in yours."
11. "A leader who can deliver change"
12. "Change in America doesn't start from the top down. It starts from
the bottom up."
13. “Obama Momma”
14. "Women for Obama"
15. "Obama for America "
16. "A New Beginning"
17. "Help me take back America "
18. "My President is Black"
19. "Eight [years] is Enough"
20. " America , we cannot turn back. We cannot walk alone."
21. "We must pledge once more to walk into the future."
Seems Obama lied about that.
them.
>
> Ditto for the other programs Obama is
>continuing from the Bush years - the drone
>policy, the Gitmo trials policy, the Bush
>tax cuts, the Afghan war, the raids on
>medical marijuana clinics, the support for
>Israel, the military support for Saudi Arabia,
>the support for more nuke power plants.
>
> It is like Bush never left, and yet
>conservatives are outraged at a mythical
>"radical socialish agenda".........
>
>
>
Yes but didn't Obama campaign on the promise of change
> Ditto for the other programs Obama is
>continuing from the Bush years - the drone
>policy, the Gitmo trials policy, the Bush
>tax cuts, the Afghan war, the raids on
>medical marijuana clinics, the support for
>Israel, the military support for Saudi Arabia,
>the support for more nuke power plants.
>
> It is like Bush never left, and yet
>conservatives are outraged at a mythical
>"radical socialish agenda".........
>
>
>
>
>
Campaign Slogans of Barack Obama in the USA
1. "Yes We Can"
2. “Change” versus “More of the Same”
3. "Vote for Change"
4. "Change We Can Believe In"
5. "Our Time for Change"
6. "It's about Time. It's about Change"
7. "Stand for Change"
8. "Organize for Change"
9. “We are the change we’ve been looking for. Change can’t happen
without you.”
10. "I’m asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about
real change in Washington . I'm asking you to believe in yours."
11. "A leader who can deliver change"
12. "Change in America doesn't start from the top down. It starts from
the bottom up."
13. “Obama Momma”
14. "Women for Obama"
15. "Obama for America "
16. "A New Beginning"
17. "Help me take back America "
18. "My President is Black"
19. "Eight [years] is Enough"
20. " America , we cannot turn back. We cannot walk alone."
21. "We must pledge once more to walk into the future."
Seems Obama lied about that.
Mitchell Holman
Jun 16, 2013, 10:15:37 PM6/16/13
to
MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote in
news:1ffsr8hbl3ikdbidn...@4ax.com:
So why the conservative outrage?
surplus (he didn't) to protect America
(he didn't) to have a "candid" administration,
(he didn't) to "not play the worlds policeman"
(he did), to reduce regulations (he didn't),
to pare down the size of government (he didn't).
You are deluding yourself if you think
Obama is any different than Bush.
Obama Administration Maintains Bush Position on ‘Extraordinary
Rendition’ Lawsuit
Feb 9, 2009
The Obama Administration today announced that it would
keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the
lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. The case
involves five men who claim to have been victims of
extraordinary rendition — including current Guantanamo
detainee Binyam Mohamed, another plaintiff in jail in Egypt,
one in jail in Morocco, and two now free. They sued a San
Jose Boeing subsidiary, Jeppesen Dataplan, accusing the flight-
planning company of aiding the CIA in flying them to other
countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/02/obama-administr-4/
MattB .
Jun 16, 2013, 10:53:36 PM6/16/13
to
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 21:15:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Didn't like Bush either. Liked Clinton to a point. We haven't had a
good choice for over a decade from any party.
I don't think his party divided the nation and laughed at the
stupidity of the voters.
>
>
>
>Obama Administration Maintains Bush Position on ‘Extraordinary
>Rendition’ Lawsuit
>Feb 9, 2009
>The Obama Administration today announced that it would
>keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the
>lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. The case
>involves five men who claim to have been victims of
>extraordinary rendition — including current Guantanamo
>detainee Binyam Mohamed, another plaintiff in jail in Egypt,
>one in jail in Morocco, and two now free. They sued a San
>Jose Boeing subsidiary, Jeppesen Dataplan, accusing the flight-
>planning company of aiding the CIA in flying them to other
>countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
>
>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/02/obama-administr-4/
You do know every time a liberal says well Bush did it first or some
such nonsense I laugh. Change to a liberal is what?
Bush is no longer President I'm more interested in correcting the
future than using it as a excuse.
good choice for over a decade from any party.
stupidity of the voters.
>
>
>
>Obama Administration Maintains Bush Position on ‘Extraordinary
>Rendition’ Lawsuit
>Feb 9, 2009
>The Obama Administration today announced that it would
>keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the
>lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. The case
>involves five men who claim to have been victims of
>extraordinary rendition — including current Guantanamo
>detainee Binyam Mohamed, another plaintiff in jail in Egypt,
>one in jail in Morocco, and two now free. They sued a San
>Jose Boeing subsidiary, Jeppesen Dataplan, accusing the flight-
>planning company of aiding the CIA in flying them to other
>countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
>
>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/02/obama-administr-4/
such nonsense I laugh. Change to a liberal is what?
Bush is no longer President I'm more interested in correcting the
future than using it as a excuse.
Mitchell Holman
Jun 17, 2013, 9:11:25 AM6/17/13
to
MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote in
news:r6usr8ppgm7ths0ie...@4ax.com:
blaming the previous president for every problem
and who now recoils at the very mention of a
previous president.
MattB .
Jun 17, 2013, 1:55:53 PM6/17/13
to
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:11:25 -0500, Mitchell Holman
So much for Change. See even you admit Obama lied to all those that
voted for him , he made fools of them. Yes so did Bush but he didn't
have change on all his slogans. Where is the Change?
Obama or Bush both lousy Presidents.
voted for him , he made fools of them. Yes so did Bush but he didn't
have change on all his slogans. Where is the Change?
Obama or Bush both lousy Presidents.
Message has been deleted
Mitchell Holman
Jun 17, 2013, 10:34:04 PM6/17/13
to
MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote in
news:f8jur8hi0cgaket7o...@4ax.com:
You voted for Bush, you got
Bush, you got even more Bush with
Obama.
So why the outrage?
MattB .
Jun 18, 2013, 12:30:53 AM6/18/13
to
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 21:34:04 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>>>>>> 2. �ｿｽChange�ｿｽ versus �ｿｽMore of the Same�ｿｽ
>>>>>> without you.�ｿｽ
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10. "I�ｿｽm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring
>>>>>Rendition�ｿｽ Lawsuit
Obama IMO we Can't/couldn't trust Bush or Cheney. Now I consider
anyone that wants to impeach Obama a total idiot. I mean Joe Biden in
the office?
Never voted for Bush and if a Tea Party candidate would have won the
primary would have just not voted. Dumb and Dumber of the 2 extremes.
We need a good 3rd and IMO more moderate choice. These extremist just
aren't getting anything done.
As for me missing the point that is always possible. Politics takes
the mind of a lawyer to understand completely.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. "Vote for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. "Change We Can Believe In"
>>>>>> 5. "Our Time for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6. "It's about Time. It's about Change"
>>>>>> 7. "Stand for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8. "Organize for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 9. �ｿｽWe are the change we�ｿｽve been looking for. Change can�ｿｽt happen
>>>>>> 3. "Vote for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. "Change We Can Believe In"
>>>>>> 5. "Our Time for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6. "It's about Time. It's about Change"
>>>>>> 7. "Stand for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8. "Organize for Change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> without you.�ｿｽ
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10. "I�ｿｽm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring
>>>about
>>>>>> real change in Washington . I'm asking you to believe in yours."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 11. "A leader who can deliver change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 12. "Change in America doesn't start from the top down. It starts
>>>from
>>>>>> the bottom up."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 13. �ｿｽObama Momma�ｿｽ
>>>>>> real change in Washington . I'm asking you to believe in yours."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 11. "A leader who can deliver change"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 12. "Change in America doesn't start from the top down. It starts
>>>from
>>>>>> the bottom up."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 14. "Women for Obama"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 15. "Obama for America "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 16. "A New Beginning"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 17. "Help me take back America "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 18. "My President is Black"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 19. "Eight [years] is Enough"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 20. " America , we cannot turn back. We cannot walk alone."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 21. "We must pledge once more to walk into the future."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems Obama lied about that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And Bush promised to keep the budget
>>>>>surplus (he didn't) to protect America
>>>>>(he didn't) to have a "candid" administration,
>>>>>(he didn't) to "not play the worlds policeman"
>>>>>(he did), to reduce regulations (he didn't),
>>>>>to pare down the size of government (he didn't).
>>>>>
>>>>> You are deluding yourself if you think
>>>>>Obama is any different than Bush.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think his party divided the nation and laughed at the
>>>> stupidity of the voters.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Obama Administration Maintains Bush Position on �ｿｽExtraordinary
>>>>>> 14. "Women for Obama"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 15. "Obama for America "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 16. "A New Beginning"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 17. "Help me take back America "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 18. "My President is Black"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 19. "Eight [years] is Enough"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 20. " America , we cannot turn back. We cannot walk alone."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 21. "We must pledge once more to walk into the future."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems Obama lied about that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And Bush promised to keep the budget
>>>>>surplus (he didn't) to protect America
>>>>>(he didn't) to have a "candid" administration,
>>>>>(he didn't) to "not play the worlds policeman"
>>>>>(he did), to reduce regulations (he didn't),
>>>>>to pare down the size of government (he didn't).
>>>>>
>>>>> You are deluding yourself if you think
>>>>>Obama is any different than Bush.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think his party divided the nation and laughed at the
>>>> stupidity of the voters.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Rendition�ｿｽ Lawsuit
>>>>>Feb 9, 2009
>>>>>The Obama Administration today announced that it would
>>>>>keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the
>>>>>lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. The case
>>>>>involves five men who claim to have been victims of
>>>>>extraordinary rendition �ｿｽ including current Guantanamo
>>>>>The Obama Administration today announced that it would
>>>>>keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the
>>>>>lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. The case
>>>>>involves five men who claim to have been victims of
>>>>>detainee Binyam Mohamed, another plaintiff in jail in Egypt,
>>>>>one in jail in Morocco, and two now free. They sued a San
>>>>>Jose Boeing subsidiary, Jeppesen Dataplan, accusing the flight-
>>>>>planning company of aiding the CIA in flying them to other
>>>>>countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/02/obama-administr-4/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You do know every time a liberal says well Bush did it first or some
>>>> such nonsense I laugh.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Modern Conservative: Someone who spent 8 years
>>>blaming the previous president for every problem
>>>and who now recoils at the very mention of a
>>>previous president.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> So much for Change. See even you admit Obama lied to all those that
>> voted for him , he made fools of them. Yes so did Bush but he didn't
>> have change on all his slogans. Where is the Change?
>
>
> You are missing the point.
>
> You voted for Bush, you got
>Bush, you got even more Bush with
>Obama.
>
> So why the outrage?
>
>
Yes I voted for Bush the first time you got me, not the second. Like
>>>>>one in jail in Morocco, and two now free. They sued a San
>>>>>Jose Boeing subsidiary, Jeppesen Dataplan, accusing the flight-
>>>>>planning company of aiding the CIA in flying them to other
>>>>>countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/02/obama-administr-4/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You do know every time a liberal says well Bush did it first or some
>>>> such nonsense I laugh.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Modern Conservative: Someone who spent 8 years
>>>blaming the previous president for every problem
>>>and who now recoils at the very mention of a
>>>previous president.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> So much for Change. See even you admit Obama lied to all those that
>> voted for him , he made fools of them. Yes so did Bush but he didn't
>> have change on all his slogans. Where is the Change?
>
>
> You are missing the point.
>
> You voted for Bush, you got
>Bush, you got even more Bush with
>Obama.
>
> So why the outrage?
>
>
Obama IMO we Can't/couldn't trust Bush or Cheney. Now I consider
anyone that wants to impeach Obama a total idiot. I mean Joe Biden in
the office?
Never voted for Bush and if a Tea Party candidate would have won the
primary would have just not voted. Dumb and Dumber of the 2 extremes.
We need a good 3rd and IMO more moderate choice. These extremist just
aren't getting anything done.
As for me missing the point that is always possible. Politics takes
the mind of a lawyer to understand completely.
Dänk 42Ø
Jun 18, 2013, 2:14:58 AM6/18/13
to
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:38:57 -0600, Yoorghis quacked:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:55:53 -0700, MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Modern Conservative: Someone who spent 8 years
>>>blaming the previous president for every problem and who now recoils at
>>>the very mention of a previous president.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>So much for Change. See even you admit Obama lied to all those that
>>voted for him , he made fools of them.
>
> You mindless moron
>
> You cannot affect change---when the control (CONTROL) of government lies
> in the hands of a political enemy that decided the first night of Obama
> Presidency----to destroy him .....AT-ALL-COSTS.
>
> Since January 2009--that's exactly what your republican party has
> carried out----making recovery and progress non-existent for political
> gain.
The Republican Party is the same as al-Qaeda, which is why Chairman Obama
and his glorious Democrapic People's Party must use any means necessary
to wipe them out.
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:55:53 -0700, MattB . <trdel...@spamnogmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Modern Conservative: Someone who spent 8 years
>>>blaming the previous president for every problem and who now recoils at
>>>the very mention of a previous president.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>So much for Change. See even you admit Obama lied to all those that
>>voted for him , he made fools of them.
>
>
> You cannot affect change---when the control (CONTROL) of government lies
> in the hands of a political enemy that decided the first night of Obama
> Presidency----to destroy him .....AT-ALL-COSTS.
>
> Since January 2009--that's exactly what your republican party has
> carried out----making recovery and progress non-existent for political
> gain.
The Republican Party is the same as al-Qaeda, which is why Chairman Obama
and his glorious Democrapic People's Party must use any means necessary
to wipe them out.
Message has been deleted
0 new messages