Obama Urges GOP Not to Extract Pop-Tarts from Toasters with Tongues

And the foul stench of burning hair and roasted flesh filled kitchens nationwide. Via MSNBC:

In a jarring break from the George W. Bush era, the Republican National Committee voted Friday to adopt a resolution demanding an investigation into the National Security Agency’s spy programs.

According to the resolution, the NSA metadata program revealed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden is deemed “an invasion into the personal lives of American citizens that violates the right of free speech and association afforded by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.” In addition, “the mass collection and retention of personal data is in itself contrary to the right of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

Titled a “Resolution To Renounce The National Security Agency’s Surveillance Program,” it was passed by a voice vote as part of a package of RNC proposals. Not a single member rose to object or call for further debate, as occurred for other resolutions.

Bobby Fischer? Deep Blue? Morons. Clearly, we are dealing with the greatest Eleventy Dimensional Chess Grandmaster of all time.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






141 replies
  1. 1
    piratedan says:

    Next up, Obama launches national moratorium to stop operating all motorized vehicles while eyes are closed……

  2. 2
    Baud says:

    So Obama is talking about actual reforms, while the RNC (an unelected body) is proposing investigations.

    Because god forbid we do anything to tie the hands of the next GOP president (apparently to be nominated on the 4th of July, for good measure).

  3. 3
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    It actually would be cool if we can use this to rollback the Patriot Act.

  4. 4
    piratedan says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I expect kabuki, not legislation from the GOP and with the current Congress, I haven’t been disappointed yet.

  5. 5
    Mobile Grumpy Code Monkey says:

    That’s a comfortable fantasy, but I don’t think this is part of some master plan; Obama’s been quite happy to perpetuate some of W’s less savory policies.

    Reigning in domestic surveillance is a Good Thing, regardless of the motivation.

  6. 6
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    You funny.

    Personally, I can’t wait to hear what the caveat is on this one. It’ll be hard to beat Rand Paul’s I’m against domestic use of drones, except if someone is seen robbing a liquor store, because fuck that guy.

  7. 7
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @piratedan: I know. I would also like a pony.

  8. 8
    eric says:

    Seventh Rung of Hell (AP) Reports have emerged out of Hell that United States President Barack Hussein Obama has declared the pits of hell off limits to members of the GOP. In response, the Republicans, led by long time resident, Richard Cheney, have vowed to stake their claim to Hell and force out the uppity democrats. President Obama responded that he was disappointed, but not surprised by the GOP efforts.

  9. 9
    Felonius Monk says:

    And a resolution from the RNC means exactly what? Bupkis, I think.

  10. 10
    Baud says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    That hope just died. The only chance reform had was that the GOP would be pressured to take the issue seriously. Now they’ve settled on an “investigations” strategy — which no small number of people will eat up — they can’t afford to actually accomplish anything.

  11. 11
    Ben Franklin says:

    It’s not rocket science. They read polls, thassall. Someone had to take the lead, but the Big Mo belongs to Snowden, hero or no.

  12. 12
    BGinCHI says:

    “When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor….”

    The GOP is about to go streaking by itself into the cold, cold night.

  13. 13
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    I thought Rand Paul might actually prove useful in this matter, then he responded to Obama’s speech last week with a dumbass quip for the Limbaugh crowd. “If you like your privacy, you can keep your privacy”

  14. 14
    Mandalay says:

    @Baud:

    So Obama is talking about actual reforms

    The “reforms” that Obama talks about are not meaningful, and full of loopholes.

  15. 15
    Mandalay says:

    @Baud:

    So Obama is talking about actual reforms

    The “reforms” that Obama talks about are not meaningful, and full of loopholes.

  16. 16
    jl says:

    Whatever it takes to get them through the night, I guess, or until a better fake scandal pops up. If the House takes this up, I am sure Issa and his buddies will include a conscientious and very thorough examination of Congressional oversight of the NSA.

  17. 17
    Cacti says:

    Nothing’s stopping the House GOP from introducing a bill to repeal the Patriot Act.

    Wake me when it happens.

  18. 18
    Corner Stone says:

    Clearly, we are dealing with the greatest Eleventy Dimensional Chess Grandmaster of all time.

    I’m sorry, but who are you referring to?

  19. 19
    BGinCHI says:

    BTW, didn’t all of the GOP members of Congress who were around vote for exactly this kind of surveillance under Bush?

  20. 20
    Corner Stone says:

    @Baud: Do you live in CO or WA? Because I want some of what you’re smoking.

  21. 21
    Baud says:

    @Mandalay:

    They’re more substative than anything the GOP — including Rand Paul — has put forward.

  22. 22
    gbear says:

    @Ben Franklin: They also know how to do outreach to women. They’ve read those polls too.

  23. 23
    russell says:

    pwned by cleek’s law

  24. 24
    Corner Stone says:

    @Baud: That is your bar now?

  25. 25
    Cacti says:

    @BGinCHI:

    The House last voted to renew the Patriot Act on May 26, 2011.

  26. 26
    Baud says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I get high on truth!

  27. 27
    BGinCHI says:

    @gbear: According to Huck, all women think about are poles.

  28. 28
    BGinCHI says:

    @Cacti: That burns.

  29. 29
    Baud says:

    @Corner Stone:

    No, that was Mandalay’s bar. I was responding o his/her comment.

  30. 30

    According to TPM more debt limit shenanigans are coming our way because once was not enough.

  31. 31
    gbear says:

    @BGinCHI: They can’t help it. It’s their out of control libidos.

  32. 32
    jl says:

    GOP not sure it can quit its debt limit blackmail habit.
    They are considering more debt limit blackmail, plan to use it to take a another crack at wrecking health reform.

    GOP wants to do away with risk adjustment for exchange insurance. They figure calling risk adjustment an ‘insurance company bailout’ will sound populist, and make people realize that, hey, it’s counter intuitive, but the GOP has been the one looking our for the regular people all along, we’ll vote for them.

    Maybe some GOP PR whizz gave them clever hook and they couldn’t resist.

    GOP May Use Threat Of Default To Sabotage Obamacare
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/d.....er-bailout

    Edit: I see the quantum cat beat me to it.

  33. 33
    Cassidy says:

    Awwww, the teatards and emoprogs are holding hands. Isn’t young love so sweet.

  34. 34
    Roger Moore says:

    @Cacti:

    Wake me when it happens.

    OK, Mr. van Winkle.

  35. 35
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Mandalay:

    Yeah, but he seems to mean well.

  36. 36
    Mandalay says:

    @Baud:

    They’re more substative than anything the GOP — including Rand Paul — has put forward.

    BFD.

    Obama should focus on showing that his proposals would be legal and worthwhile. He’s ducking that right now.

  37. 37
    BGinCHI says:

    @jl: The image of Wile E. Coyote springs to mind.

    Repetition, failure, falling from a great height.

  38. 38
    Roger Moore says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:
    If you believe in that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, the Republican response to Obamacare belongs in DSM-V.

  39. 39
    Baud says:

    @Mandalay:

    We’ve only just started the process. No one Sid the conversation ended with Obama’s speech.

  40. 40
    Baud says:

    @Baud:

    Sid = said

  41. 41
    Ash Can says:

    So the Republicans are shocked — shocked — to discover spying in this establishment. They can all just go eat shit and bark at the moon.

  42. 42
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    Obama to GOP: Whatever you do, don’t mix Prestone with Scotch. I’m talking to you, John Boner.

  43. 43
    jl says:

    @BGinCHI: If we see a pic of some GOP nutters dragging a huge ACME foolproof debt limit blackmailer (patent pending) into the House, we’ll know it’ll be fun.

  44. 44
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Corner Stone: President Obama, of coursE. He dispatched his personal valet to pack Snowden’s bags. A Medal of Freedom will be forthcoming; you mark my words.

    But seriously, I’m with Omnes; if the GOP’s new-found appreciation of the 2nd Amendment +2 can be harnessed to dial back ineffective and needlessly intrusive practices, huzzah. It’ll never happen, though; they’ll forget all about their qualms if, FSM forbid, they regain power.

  45. 45
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    they’ll forget all about their qualms if, FSM forbid, they regain power.

    Just as they only had qualms about deficits and the national debt starting about 8PM PST on 4 November 2008.

  46. 46
    Corner Stone says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    can be harnessed to dial back ineffective and needlessly intrusive practices, huzzah.

    How about we actually try doing something about that? And not depend on the mendacity of the R’s.

  47. 47
    BGinCHI says:

    @Betty Cracker: Ideas. They is out.

  48. 48
    Roger Moore says:

    @Corner Stone:

    How about we actually try doing something about that? And not depend on the mendacity of the R’s.

    Considering that anything needs some Republican votes to get through Congress these days, that seems unlikely. Of course, the need for Republican votes to accomplish anything legislatively seems to be a fact that is incapable of registering in your brain on other issues, so I don’t expect it to in this case, either.

  49. 49
    Mandalay says:

    @Baud:

    We’ve only just started the process. No one Sid the conversation ended with Obama’s speech.

    True, but look at Obama’s opening position: mild concessions, but essentially maintaining the status quo, with holes in his proposals a mile wide.

    The core problem is that politicians have a vested interest in having absurdly high security measures. It’s CYA for when something badass happens. Politicians are not honest brokers; they are looking out for themselves. They don’t want to be seen as removing legislation that might have prevented some future terrorist act. There is no dispassionate cost-benefit analysis being done by politicians; they generally adopt a security-at-all-costs position. This advisory panel is at least taking a realistic look at the current situation.

    Congress used to determine their own pay increases until everyone realized that was like the fox guarding the hen house. The same applies here – politicians will do what is best (or safest) for themselves, rather than what is best for the nation, with respect to national security.

  50. 50
    Renie says:

    the lack of self-awareness is astonishing!

  51. 51
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    OT but related, Noismax gives us this headline/link:

    Noonan: ‘No One’s Listening to Obama Now’

    It’s always projection with Rethugs. Always.

  52. 52
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Roger Moore:

    This may be the multi-dimensional chess game I keep hearing about. If Obama had actually proposed concrete solutions last week, any reform would die the death of a zygote.

    Let’s hope he can continue to be the goat for Authoritarianism.

  53. 53
    Cassidy says:

    @Roger Moore: No, no, no. If Obama doesn’t wave his magic wand from the bully pulpit then it’s the death of freedom and we live in a police state.

  54. 54
    Tommy says:

    I am watching MSNBC. I am 44. Talk of sex. I think I have had sex with a few women in my life. 99.9 percent of the time I used a condom. Just seemed to be respectful.Well 95% percent. I say this cause I am so sick of hearing all this BS. I respect women. I care for them. My mom is my best friend. I have an unlimited respect for women.

  55. 55
    Baud says:

    @Mandalay:

    I’m not sure what your point is. Every democracy is run by politicians. We can’t just wish them away.

  56. 56
    Baud says:

    @Tommy:

    You might want to explain what you’re watching on msnbc.

  57. 57
    srv says:

    Someone has to save us from Obama.

    Think what Hillary will do with this.

  58. 58
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Mandalay: you also have remember that anything Obama does off his own bat would be in the form of executive orders and policy setting. The legislative framework would remain and any successor could reverse the EOs and policies immediately upon taking office. Any real change must come from the courts or involve Congress.

  59. 59
    Tommy says:

    @Baud: Ed Show.

  60. 60
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Tommy:

    This has something to do with that Huckabee assclown, doesn’t it?

  61. 61
    BGinCHI says:

    @Tommy: Looks like our time is up. See you next week.

  62. 62
    Baud says:

    @Tommy:

    Some more context please. Viewed in isolation, your comment was kind of creepy.

  63. 63
    shortstop says:

    It hurts so much to belly-laugh, so I blame you mightily for this post title, Bet.

  64. 64
    Baud says:

    OT: A possible Friday Evening Open Thread topic for Anne Laurie.

    House Speaker John Boehner used his first-ever appearance on to talk politics and, as and others have also done on late-night TV, have some fun at his own expense.

    Asked Thursday if he has any presidential ambitions, the Ohio Republican joked that:

    — “Listen, I like to play golf. I like to cut my own grass. You know, I do drink red wine. I smoke cigarettes. And I’m not giving that up to be president of the United States.”

  65. 65
    shortstop says:

    And now I’m silent and still as a mouse again after reading Tommy’s musings. Hmmm.

  66. 66
    shortstop says:

    @Baud: Now I’m laughing again. If he’d only said “bourbon” (which is what he drinks all day long anyway) instead of effete red wine, he could have had the 27 percent bellowing, “Fuck yeah!” along with him.

  67. 67
    Mandalay says:

    @Baud:

    I’m not sure what your point is.

    I thought it was pretty clear: the political consequences of decreasing national security are potentially so high, that few politicians are ever going to go down that path, even if decreasing national security is the more appropriate option.

  68. 68
    kc says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Hell yeah. I would love it if Obama would propose MAJOR reforms. Let the GOP tie itself into knots figuring out how to handle that.

  69. 69
    Tommy says:

    @Baud: I didn’t mean it to be rude. Just said what I think.

  70. 70
    kc says:

    @Baud:

    So Obama is talking about actual reforms, while the RNC (an unelected body) is proposing investigations

    Obama’s reforms are pretty lame, imo. Of course if he had proposed really significant changes, the GOP would strive to find ways to block them, but at least he’d have the political advantage.

  71. 71
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Mandalay:

    potentially so high

    That’s the Straw bundled into the Scarecrow. The measures they take to protect us have produced no evidence of success.

    It’s a lot like the foolishness of ‘Duck and Cover’ during the 50’s. All they can really provide is the perception. of being safe…nothing more.

  72. 72
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @kc: Unfortunately, it is unlikely to happen.

  73. 73
    IowaOldLady says:

    The training for these guys to talk about women should consist of one word: Don’t.

  74. 74
    danielx says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    It would be nice to think so, but…the powers that be shot the Fourth Amendment full of holes three decades ago because Drugs, and the Patriot Act pretty much did away with what was left. It’s…convenient for government agencies (federal, state and local) not to have to worry about things like warrants, or limitations on what can be searched for, etc etc. Or, for that matter, habeas corpus, and the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th Amendments aren’t doing real well either.

    What our solons seem to forget is that the Bill of Rights was designed to make things more difficult for the government and those government agencies* charged with enforcing the law, and there were a lot of good reasons why those at the 1789 convention set it up that way. (Lettres de cachet, anyone?)

    *Or what I’m starting to think of as the “justice industry”.

  75. 75
    Tommy says:

    @BGinCHI: The world is comlpex.I tried to talk about that.Clearly I wasn’t clear. Sex is a tough issue. I thought I tried to talk about that in a sensible manner, that I have pissed off so many folks shows I didn’t have a clue I thought I did. nI am sorry.

  76. 76
    CaseyL says:

    The RNC vote has about the same power to affect anything as one of Jonah Goldberg’s farts. Probably less, in fact.

    The resolution will go into their party platform and maybe get mentioned a few times. It’s symbolic.

    The GOP has a majority in the House, right? And bills originate in the House, right?

    Let’s see them put up, and pass, a bill ending the NSA surveillance program. Or revoking the AUMF. Or even rolling back the Patriot Act.

    Frankly, I’d love to see that. I’d particularly love to see the Patriot Act go bye-bye, and the Department of Homeland Security get dismantled back to its original component parts.

    It’s not going to happen.

  77. 77
    Cervantes says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    It actually would be cool if we can use this to rollback the Patriot Act.

    It would.

    Recent revelations appear to have given Sensenbrenner second thoughts. Let’s see how real those second thoughts are.

  78. 78
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Tommy: When a comment like yours appears, context free, in a thread about an unrelated subject, it will tend to puzzle readers. Just sayin’.

  79. 79
    Mandalay says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    The measures they take to protect us have produced no evidence of success.

    Exactly so. This is what the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board just reported…

    The threat of terrorism faced today by the United States is real. The Section 215
    telephone records program was intended as one tool to combat this threat — a tool that
    would help investigators piece together the networks of terrorist groups and the patterns
    of their communications with a speed and comprehensiveness not otherwise available.
    However, we conclude that the Section 215 program has shown minimal value in
    safeguarding the nation from terrorism. Based on the information provided to the Board,
    including classified briefings and documentation, we have not identified a single instance involving a threat to the United States in which the program made a concrete difference in the outcome of a counterterrorism investigation. Moreover, we are aware of no instance in which the program directly contributed to the discovery of a previously unknown terrorist plot or the disruption of a terrorist attack.

    Let’s see how many politicians have the balls and integrity to talk about that inconvenient truth in the next few days.

  80. 80
    Cervantes says:

    @Baud: Or not.

  81. 81
    WaterGirl says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Tommy is watching MSNBC, where I’m sure someone is talking about Huckabee’s stupidity yesterday.

    I’m pretty sure the context of tommy’s comment is huckabee & women & sex & birth control and respect for women (or lack thereof).

  82. 82
    kc says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Yeah, I’m afraid we’ve missed the best chance we’re ever gonna have.

  83. 83
    Roger Moore says:

    @IowaOldLady:

    The training for these guys to talk about women should consist of one word: Don’t.

    That’s the disadvantage of being the party of id; they have very poor impulse control. They have a very hard time resisting saying whatever pops into their heads, especially because they’re viewed as bold truth tellers by the rest of the clique who already agree with them.

  84. 84
    Mandalay says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Any real change must come from the courts or involve Congress.

    Of course, but my point is that we need third-parties to dispassionately review the data relating to national security to better inform the decisions that are ultimately made by our politicians.

    If Congress is deliberating over whether to reduce the head count at some remote military base, or close a certain post office, they don’t pretend to be fully informed – they frequently defer to the opinions of those non-politicians who have researched the matter.

    Well I just wish that situation also applied more to national security. I suspect most politicians are fearful of voting to kill some existing security measure that might later be shown to have been able to prevent a terrorist attack. That fear should not be a determining factor in forming our national security policy.

    Congress could reduce road deaths by introducing legislation requiring us to wear crash helmets in cars, but they don’t. Yet they make similarly absurd and arbitrary decisions relating to our national security in the name of “keeping the nation safe”.

  85. 85
    VincentN says:

    @Tommy:

    There’s nothing wrong with what you said. You just didn’t explain that you were talking about Huckabee’s comments on birth control and women. Without that context, somebody could assume that you were randomly talking about sex.

  86. 86
    Cervantes says:

    @Mandalay:

    Well I just wish that situation also applied to national security. I suspect most politicians are fearful of voting to kill some existing security measure that might later be shown to have been able to prevent a terrorist attack. That fear should not be a determining factor in forming our national security policy.

    A good comparison might be the way base-closings are handled.

  87. 87
    Shakezula says:

    The list so far:
    No abortions for the slutty sluts.
    Kill the NSA.
    Stop the Obamacare bailout for insurance companies.

  88. 88
    burnspbesq says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I know. I would also like a pony.

    Alas, the pony’s a lot more likely.

  89. 89
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Mandalay: You, yourself, cited the Congressional advisory panel. Do you want a blue ribbon commission to be assembled? That’s the most effective way to pretend to do something about an issue.

  90. 90
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: What? Not a unicorn?

  91. 91
    burnspbesq says:

    The only way anything of lasting good will happen in this area is if the Dems get control of both houses of Congress.

    If you’re serious about reform, get your ass out of that chair and go get out the vote.

  92. 92
    Cassidy says:

    @burnspbesq: Not if I can’t vote for the perfect progressive candidate.

  93. 93
    mk3872 says:

    This is funny because most Republicans in Congress SUPPORT NSA surveillance. There is no subject that the GOP won’t try to use for short-term political gain. The GOP is absolutely not serious about reforming the NSA. But they are serious about finding ways to win the next election.

  94. 94
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Mandalay:

    Congress could reduce road deaths by introducing legislation requiring us to wear crash helmets in cars, but they don’t.

    Why make people wear crash helmets in cars when airbags do the same job and protect more than just the head? It’s a silly argument that shows the speaker doesn’t understand how airbags work or that they’ve been required by law for almost 20 years.

  95. 95
    Betty Cracker says:

    @IowaOldLady: The RNC should heed your advice and cut you a $100K check for providing it. It’s the best guidance they could possibly receive. How do you like being a high-powered political consultant?

  96. 96
    SiubhanDuinneOnIPhone5 says:

    @Baud:

    I’ve had that exact same FYAC.

  97. 97
    RaflW says:

    @CaseyL:

    The RNC vote has about the same power to affect anything as one of Jonah Goldberg’s farts. Probably less, in fact.

    Yeah. But I am enjoying the optics of the mega-pro-Patriot Act party suddenly discovering that endless spying is bad. I remember these asshats taking the position “If you have nothing to hide, why do you care if we see your library checkout record?”

    Dipshits. All of ’em.

  98. 98
    Mnemosyne says:

    @RaflW:

    It’s very simple, silly:

    Spying on white patriots who belong to militia groups: bad
    Spying on brown people who are up to no good because just look at them: good

    ETA: As we all know, liberals and other anti-conservative folks are honorary brown people no matter what their race is.

  99. 99
    WaterGirl says:

    @IowaOldLady: Some blog or link yesterday posted a tweet from some old white guy (R-somewhere) suggesting that it’s never a good idea to talk about “libido” in public. Duh.

  100. 100
    Ben Franklin says:

    @mk3872:

    But they are serious about finding ways to win the next election.

    We enjoy derogating conservatives for their impurity, while we excuse our own with the same rhetoric. The DNC has no dirty tricks for keeping a district or the the WH, do they?

  101. 101
    SiubhanDuinneOnIPhone5 says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Yes, this. I don’t always agree with Burnsy, but when I do it’s wholeheartedly :-)

  102. 102
    Ruckus says:

    @Betty Cracker:
    The sentiment is 100% correct but she doesn’t use anywhere near enough words to describe it to collect a big check. Also the answer had too much logic and truth to it to be used as a resume for the job.
    IOW, not enough bullshit involved with the added fact of being true.

  103. 103
    Corner Stone says:

    @Roger Moore: That certainly was trenchant. Thanks, dudebro.

  104. 104
    Ignaz Playel says:

    Its odd that the party the controlls the house has decided to declare the NSA unconstitutional. We have another body that determines that. Couldn’t they pass laws allowing citizens harmed by the survellance state easier access to the courts so that they could decide the matter publicly?

  105. 105
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I thought it was full of sound and fury with a temperance worthy of Job; who also would have waited patiently for Congress to humanize to the extremes of the wimmens and negroes having access to the Vote.

  106. 106
    Cassidy says:

    If only Obama would eve his magic purity wand to make the suburban progressives happy. Who cares about health care and women’s rights and voting rights….oh no, the white left insist only corporations who give them free shipping get their personal information.

  107. 107
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Cassidy:

    I just love Cafeteria Democrats.

  108. 108
    Dude in Princeton says:

    @Baud: “So Obama is talking about actual reforms”

    You’re joking? I must be missing the subtly of your humor.

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/23/.....s-privacy/

  109. 109
    Cervantes says:

    @Felonius Monk:

    And a resolution from the RNC means exactly what? Bupkis, I think.

    It means nothing by itself, you’re right.

    But it can be utilized by those who are so inclined.

  110. 110
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ben Franklin: Heh. Is he doing his usual drunken incoherent rage posting? One where he talks about things people care about but may not be the one thing he thinks they should care about? And so no one else has availability to do two things at the same time?

  111. 111
    Dude in Princeton says:

    @Mandalay: Ya’ think?

  112. 112
    Dude in Princeton says:

    @Cassidy: ha ha!

  113. 113
    Corner Stone says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    President Obama, of coursE.

    Edgar Allan?

  114. 114
    Dude in Princeton says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: “rollback” in this context is actually two words separated by a space.

  115. 115
    Dude in Princeton says:

    @Mandalay: “we need third parties”: http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/23/.....s-privacy/

  116. 116
    Cassidy says:

    @Corner Stone: You two are just so adorable. I smell rom-com. Two starry eyes idealists, one an entitled twit, the other a drunk constantly battling the demons of the wife who left and the child who despises him….Has Oscar bait all over it.

  117. 117
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Cassidy:

    the other a drunk constantly battling the demons of the wife who left and the child who despises him

    Just one thing disturbs me. I can’t tell which one I envy more; the entitled or the drunk?

    Drunk will do. I’m adorable when drunk.

  118. 118
    Suffern ACE says:

    Yep. Obama on the NSA phone record support is burning up a lot of air that could be used for other things. He has not made the case that this is a vital program. He hasn’t made the case that it is worth the money. I hope it is worth it for him personally.

  119. 119
    IowaOldLady says:

    @Betty Cracker: There isn’t enough shut-up in the world to keep these guys quiet. That’s part of what makes it so offensive. They think they have to tell women what to do and how to think and feel.

  120. 120
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ben Franklin: Damn. His wife left him? Maybe she finally got tired of the unpredictable roid rage and his beating her.

  121. 121
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Dude in Princeton: Thanks, douche.

  122. 122
    Cassidy says:

    @Corner Stone: You’re funny. How long ago did your ex make a good decision? How terrible were you that she left everything behind? Go have another drink.

  123. 123
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Cassidy: It is perfectly possible to care about those issues and to deplore the expansion of surveillance. Quite a few people manage to do it every single day.

  124. 124
    Cassidy says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Many do. Many of the chuckleheads here don’t.

  125. 125
    Ted R says:

    This is Obama’s Waco. Some tea-party cracker will blow up a federal building because Snowden/Bengazi. I do hope not, but they’re doing their best to encourage the fringe…

  126. 126
    Ted R says:

    This is Obama’s Waco. Some tea-party cracker will blow up a federal building because Snowden/Bengazi. I do hope not, but they’re doing their best to encourage the fringe…

  127. 127
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ted R:

    This is Obama’s Waco. Some tea-party cracker will blow up a federal building because Snowden/Bengazi. I do hope not, but they’re doing their best to encourage the fringe

    Wow.

  128. 128
    Cervantes says:

    @Ted R:

    This is Obama’s Waco. Some tea-party cracker will blow up a federal building because Snowden/Bengazi.

    Wait … what does “This” refer to?

  129. 129
    Cervantes says:

    @IowaOldLady:

    There isn’t enough shut-up in the world to keep these guys quiet. That’s part of what makes it so offensive. They think they have to tell women what to do and how to think and feel.

    OK, but how do they avoid seeing that it’s ridiculous (at best)?

    What do they hear from their own wives, daughters, etc.? Who puts up with them?

  130. 130
    Citizen_X says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Edgar Allan?

    Purity Of Essence.

  131. 131
    IowaOldLady says:

    @Cervantes: I think they pretty much hear only their own voice.

  132. 132
    Bill Arnold says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Edgar Allan?

    I read this as Purity Of Essence.

  133. 133
    Cervantes says:

    @IowaOldLady: That is a fitting punishment, I suppose.

  134. 134
    Keith G says:

    @mk3872:

    This is funny because most Republicans in Congress SUPPORT NSA surveillance. There is no subject that the GOP won’t try to use for short-term political gain. The GOP is absolutely not serious about reforming the NSA. But they are serious about finding ways to win the next election.

    As with so many things in politics, what one intends matters less than what one does. The current Democratic leadership has given room to be outflanked by the GOP on this issue, if the GOP wants to make the effort. (Not a easy bet).

    People here like to mock the libertarian efforts of certain conservatives, and that’s fair enough, but those libertarian issues only get traction because the Democrats, in part, have forfeited that ground.

    “The battle against the Gays” is no longer a productive issue in enough states. The “push” marketing braintrust of the GOP needs new red meat and they will go where they need to. If they see an advantage in running against “Obummer’s NSA” that is what they will do as long as Obama gives them the space to do so.

    If I were the GOP establishment leadership, I would be fanatically focused on 2014. There are decent odds that the next president will be a Democrat, so strengthening the GOP in the legislature is an imperative.

  135. 135
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Keith G: Oh for fuck’s sake. Do you really thing that someone like Rand Paul really will do a thing in favor of the civil liberties crowd? If so, I would suggest that you are naive. I am part of the civil liberties crowd, and I am pretty sure that that the the GOP is not on my side. The current Admin may not be good on those issues but can you conceive of an electable person who would be better?

    Yeah, I am talking pragmatism. There is no win on this issue with the current options available. I am viscerally opposed to the death penalty. Nonetheless, I voted for Clinton and Gore.

  136. 136
    Keith G says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: “Oh for fuck sake” indeed. If what they do is to campaign (that IS an action, no?) on an issue that the Dems are weak on, then they get an advantage.

    Will that be enough to gain significant votes? I do not know. Maybe it will be enough to stem the hemorrhaging of support. Your mistake is the lack the flexibility to imagine that by “action”one can mean how one campaigns as opposed to how one legislates. In a short campaign cycle (now til Nov.) there is not a lot of time for more than just words. The public will hear Obama’s (how much will they believe?) and over time they will hear the other side.

    Yes we are lucky that the other side is fragmented, but a leadership policy that depends on the other side fumbling is no way to maximise support on this issue. Obama’s inadequate NSA solutions (if he sticks with them) are weak on Constitutional grounds and stupid on political grounds.

    It is timid and uninspiring leadership, if leadership it is.

  137. 137
    Cacti says:

    @Keith G:

    “Oh for fuck sake” indeed. If what they do is to campaign (that IS an action, no?) on an issue that the Dems are weak on, then they get an advantage

    This announcement strikes me as a “ready, fire, aim” move from the RNC from a political standpoint. It doesn’t give a fig leaf of cover to the House GOP caucus, if they don’t bring it up for vote in the 10 months between now and the next election.

    122 Dems voted nay on renewing the sunset provisions of the Patriot Act in 2011 vs. only 31 GOPers. It takes 213 votes for a majority in the House. Of the remaining 203 House Republicans, only 60 would need to cross over for repeal to pass. If they don’t, what is their excuse?

    If one of the House Dems who voted nay tries to introduce legislation to repeal, how do they plausibly avoid letting it come to the floor, now that it’s the official RNC position? If it passes with mostly Dem support, how is it a political victory for the GOP?

    I think Reince got more than a few angry “WTF?” phone calls yesterday.

  138. 138
    LAC says:

    @srv: so, we got you, corner stone, and Mandalay here, as usual. Why don’t you trifecta of twats surprise us and offer some reality based solutions other than your usual “Hillary in 2016” sparkle pony whinings?

  139. 139
    LAC says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: they don’t here. If anyone dare to suggest a balance, board bullies like corner stone chug down their fifth whiskey and start swinging.

  140. 140
    Cervantes says:

    @LAC: What on earth are you talking about?

  141. 141
    Kropadope says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    I just love Cafeteria Democrats.

    Translation: Fall in line.

    Doin the old screenname proud.

Comments are closed.