Home › Blogs › I.Heart.Krauthammer's blog ›

Obama In Your Computer

Submitted by I.Heart.Krauthammer on Mon, 08/31/2009 - 08:11
in

Weren't the Dems the ones shocked and appalled by George W. Bush's Patriot Act?

This morning, I read an article about a bill currently proposed in the U.S. Senate that will grant "temporary" access to the president over private home internet usage during a so-called, "cyber security emergency."  

So, when the President wanted to grant warrantless wire taps to gain information on possible terrorists after an actual national terrorist attack occurred on American soil, it was a travesty to tap phones?  But a cyber-security emergency, now that requires spying on Americans?

Let's be real:  This is a sad attempt by the liberal movement to silence the opposition.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans are genuinely frightened by the slippery slope the current health-care reform will lead this country into, and Obama's minions are trying to pass it in any way possible. 

Change? I think not..

Read the whole article at CNET news. (news.cnet.com)

0
Your rating: None

Comments

I read that

Submitted by Ray in TX on Tue, 09/01/2009 - 08:13.

Here's the link: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.html?tag=mncol

The only thing they want to silence are most likely the DOS attacks that seem to be happening with increasingly regularity.

And in case you haven't noticed, your right to protest and express dissent has increased in protection by about 1000% since the previous Republican president left office.

 

And the only thing the Bush

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Tue, 09/01/2009 - 09:29.

And the only thing the Bush administration wanted to silence were attacks against American interests that seemed to be happening with increasing regualrity.

And in case you haven't noticed, your right to protest and express dissent has increased in protection by about 1000% since the previous Republican president left office.

I think you mean your need to protest and express dissent has increased 1000% since the GOP left office.

I think you mean your need to

Submitted by Ray in TX on Tue, 09/01/2009 - 12:53.

I think you mean your need to protest and express dissent has increased 1000% since the GOP left office.

 

I meant exactly what I said. You can pee in your pants over idiotic conspiracy theories if you like, but you are definitely in the minority.

You are kidding of course?

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Tue, 09/01/2009 - 13:50.

You think that the left in this country would not have gone absolute bat-shit crazy if the Bush administration had floated this idea? At least try to be consistant!

As for who is and isn't in the minority-be careful with that, sport- you may want to look at some recent polls. You see, one day you are in the majority and the next day you aren't . . .stay tuned . . .

You think that the left in

Submitted by Ray in TX on Tue, 09/01/2009 - 18:27.

You think that the left in this country would not have gone absolute bat-shit crazy if the Bush administration had floated this idea? At least try to be consistant!

 

Floated?!? Are you kidding me? They were monitoring your phone calls and emails. There was no "floating" involved.  They went to the telecoms and said "this is what you will do" and then made sure they had immunity from prosecution when the shit hit the fan.

Did you go "bat-shit crazy" when that came out? Show me the post where you complained about that and then you might sound a little more credible. Otherwise, I'll simply presume that, like all partisans, you assume the best in your party and always the worst in the other.

Great Example

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 06:33.

When the Bush administration responded to an attack (that killed 3,000 Americans) by monitoring communications from potemtial terroists, I should have objected. Even though Obama did not object, and in fact has left the program in place because he (Obama) said it is a vital program to prevent further attacks.

However you say:

Floated?!? Are you kidding me? They were monitoring your phone calls and emails. There was no "floating" involved.  They went to the telecoms and said "this is what you will do" and then made sure they had immunity from prosecution when the shit hit the fan.

But (and I love this), when the Obama administration floats the idea of SHUTTING DOWN THE INTERNET, here's your thought process:

The only thing they want to silence are most likely the DOS attacks that seem to be happening with increasingly regularity.

and

You can pee in your pants over idiotic conspiracy theories if you like, but you are definitely in the minority.

So when its Republicans, its a violation of our right to privacy. When Obama suggests it, its just him trying to protect us. Anyone suggesting otherwise must believe in conspiracy theories.

So to summarize, you, Ray:

 I'll simply presume that, like all partisans, you assume the best in your party and always the worst in the other.

Well said. And thanks for the PERFECT example of blind partisanship.

ok, first of all, the Bush

Submitted by Ray in TX on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 07:46.

ok, first of all, the Bush administration DID monitor your calls and emails. There was no "floating". They did it then denied it. Then they said it was only known terrorists. Then they said it was only international calls. Then they decided to grant immunity to telecoms and hide behind the defense of national security.

It was an out and out power grab by the government, and you didn't say a word.

Now what did the article cited here say. The Obama administration wants to be able to protect the internet and other networks from external attacks. Do you read the news? Do you know how many DOS attacks are made from malicious people in Asia? I guarantee you that your IP address has been pinged at least 100 times from China already this morning.

I don't think you are aware of exactly how vulnerable the internet is to DOS attacks. But hey, Obama is a Democrat so this is the end of our constitution.

I didn't say the internet

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 09:15.

I didn't say the internet isn't vulnerable.

Here is my observation. When the Bush administration reacted to an actual attack on US soil by reducing our right to privacy. you and the left screamed. When Obama proposes to react in the same way to a potential threat, you and the left see that as a prudent and necessary measure.

I'm simply pointing out your double standard.