Obama adviser: Obama naive, “knee-jerk” on telecom immunity
posted at 7:05 am on March 8, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Barack Obama has resolutely opposed giving American telecommunications companies immunity from lawsuits for their work with the NSA, under Department of Justice assurances of legality, to assist in surveillance. He voted against the bipartisan Senate FISA reform bill that Democratic House leadership has stalled. Now Obama’s national-security advisor has gone public in opposing Obama on the key national security issue:
In a new interview with National Journal magazine, an intelligence adviser to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign broke with his candidate’s position opposing retroactive legal protection for telecommunications companies being sued for cooperating with a dubious U.S. government domestic surveillance program.
“I do believe strongly that [telecoms] should be granted that immunity,” former CIA official John Brennan told National Journal reporter Shane Harris in the interview. “They were told to [cooperate] by the appropriate authorities that were operating in a legal context.”
Disagreement on policy points occur between candidates and their advisers, although open breaks on major issues are somewhat rare. However, Brennan goes farther than just mere disagreement:
That wasn’t just a personal opinion, Brennan made clear to Harris. “My advice, to whoever is coming in [to the White House], is they need to spend some time learning, understanding what’s out there, identifying those key issues,” including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, he said — the law at the heart of the immunity debate.
“They need to make sure they do their homework, and it’s not just going to be knee-jerk responses,” Brennan said of the presidential hopefuls.
Brennan isn’t just some guy who did a couple of years at Langley and then wrote a book. He headed the National Counterterrorism Center, which coordinated efforts between the CIA, FBI, and other law-enforcement and intel agencies. He understands how to conduct counterintelligence and the resources needed for its success.
This statement will underscore the lack of seasoning that Obama would bring to the White House. Obama’s own policy adviser describes Obama’s position as one that lacks understanding and/or ignorant, as well as “knee-jerk”. It also points up another aspect of Obama on telecom immunity: for a man who claims he will forge bipartisan solutions, Obama seems determined to sabotage this bipartisan effort led by the man who endorses him as “brilliant”, Jay Rockefeller.
We can take from this that Obama is a naive, knee-jerk liberal who hasn’t done his homework on counterterrorism. And we apparently can quote the Obama campaign on that.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
The wheels are comin’ off this cart. It can only get worse for Obama from here, folks.
What’s next? His wife calling America racist? Obama himself saying how shameful it is to be American? His foreign policy advisor calling for billions in aid to Palestinian terrorists and the US military enforcement of a two-state “solution”? Oh wait… Yep, I’d agree with you, Ed – Obama is not ready for prime-time. He’s not even ready for dress rehearsal.
amkun on March 8, 2008 at 7:14 AM
While I applaud Mr.Brennan’s willingness to criticize the empty sackcloth that is Obama, I question his judgement in associating himself with said empty toga in the first place. It isn’t hard for the majority of Americans to dismiss Obama as unqualified without having to meet and work with him. But this “intelligence” officer didn’t get it? This is a negative endorsement of questionable value.
JiangxiDad on March 8, 2008 at 7:22 AM
Mornin’, Ed. Welcome to HA. I’ve been enjoying, and learning from, your comments.
Osamabama is indeed not ready for prime-time.
davidk on March 8, 2008 at 7:22 AM
Why would Obama’s National Security Officer risk his job and go public with his opinions like this? Especially now when Obama and Hillary are neck and neck. It’s very strange.
SoulGlo on March 8, 2008 at 7:27 AM
I have to say that Obama looks really good at the beach.
/sarc
Niko on March 8, 2008 at 7:36 AM
Power says he’s basically lying about Iraq and now Brennan’s calling him a “naive, knee-jerk liberal who hasn’t done his homework on counterterrorism.”
Are his top advisers actively out sabotaging him all of a sudden? Have they just now realized he might actually win and are a bit concerned by that idea?
Is the press suddenly asking the “right” questions or are they just now being less protective of him now?
Is it pure coincidence?
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 7:36 AM
OT (or maybe not), but to all Mississippians in the audience, please be mindful that your primary on Tuesday is open, so be sure to turn out for the Glacier, especially since the Republican primary is now mathematically meaningless.
Mark V. on March 8, 2008 at 7:39 AM
lets see no real foriegn policy, no real domestic policy..
how did obama get this far again?
trailortrash on March 8, 2008 at 7:41 AM
You’re getting the southside’s best here, guys. Right outta the Jesse/Jesse jr, Danny Davis, Stroger, Beavers, Daley, Bobby Rush mold…the list goes on and on.
LtE126 on March 8, 2008 at 7:43 AM
Reading the comments at the ABC blog, the majority of them still spew the “violating our privacy!” hysteria.
I didn’t realize that there was such a large movement to get Lynne Stewart on the Obama ticket.
rhodeymark on March 8, 2008 at 7:44 AM
Review time:
1. Elegan empty rhetoric.
2. Racism
3. Liberal guilt.
4. Identity politics.
5. Dumbing down of the electorate.
6. Fawning disingenuous media.
7. Lack of qualified democrats.
8. Liberalism
9. US success in Iraq.
10. BDS
feel free to add to the list. it’s endless. the list is called, What’s wrong with America.
JiangxiDad on March 8, 2008 at 7:47 AM
That’s a really good question. Part of it is his charisma, etc., but, I have this suspicion that anti-Hillary Dems and Independent/Republican crossovers voted purely to sink Hillary. I think that stopped last Tuesday when they realized he might actually win and Reps realized it was in their best interest to keep the race going.
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 7:54 AM
IMHO we are experiencing an “I.Claudius” moment in our system, most all of the decent,hard-working people in government have been destroyed by a machine/group interested in one thing only, their rise to power, leaving only Caligulas on deck and ready to assume the chair of “leadership”.
But where is the stuttering clubfoot that can save the Republic?
bbz123 on March 8, 2008 at 8:06 AM
Obama had to
accept the resignation offire senior adviser Powers, & he may be compelled to do the same to too-candid adviser Brennan.jgapinoy on March 8, 2008 at 8:07 AM
“Let all the poisons, that lurk in the mud, come out!”
I think we may be post-Claudius. Can’t you hear the fiddle?
Limerick on March 8, 2008 at 8:10 AM
Heh. I finally have a point of agreement with the Obambi campaign – this is exactly how I see him.
Jaibones on March 8, 2008 at 8:11 AM
Hey, who cares about the phone comapanies those guys are big business. You know all big business likes to steal. Besides, he’s for hope and change, hope and change!
I’m sure that is some of what will go through his zealot’s minds.
boomer on March 8, 2008 at 8:12 AM
Aw, c’mon, LtE; you’re not being fair here. Most of these guys you named are actually retarded …
Jaibones on March 8, 2008 at 8:12 AM
I think we have a bit of SNAFU here,if my memory
is correct,didn’t the Liberal Party go on the warpath
a year or two ago not wanting any kind of surveillance.
And then the Liberals went ballistic over spying on
Americans,which wasn’t going on to begin with,they
kept this caniption fit going for months on every
MSM,and again they blamed President Bush!
This bipartisan the Liberal’s are talking about should
be mute,because in eight years,President Bush’s two
terms,I didn’t see the Democrats reaching across isle
as their claiming,they spent more time demonizing Bush!
canopfor on March 8, 2008 at 8:24 AM
You know, instead of B.O. sending out his faithful cronies to do the majority of blathering and bloviating for him, it would be nice to see this guy actually step out of the shadows just one time and tell us all just who he is, what he has done and what he could do if elected President. And I don’t mean get up and offer hope, change, a promising future, and Oprah. I mean actually tell the country what his plans are, why he thinks they will make this a better country, and most important, HOW he plans to implement them. If the guy was really sincere on that aspect, I would have more respect and trust in him. What’s more, he could stop the Shillary Spin Machine dead in its tracks. But so far, all we get are his mouthpieces, not him. He keeps this up, he will lose followers, and he won’t even make it to the convention in August.
pilamaye on March 8, 2008 at 8:28 AM
How did it come to this; our political system has given us a choice between McCain, Hills Clinton, and the empty suit? Is this the best our system could offer us? How far down the sewer pipe have we drifted?
My best guess; who in their “right mind” would enter into a system that has built itself around the destruction of those who dare enter. The politics of personal assassination rather than the politics of ideas and solutions; this is what our system has become.
What part has the media played in this dynamic? What part has Hollywood and film makers played in this dynamic? How did we get here? What can we do to end this dynamic and get back to ideas and solutions?
This is a debate that should take place with all fair minded Americans of all races & religions. Obama doesn’t belong in this race; he is a rookie, plain & simple. Clinton is not a rookie in my view, but is an example of one who has taken our system into the politics of personal assassination rather than a system that breeds ideas and solutions while promoting free markets “capitalism”. McCain is a seasoned politician, which is about the only positive I can come up with.
Geez; what a choice….
Keemo on March 8, 2008 at 8:32 AM
Obama can’t afford to tell people what his plans are, not if he wants to get elected. He favors amnesty and full rights of U.S. citizenship for all illegal aliens — something the majority of U.S. voters oppose; he favors more affirmative action and racial preference programs — something the majority of U.S. voters oppose; he favors giving nearly $1 trillion of U.S. tax dollars to the United Nations to fight “global poverty” — something the majority of U.S. taxpayers (if they knew about it) would oppose.
Obama is not only ignorant (national security) and untrustworthy (e.g., the NAFTA doublespeak), he is a big-taxing and big-spending liberal who is far left of the majority of the voting American public on almost every issue.
AZCoyote on March 8, 2008 at 8:37 AM
B Hussein has always been a stupid, ignorant knee jerk liberal. Oh I forgot SPINELESS. How many times did he vote present? Close to 200?
Yeah he really stands for something. Like his campaign admitted during an interview that he couldnt be expected to act as President according to what he said during the campaign.. (with regards to pulling out of Iraq)
Yeah they actually said that.
dogsoldier on March 8, 2008 at 8:43 AM
Follow the money, Honeys! The trial lawyers stand to make gazillions of dollars off frivolous settled-out-of-court FISA-related lawsuits against the telecoms. They are off on the sidelines waqving huge bags of “campaign contribution” bribes and no pol in his or her right mind is going to ignore all that needed cash.
GeneSmith on March 8, 2008 at 8:49 AM
pilamye, AZCoyote,
I said it Wednesday, I’ll say it again; the HildaBeast will be the nominee. The Messiah has no clothes. He was a shooting star, gravity (and the Clinton goon squad) will bring him back to earth. He has no clue what to do beyond “hope, change we can believe in…blah, blah blah..”
The DemoncRAT party will eventually see this and throw him under the bus, in a New York minute. Keep in mind the Party lust for power ( as well as the Clintons) plus BDS = the HildaBeast at the top of the ticket.
Rush and the Republicans that voted for the HildaBeast last Tuesday made a big mistake. The Messiah would be far easier to defeat than HELLARY. She is much tougher than O’Bambi, as we saw last week.
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 8:54 AM
It appears that Obama’s policy advisors are just names on a list to pretty up his empty resume’.
It begs the question: How can a parent of young children can be so cavalier with our national security at a time of war?
Buy Danish on March 8, 2008 at 9:00 AM
GeneSmith,
Obama just raised 55M in one month. People are starting to demand answers for this dynamic “where is this money coming from”. Most contributers are “once” or “twice” donors, and have already given what they can. Clinton can’t attack Obama with this issue, as she must avoid transparency also. McCain would be wise to demand that these donations be made available to the public; let’s see exactly where these funds are coming from…
Keemo on March 8, 2008 at 9:01 AM
OK, since this is BarackObama’s advisor, isn’t it safe to say that he fully advised BarackObama about the issue?
Why are we giving BarackObama every possible benefit of the doubt and assuming he doesn’t know what he’s doing? It’s obvious the guy knows EXACTLY what he’s doing.
logis on March 8, 2008 at 9:12 AM
BO candidacy is a youth concept with racial underpinnings. Should HRC get the nomination, Dems could lose many voters for a generation.
Very strange times for the DNC.
swami on March 8, 2008 at 9:15 AM
Keemo,
You ask what part did the media play? They selected both (O’Bambi, maybe prematurely) O’Bambi and John McCain. They gave both much more favorable coverage. Why? Because they are clearly the most liberal candidates from their parties.
If the media sees that O’Bambi is not ready for prime-time, they will turn on him and back the HildaBeast. Now that McCain is the nominee, the MSM will try to destroy him, they want the most liberal candidate to win in the general.
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 9:15 AM
moutainmanbob,
Rush was dead on target with his goals. Keeping Hillary in the race will do more damage to the Democrat Party than Republicans could ever dream of doing on their own. I agree with you that Hillary will be the nominee. Hillary will also expose to all black Americans exactly where they stand in the party ranks; black America is now getting a wake-up call, a stiff reality check on just how badly they have been used by white elitist Liberals such as the Clinton’s… Hillary must cater to the Mexican vote, while throwing the black vote under the bus. It’s high time for black Americans to wake up and start standing up on their own, rather than being consistently held down by government hand-outs. It’s high time black Americans wake up and see how the DNC keeps hatred between races “alive and well”, as put on national view during Katrina.
Keemo on March 8, 2008 at 9:16 AM
It’s not strange at all. How much do you want to bet Mr. Brennen is banking on a good position in the next Clinton administration? And I’m not kidding.
I expect a few more moles to come popping out of Obama’s hallowed ground in the next few weeks. It seems to be a classic Clintonian strategy. Get the opponent all tangled up and looking stupid arguing with his own team.
miles on March 8, 2008 at 9:23 AM
I agree the demolition derby will be fun to watch.
As far as damaging the DemoncRAT party goes, that presumes that they have any morals, ethics, integrity and really care about the best interests of America. I submit, they care about none of the aforementioned. They threw all that out the window 16 years ago when they elected and still adore an adulterer, Narcissistic, felonius, treasonus Bastard.
Win back the White House, whatever it takes. That is all they care about.
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Up until now, Obama hasn’t done ANY homework on ANY issue. He just talks about it off the seat of his pants or promotes a position that he thinks will grab his constituency. He appears to be un-willing or unable to really inform himself on most issues. That, to me, bodes a would-be President of a country run by advisers whose commander-in-chief’s main function is to take advice. He is an “empty suit” so far.
jeanie on March 8, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Those who are interested in facts and not just in bashing Obama would be well served to recall once again that it is manifestly false that the companies thought the requests were legal, and one company explicitly refused to cooperate with illegal demands byt he government as was the right thing to do.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 9:45 AM
If that were the case, they wouldn’t have waited until he had a practically insurmountable lead.
The only way for Hillary to “win” now is to destroy the party which decreases the chances of winning the Presidency exponentially. Good for us shes so narcissistic that little fact does not bother her. If she can’t have it, she’s going to make sure Obama can’t either.
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 9:49 AM
You must be lost Little Lamb. Let me help you. dKos, DU and Huffpo are this way
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 9:51 AM
Those who are interested in facts and not just in bashing Obama would be well served to recall once again that it is manifestly false that the companies thought the requests were legal, and one company explicitly refused to cooperate with illegal demands by he government as was the right thing to do.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 9:45 AM
As Ed so appropriately stated “ignorance confirmed”…
Keemo on March 8, 2008 at 10:04 AM
As I have so appropriately and repeatedly stated it’s hard to hate America more than a Republican partisan does. It’s only from a person like that we will hear that American courts are incapable of dealing with complicated dilemmas “security vs personal rights of citizens”. Everybody else thinks our system of checks and balances works fairly well.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 10:09 AM
“….checks and balances works farily well.” I wonder if you’ll think that when/if the telecommunications companies are vindicated? Bet not!!
jeanie on March 8, 2008 at 10:15 AM
Aren’t you all delighted the huckster stayed in so long so that mccain could rap up the rep nomination – so we lost hunter, fred, and mitt. Any one of them would be a better candidate and someone we could get behind. Then we have the evangelical, who endorsed mccain, going after catholics (you knew they’d come after you, after they finished with the Mormons) and mccain having to repudiate what he said. We are in a mess! We need someone who is tough on security, tough on immigration (also a security problem), knows about the economy. Well we lost them. God bless my adopted country, we certainly need it.
As for freevillage – how many attacks since 9/11? Grow up!
Bambi on March 8, 2008 at 10:15 AM
What you have here freevillage, is a very informed community of regular folks. You come in here and start your comment with “Those who are interested in facts”… Bingo, disqualified yourself right there; typical elitist attitude.
Keemo on March 8, 2008 at 10:17 AM
Wow. Many of your comments on HA have been, how to put it, lacking in so many fundamental ways, but I never expected this from you. What planet have you recently relocated to?
shibumiglass on March 8, 2008 at 10:19 AM
The only people who think our system works fine are criminals and criminal defense attorneys.
In fact, we have a famous saying in this country that our system is terrible but it just happens to be better than any other.
I can understand where a Russian would be very sensitive to this sort of thing given the history, here in this country, we don’t have that sort of history. The government isn’t listening to calls to find political enemies or even regular criminal activity. They are listening to calls from/between known terrorists that mostly originate outside of the country but happen to pass through switches located in the US. Even if they wanted to “spy on regular Americans” they don’t have the time or the manpower to do it.
Even if they somehow managed to hear you discuss some sort of illegal activity not related to terrorism and tried to prosecute you for it, it would be thrown out of court and jeopardize their future ability to monitor terrorists because they would be seen to have lied about their purpose.
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 10:25 AM
Finally we begin to see inside the Obama camp. With Powers anti-semitic stand on Israel, which along with other “ethnic cleansing” comments she’s made recently in my opinion, is what forced her “resignation”, I somehow don’t see Obama disagreeing with the “Hillary is a Monster” comment enough to dismiss his long time “advisor”. Instead, he’s concerned that people will see what he’s really about. And now Brennan, another top advisor has come out to cross swords with Obama. Could it be, could it really be, that finally those who have jumped on the wagon with Brother Love’s Traveling Salvation Show are seeing that this wagon is not bound for the Promise Land, but instead is heading over the precipice to disaster?
monique on March 8, 2008 at 10:27 AM
I frankly don’t think this community is “very informed”. This community is right-wing for sure, as I tend to be on a lot of issues. But it is obvious in my mind that the left ideas are often perverted here beyond belief and no reasonable attempt is made to understand their position. This is painfully obvious when looking at pictures that accompany news involving a left wing politician. The level of objectivity and intellectual honestly that was involved in selecting the image then often (although not always) translates into a commentary.
So, I mean, if I am disqualified in your eyes, don’t read my posts. Several people have disqualified themselves as far as I’m concerned, so I ignore what they write. I also note how this “My advice, to whoever is coming in [to the White House], is they need to spend some time learning, understanding what’s out there, identifying those key issues” was viewed by you as elitist.
Now back to the issue. It’s a fact that one company refused to provide the government the kind of information they wanted. They suffered no consequence as a result. I think it’s fair to suspect that other companies should have done the same. I think a court will be able to determine who’r right.
And I’m not interested n punishing companies for the sake of it. I support business. I’m interested in clear rules. A court decision could let the companies off the hook but outline some standards. The latter then we can either accept or try and change them through the legislature.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 10:32 AM
NEWS FLASH Obama is naive and knee-jerk about far more than the Telecomms.
TooTall on March 8, 2008 at 10:33 AM
freevillage,
Maybe you need to be reminded about how your good liberal judges (think Ruth “Buzzy” Ginsburg the former General Counsel of the ACLU, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the most overturned court in America, the loony Lefty judges in MA & VT that keep releasing pedophiles, just to name a few) have made America a better place.
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 10:33 AM
I am not a McCain fan although I will support him wholeheartdly now over Hillbama. However, I have to disagree that he is the wrong candidate. Actually, it may turn out he is uniquely positioned to be the only Republican with a true shot to win in what is widely expected to be a bad year for Republicans. The economy is tanking very quickly. All the indicators point to stagflation. The dollar is crashing and commodity prices are going through the roof. Gold is at $1K and is likely going to $1.5K. Oil’s at $105 and most experts think $150 is right around the corner. Home values are in steep decline. Defaults are way up. Etc., etc. The party in power always pays for a bad economy without exception.
Given McCain can truly attract independents, and what the Dems are likely to do to themselves over the next 5 months, he may be the only Republican truly capable of winning an election Republics have no business winning from a purely historical perspective…
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I have commented elsewhere that what scares me the most about the prospect of an Obama presidency is that it looks so much like it will be a reprise of Jimmy Carter. Obama, like Carter, seems like a well-intentioned but totally misguided amateur, particularly naive in foreign affairs. And, like Carter, who purposely fostered disagreement and dissension in senior administration officials — which led only to chaos and fecklessness — Obama seems to be setting up a situation where people like Brennan will constantly be at odds with Obama’s thoughtless pandering to liberal shibboleths. In short, an Obama presidency promises to be the same experience as the ineffectual, Pelosi-led House of Representatives, writ large.
VG
Voiceguy on March 8, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I think most of us are a little more interested in if any American lives suffered as a result of not cooperating.
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Either way this is bad for Obama, does he let a qualified adviser go that disagrees with him and replace him with one that may be unqualified that does fall in line with his policies or does he keep the adviser and risk being exposed as weak, unqualified himself or just unwise.
Speakup on March 8, 2008 at 10:40 AM
First, I generally regard ACLU quite highly. It doesn’t mean I support their position in every case but they have absolutely made this country a better place.
Secondly, I support more conservative (or better libertarian) courts. In particular, I think the SCOTUS has gotten much better recently. It is therefore possible to correct for whatever deficiency the current composition of a court suffers from.
I supported Mitt Romney in this election cycle. I along with Ann Coulter and others find it insane that the Republican party has chosen McCain as a candidate. It doesn’t mean I will not run around claiming the executive power of the President needs to be curbed since “look who we’ve got there”.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 10:42 AM
A little more than… what exactly? The US Constitution? I see.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 10:44 AM
It doesn’t mean I will run around
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 10:48 AM
freevillage,
I consider myself a Libertarian Conservative. I am thoroughly disgusted with the Republican Party, having been a life-long member and watching it drift left on spending, immigration and fighting a PC war.
However, the ACLU is one of the most anti-American organizations I can think of. One of the most high profile lawyers to come from the ACLU, Ruth Bader Ginsburg now sits on the Supreme Court. Do you believe her and her rulings (supported the age of consent 12 years old, consistently votes supporting partial-birth abortion, etc.)to have helped make America a better place?
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 11:08 AM
No, more than whether the company suffered as a result of not cooperating. Did you forget what you wrote already?
But, for your information, since you might not legitimately know this (your site is in Russian so I’m, assuming you weren’t born here), we suspend portions of the Constitution during times of war. Maybe you have also heard the famous phrase from Abraham Lincoln, “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.”
I give you this from Thomas Jefferson:
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Vladimir Lenin had a name for people who believe such utter nonsense. It is a shame that people so blindly follow and admire the work against us by the Anti-American Civil Lying Union. The ACLU works against the protections this country is supposed to afford its citizens and works to the favor of terrorists, who count on them to do so. As with you, the ACLU are useful idiots and should be regarded as such.
Steel on March 8, 2008 at 11:13 AM
I’m sure you’re a good student of Lenin on many more subjects than just dealing with the opposition.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 11:22 AM
You are who you are and you support and admire those who work against the U.S. and our citizens. I’m fine with who I am and comfortable with who I am not. Nice try, though (not really).
Steel on March 8, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Those who are interested in facts and not just in bashing Obama would be well served to recall once again that it is manifestly false that the companies thought the requests were legal, and one company explicitly refused to cooperate with illegal demands byt he government as was the right thing to do.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 9:45 AM
How about some of those “facts” to back-up your statement here FV…
Keemo on March 8, 2008 at 11:28 AM
The more I read and seek to understand the stances of Obama and apparently freevillage, the more the term “ignorant” seems to be completely accurate. Not to imply that either are too stupid to understand, but instead they choose to ignore that which does not fit their predetermined conclusions and deepest, darkest desires. I believe that Obama has done his homework and simply chooses to ignore what is inconvenient to the ends he hopes to achieve and instead works in the favor of those who otherwise do not support him or his aspirations.
Purposeful ignorance is not a badge of honor. It is a shameful attribute to display so publicly and is deserving of zero admiration.
Steel on March 8, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Really? You do know that this is the same ACLU that has defended terrorists and child rapists. Right?
SoulGlo on March 8, 2008 at 11:35 AM
And routinely, methodically goes after the Boy Scouts. Defends NAMBLA. Child pornographers. Goes after Christian symbols. Protect’s and/or does not challenge Islamic symbols and accommodations. Etc, etc.
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 11:40 AM
freevillage,
Care to answer my questions? Does support of partial-birth abortion, age of consent 12, and the other anti-American
positions taken by the ACLU (Association of Communist Lawyers Union) cited by others here make America a better place?
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 11:49 AM
freevillage,
Would you please explain why and how?
shibumiglass on March 8, 2008 at 11:55 AM
freevillage,
Hello? Sound of crickets……………
mountainmanbob on March 8, 2008 at 11:56 AM
“Lacking of seasoning“?
Doesn’t matter.
Just stick a fork in this turkey.
He’s done.
profitsbeard on March 8, 2008 at 11:58 AM
Obama’s just doing what his white liberal contributors are telling him to do. He’s nothing more than an errand boy for MoveOn.org and George Soros.
NoDonkey on March 8, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Maybe in the general but the Barakbots will make sure he’s the nominee.
TheBigOldDog on March 8, 2008 at 12:04 PM
As someone who is relatively new to national politics, I think its somewhat odd to have a campaign that repeatedly points out what an inept fool their candidate is on foreign affairs.
Am I just being naive?
Mattpat11 on March 8, 2008 at 12:21 PM
That the Clintonistas will finish him off, by any means, is the irony of all ironies. They can’t stand him for even contemplating to interfere with their ‘glorious’ time in history, his inexperiences aside. His hutspa to dare enter the race is infuriating to them. This is a major reason why he should not take the 2nd spot. They’ll demean him into oblivion.
Entelechy on March 8, 2008 at 1:30 PM
If the RNC doesn’t, they just don’t want to win.
SouthernGent on March 8, 2008 at 1:47 PM
1 Messiah advisor says he’s wrong on FISA.
1 Messiah advisor says he’s not ready for a 3am call.
1 Messiah advisor says he’s full of crap on NAFTA.
1 Messiah advisor says he’s full of crap on Iraq, calls Hillary a monster, resigns.
And that was just this week.
Chuck Schick on March 8, 2008 at 2:07 PM
The advisers seem more savvy than the candidate, having to resign, aside.
Entelechy on March 8, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Anyone else notice, the more we learn about the Obama’s, the less popular they become?
Hog Wild on March 8, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Tick tock, tick tock.
November is coming but not soon enough for Team O.
PattyJ on March 8, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Pretty much ties it down.
Next question.
snaggletoothie on March 8, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Oh thats the “Hope” and “Change” that Obama is promising?
A huge class action lawsuit against the American telecommunications companies?
Oh…. then Reparations or slavery is suppose? ish..
Chakra Hammer on March 8, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Roll with the changes…(I think it needs more Cowbell)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-XRvteZhpI
Chakra Hammer on March 8, 2008 at 3:34 PM
Oh yeah, six and a half more weeks of intraparty strife before the PA primary. The only good to come of it will be to the Republican party and to the state of PA, where this unexpected economic stimulus will aid the sluggish economy.
‘Change’ to Obama: opposing what Bush would favor. Someone in PA should ask Obama whether ‘change’ means earmark elimination. Particularly while visiting Johnstown.
thirtypundit on March 8, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Those who are interested in facts and not just in bashing Obama would be well served to recall once again that it is manifestly false that the companies thought the requests were legal, and one company explicitly refused to cooperate with illegal demands byt he government as was the right thing to do.
Freevillage, sorry, but we here at HotAir are not interested in enriching the trial lawyers in all this, nor aiding our enemies in this war, which is precisely what those who oppose our government’s spying on our enemies are doing.
This is a national security issue, period. Our very existence is at stake, whether you believe it or not.
The trial lawyers can go get bent.
BTW-Just whose side are you on, exactly?
Dave R. on March 8, 2008 at 3:50 PM
freevillage is right about one thing. I could state that the left hates America on almost any HotAir thread, and it would hardly raise a single eyebrow.
“Now back to the issue. It’s a fact that one company refused to provide the government the kind of information they wanted. They suffered no consequence as a result. I think it’s fair to suspect that other companies should have done the same.”
I’m not sure why it’s fair to assume that they should have refused to do what Congess agrees they should be compelled to do — or that those who did what Congress now officially concludes is the right thing should be punished. The onus for keeping the federal government in check does not rest on private business.
“A court decision could let the companies off the hook but outline some standards. The latter then we can either accept or try and change them through the legislature.”
This is a misguided formulation in two very basic regards. First, the burden for outlining standards resides in the legislature not the courts. Second, if the government made improper demands on business, the businesses who acceded are the victims of an illegal act themselves, not the perpetrators. If reparations are in order as a consequence of such cooperation, it is the government who should properly pay the price. Congressional refusal to indemnify such businesses retroactively is like having your illegal cake, eating it too, and making private enterprise foot the bill.
JM Hanes on March 8, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Since Obama doesn’t understand the WOT, perhaps we should send him some Vince Flynn books.
Domino on March 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM
First of all, it’s a silly line of argument. Assuming Ruth Ginsburg is the Devil reincarnated it doesn’t say anything about the organization she once belonged to.
I am unapologetically pro-choice. However, I do object to removal of parental consent before a certain age. I can live with restrictions on abortions if the mother can give the child up. Again, I disagree with certain decisions by ACLU. Overall I regard them very highly.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Yes. This is what criminal lawyers do. Every suspect is entitled to a fair trial and competent representation. If you didn’t hate America so much, you’d know it’s in its Constitution.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 5:18 PM
The evildoers’.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 5:24 PM
OK. Make this argument in court. Or expect the court to throw the case away. I mean if it’s such a bullet proof legal argument, how come you don’t trust an American court to come to the same conclusion?
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 5:28 PM
Yeah.You could trust the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to come up with the right conclusion.
sheriff246 on March 8, 2008 at 5:51 PM
You seem to think the the decision of one U.S. District Court would be binding on every other court in the nation. It would not. You also seem to think that the enormous expense of defending numerous lawsuits in numerous different jurisdictions — which is what would happen if the phone companies are denied immunity — would be inconsequential. It would not.
AZCoyote on March 8, 2008 at 6:37 PM
You seem to think that separation of powers is an abstract concept that can be set aside whenever convenient. You also seem to think such a violation will go without consequences. It won’t.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Me thinks freevillage is a liberal. Did’nt Hillary say it takes a village?
Johan Klaus on March 8, 2008 at 8:04 PM
It’s ok. Everything is ok. Obama transcends terrorism.
Montana on March 8, 2008 at 8:42 PM
Who would have believed anybody who said that there might be attacks on America from Islamic terrorists in 2001?
In America, as in elsewhere, people are the same, they do not heed calls of warning.
So, go ahead.
I warned you long time ago about Hussein Barack.
Elect him, but don’t cry later.
Idiots.
Indy Conservative on March 8, 2008 at 8:54 PM
I just love how the government can tell a company to assist them,, then later,, throw them to the wolves because, well, they assisted them.
So,, in other words,, we are all just property to be used and thrown away at the whim of government.
JellyToast on March 8, 2008 at 9:23 PM
If you believe in separation of powers, why do you think courts should “outline some standards”? That is precisely how liberal dems are taking this country down one notch at a time.
shibumiglass on March 8, 2008 at 10:55 PM
“I mean if it’s such a bullet proof legal argument, how come you don’t trust an American court to come to the same conclusion?”
Because telecoms, not the government, will be the defendants. Judges cannot simply right any wrong they happen to notice from the bench (See: Separation of Powers). It’s not a question of bullet proof arguments, but of who actually has the standing to make them. That’s the point.
On the flip side, you’ve made no argument at all as to why telecoms should not be indemnified retrospectively, just a vague sense that all of them ought to have refused their cooperation because apparently one company did so — in circumstances which are not entirely clear. Apparently Congress came to the opposite conclusion in deciding to compel such cooperation in future.
JM Hanes on March 8, 2008 at 11:26 PM
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/BurtPrelutsky/2008/03/07/a_12_step_program_for_recovering_liberals?page=full&comments=true
Speakup on March 9, 2008 at 1:01 AM
So now the ACLU is just another (well-heeled) defense law firm? Not an American Civil Liberties group? Please, make up your mind. Which is it? And whose side on they are on? The side of America and its civil liberties (like not having neo-Nazis march though a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie), or on the side of the enemies of America (including the loonytoons calling themselves progressives)? Is there nothing about America that is worth defending, or is it necessary to hope to che’nge everything? And che’nging everything by fiat from the courts, rather than the legislative process? Why do you think the abortion issue went through the courts rather than the legislative process? It would never have passed muster, or in enough states, to make it into law. Is that what you want, the courts overstepping their constitutional powers to review laws, and instead make them? Who elects the Supreme Court anyway? I sure haven’t voted for one SC justice in my 30 plus years of voting, nor had the opportunity to do so.
RickZ on March 9, 2008 at 8:19 AM
That was awesome. Thanks. I’m going to give it to my mom and sister along with a pocket Constitution.
shibumiglass on March 9, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »