Comments on: Obama’s Surveillance State

By: Phillip Ellis Jackson

Phillip Ellis Jackson — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 11:01:31 +0000

Patrick: Just don't mention catepillars when you and cousin Ahmed talk. You might get indicted by the Spanish Government for a torture-related terrorist threat.

"In an insane society, only the sane are regarded as insane" — Star Trek

By: Patrick Mulligan

Patrick Mulligan — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:28:52 +0000

Raymond,

How many years does Obama get before "Bush did it too!" loses the ability to excuse any and all of his misdeeds (misdeeds as liberals seen them during the Bush administration, that is)? And why didn't the same apply to the Bush administration? Bear in mind, after all, that it was Clinton's DOJ that oversaw Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the Elian Gonzalez case. Could not Bush have cried, "Clinton did it too!"? Granted, at least they weren't doing anything as egregious as tapping phone calls routed through the US to foreign countries to spy on terrorists (evidenced by the fact that America suffered four Islamic terrorist attacks during Clinton's terms, and 9/11 8 months after he left office), but personally I'm more scared of US Marshals shoving a machine gun in my face than listening to my phone calls to my cousin Ahmed in Saudi Arabia…

By: milbrat

milbrat — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:09:08 +0000

Utilizing the classification of 'State Secret' or the invoking of executive privilege is always indicative of malfeasance in a republican administration. You can ALWAYS expect press secretaries, and other administration officials to be relentlessly pursued regarding such things. You may also count on the MSM to work overtime to uncover details of such programs and then publish those details in the morning edition.

However; the Religion of Liberalism always seeks power, and the wielding of that power is NEVER wrong. Liberals can always be depended upon to exercise proper restraint, so transparency is just electioneering.

The Bush Administration had no expectation of secrecy, but the Messiah? He has reason to keep much of the agenda under wraps and a complicit press will not concern themselves with it.

By: Andrew Alexander

Andrew Alexander — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:53:19 +0000

Raymond, I think you'll find that David Theroux, Ivan Eland, and Robert Higgs have been very consistent critics of the Bush administration.

Also, every time Obama continues a Bush adminstration policy — Iraq, Aghanistan, executive privilege, just to name a few — it is noteworthy. After all, his entire campaign was built on withdrawal from Iraq and "change" from Bush administration policies, including increased transparency in government.

By: Raymond Ingles

Raymond Ingles — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:05:43 +0000

When did the negotiations for ACTA begin? When did the controversy over ACTA begin? When did the article appear on Intellectual Conservative?

By: Anderson

Anderson — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:59:23 +0000

Where in this article did it ever say it was ok when Bush was doing it?

By: Raymond Ingles

Raymond Ingles — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:13:10 +0000

But it was okay when Bush was doing it... Still, I'm officially more upset now.