JUST SUPPOSE...

[Buster's Uncle]

Obama’s job approval tumbles, Americans split on spying: Poll
By Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News | The Ticket – 3 hrs ago...

 
President Barack Obama delivers a keynote address ahead of the G-8 summit in Belfast, Northern Ireland, June 17, …President Barack Obama’s job approval rating fell sharply over the past month—from 53 to 45 percent, according to a new CNN poll. Fifty-four percent of Americans disapprove of the job he’s doing, also up from 45 percent, the survey found.

Sixty-one percent disapprove of the way he’s handling government surveillance of Americans in the aftermath of a series of dramatic reports about National Security Agency spying, while 35 percent approve.

Obama's early second term has been buffeted by a series of controversies—not just about the NSA surveillance, but also allegations of misconduct at the IRS and government spying on reporters. The president was expected to address those issues in a new interview with Charlie Rose, which airs Monday night.

What about Edward Snowden, who says he revealed the government’s secret to expose abuses? Forty-four percent approve of what he did, while 52 percent disapprove. Should the U.S. government attempt to bring him back to U.S. soil and prosecute him? Fifty-four percent say yes, 42 percent say no.

Even as the economy picks up steam, the poll found that Obama’s disapproval rating on that issue has ticked up steadily over the first six months of the year, from 51 percent in January, to 54 percent in April, to 57 percent in June.

Is Obama honest and trustworthy? Fifty percent say no, up from 41 percent in mid-May, while 49 percent say yes, down from 58 percent.

Americans are sending mixed messages on the NSA surveillance controversy—43 percent say Obama has gone too far in restricting civil liberties in the name of national security, 38 percent agree with him that he’s found the right balance, and 17 percent say he hasn’t gone far enough.

At the same time, 51 percent say the administration was right to collect the telephone records of Americans. Forty-eight percent say it was wrong.

Approval soars to 66 percent regarding the government’s snooping on personal information over the Internet. Thirty-three percent say it was wrong. (CNN’s question phrasing might have something to do with that. “The government reportedly does not target Internet usage by U.S. citizens and if such data is collected, it is kept under strict controls.”)

Still, it’s not because people don’t think it hasn’t happened to them: 62 percent told CNN they thought the government had collected and stored data about their personal telephone and Internet. Thirty-four percent say they did not think so.

Does the federal government pose an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of American citizens? A whopping 62 percent say it does, up from 56 percent the last time the question was asked, in February 2010.

The survey had an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-job-approval-tumbles-americans-split-spying-132827668.html

[Unorthodox]

Yeah, I'd just assumed all this time - but now it's one less thing they're not even bothering to pretend we're not a police state over...

Well, wasn't that basically what the patriot act was anyway? 

[Buster's Uncle]

Naked fascism?  Yes.

[Rusty Edge]

Well, I see a silver lining here. Now half of the people "get it". My wife liked George the Lesser. He talked tough against terrists. She is a Republican, and she trusted him. 

Now she sees what I've been ranting about for years.( "We don't need to abridge the Constitution, we need to act on the 911 commission report ! " )  Hopefully the under 30 crowd that only cares about politics and current events to the extent that it concerns student loans, is aware now.

[Green1]

Well, I see a silver lining here. Now half of the people "get it". My wife liked George the Lesser. He talked tough against terrists. She is a Republican, and she trusted him. 

Now she sees what I've been ranting about for years.( "We don't need to abridge the Constitution, we need to act on the 911 commission report ! " )  Hopefully the under 30 crowd that only cares about politics and current events to the extent that it concerns student loans, is aware now.

But, they are broke, so their opinion does not matter to the powers that be. Plus, they are being trained to give up information willingly via Facebook.
We need more folks who have (sometimes worthless) college degrees so they can work in the service industry for the elite. AAs and Bachelors degrees are the new high school diploma. It means they are conditioned to talk to the man's customers like a good slave. Unlike the old HS diploma, folks can get rich off of it. Soon, they will need an AA in Hotel Restaurant Management for the part time job working the broiler at Burger King. Academia and the politicians love it that way. If they have a huge loan to pay off, they are less likely to [complaint or disagreeable woman] and rebel against being oppressed in a [poopy] job, lol.

[Yitzi]

But, they are broke, so their opinion does not matter to the powers that be.

Although if enough of them decided to specifically vote for whoever spends the least money, it'd vastly reduce the amount that the politicians benefit from the support of those with money...

[Green1]

But, they are broke, so their opinion does not matter to the powers that be.

Although if enough of them decided to specifically vote for whoever spends the least money, it'd vastly reduce the amount that the politicians benefit from the support of those with money...

Yes, the peasants CAN revolt....

[Unorthodox]

. . . I know I'm a relic in many ways, included among them is only a HS diploma (ok, technically a GED, I'm technically dropout as I did not attend my senior year, having passed the GED my junior year, I went to work/college)...and I'm not doing half bad, thank you. 

[Geo]

. . . I know I'm a relic in many ways, included among them is only a HS diploma (ok, technically a GED, I'm technically dropout as I did not attend my senior year, having passed the GED my junior year, I went to work/college)...and I'm not doing half bad, thank you.

But you have about a generation of experience in your pocket.

[Geo]

One thing's sure: the day I step off a plane to enter the USA, I definitely make sure nothing suspectible is on whatever electronic device I bring with me. 

[Buster's Uncle]

Pelosi's defense of NSA surveillance draws boos
Associated Press – 12 hrs ago..

 
SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) — House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has disappointed some of her liberal base with her defense of the Obama administration's classified surveillance of U.S. residents' phone and Internet records.

Some of the activists attending the annual Netroots Nation political conference Saturday booed and interrupted the San Francisco Democrat when she commented on the surveillance programs carried out by the National Security Agency and revealed by a former contractor, Edward Snowden, The San Jose Mercury News reports (http://bit.ly/19fB6U4).

The boos came when Pelosi said that Snowden had violated the law and that the government needed to strike a balance between security and privacy.

As she was attempting to argue that Obama's approach to citizen surveillance was an improvement over the policies under President George W. Bush, an activist, identified by the Mercury News as Mac Perkel of Gilroy, stood up and tried loudly to question her, prompting security guards to escort him out of the convention hall.

"Leave him alone!" audience members shouted. Others yelled "Secrets and lies!," ''No secret courts!" and "Protect the First Amendment!," according to the Mercury News.

Perkel told the newspaper that he thinks Pelosi does not fully understand what the NSA is up to.

Several others in the audience walked out in support of Perkel.

"We're listening to our progressive leaders who are supposed to be on our side of the team saying it's OK for us to get targeted" for online surveillance, said Jana Thrift of Eugene, Ore. "It's crazy. I don't know who Nancy Pelosi really is."

Netroots Nation is an organizing and training convention for progressive political leaders. Pelosi was Saturday's keynote speaker at the event, which opened Thursday at the San Jose Convention Center and was scheduled to conclude Sunday.

Her remarks criticizing the Republican majority in the House and encouraging powerful women brought applause, cheers and laughs.

http://news.yahoo.com/pelosis-defense-nsa-surveillance-draws-boos-183845402.html

BOOO!

[Yitzi]

Yet another reason for my belief that the enemy isn't conservatives or liberals, but rather politicians of all sorts.

[JarlWolf]

In my country security has fallen to an abominable level ever since Yeltsin's Laissez Faire Funhouse failure, and maybe even before that, going as far back as the Brezhnev/Kosygin regime. The police are generally corrupt or underequipped for what they have to deal with. As for information were probably not too much better off then the United States; its just we have different issues then China prying into our sensitive information, its more of people within the nation that is the issue, not outsiders. There is lots of groups in the government, military and general populace over here that aren't very happy with the United Russia Party's gov't right now. The fact that the polls are bought in certain key regions (that grant the most amount of seats/sway) don't help matters much either. There is a lot of friction right now within my country and information is as precious as ever.

[Buster's Uncle]

Former judge admits flaws in secret court
Associated Press
STEPHEN BRAUN 21 hours ago


WASHINGTON (AP) — A former federal judge who served on a secret court overseeing the National Security Agency's secret surveillance programs said Tuesday the panel is independent but flawed because only the government's side is represented effectively in its deliberations.

"Anyone who has been a judge will tell you a judge needs to hear both sides of a case," said James Robertson, a former federal district judge based in Washington who served on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court for three years between 2002 and 2005. Robertson spoke during a Tuesday hearing of a federal oversight board directed by President Barack Obama to scrutinize government spying.

Robertson questioned whether the secret FISA court should provide overall legal approval for the surveillance programs, saying the court "has turned into something like an administrative agency." He is one of several judges with FISA experience who have spoken out recently to affirm the court's independence. But Robertson is the first to publicly air concerns about how the court grapples with the government's vast secret data collection programs.

Much of the NSA's surveillance is overseen by the FISA court, which meets in secret and renders rulings that are classified. Some of these rulings also likely been disclosed by Edward Snowden, the NSA systems analyst who leaked significant information about the spying program.

After Snowden began exposing the NSA's operations in June, Obama instructed the U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Board to lead a "national conversation" about the secret programs. The board, which took testimony Tuesday on the secret surveillance programs, has been given several secret briefings by national security officials and plans a comprehensive inquiry and a public report on the matter.

Robertson said he asked to join the FISA court "to see what it was up to," had previously played a central role in national security law. He was the judge who ruled against the Bush administration in the landmark Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld case, which granted inmates at the U.S. naval prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the right to challenge their detentions. That ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2006.

Robertson quit the FISA court in 2005, days after the New York Times revealed widespread NSA warrantless wiretapping under President George W. Bush's administration. Robertson had previously refused to explain his decision. But during a break in the hearing Tuesday he confirmed for the first time to the AP that he had "resigned in protest because the Bush administration was bypassing the court on warrantless wiretaps."

Robertson said that FISA court judges have been scrupulous in pushing back at times against the government, repeatedly sending back flawed warrants. He also said he came away from his FISA experience "deeply impressed by the careful, scrupulous and fastidious work by the Justice Department" in obtaining secret surveillance warrants.

But he warned that Congress' 2008 reform of the FISA system expanded the government's authority by forcing the court to approve entire surveillance systems, not just surveillance warrants, as it previously handled. Under the FISA changes, "the court is now approving programmatic surveillance. I don't think that is a judicial function," he said.

Robertson said that as the FISA court's role expanded, the system has failed to add authoritative legal adversaries who could act as effective checks on the government's programs in secret court proceedings. "This process needs an adversary," Robertson said, suggesting that the oversight board itself might play that role in the secret legal setting. Several other attorneys on the panel cautioned that such a change could only be authorized by Congress.

Steven Bradbury, a former top Bush administration lawyer who played a central role in national security decisions, questioned whether Robertson's call for a legal adversary inside the FISA court process could work because of strict limits on those with access to information about the top secret surveillance programs.

"In this context, you're talking about access to the most sensitive national security information," Bradbury said. Any adversary, he added, would "have to be an officer of the U.S. government and fully participate in the process."

The board heard Tuesday from several civil liberties activists and former Bush administration lawyers in its first public event since the spying operations were revealed in news reports.

American Civil Liberties Union Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer warned the oversight board that the government's massive sweeps of cellphone and telephone call logs and other data on phone and Internet communications erode privacy protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizure.

Snowden's disclosures revealed that the NSA collects phone "metadata" — records that omitted only the actual contents of conversations — from millions of Americans. A separate NSA surveillance program aimed solely at foreign terrorist suspects also sweeps up metadata about the Internet communications from smaller numbers of Americans, federal officials have acknowledged. Obama urged Americans not to worry about the secret programs because the contents of their communications are rarely targeted.

http://news.yahoo.com/former-judge-admits-flaws-secret-court-145541583.html