Greenwald: You’re All Just A Bunch Of Dick Cheneys!

I’m embarrassed for him.

First of all, a lot of Democrats have been very outspoken in calling for reforming the warrantless, criminal mess left behind by the former Republican model of freaking the fuck out and laughing off questions later.

Second, it is, in fact, a Democratic president currently presiding over an overhaul of our surveillance gathering techniques that are already accountable to the three branches of government.

Third, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush were vicious liars and relentless warmongers of the highest order, realizing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, a busted treasury, and dragging us into wars– wars that are currently coming to an end under a Democratic president.

As Glenn Greenwald seems to forget, it was Democrats like Patrick Leahy who were obstructing passage of the Patriot Act until he received a letter filled with anthrax in the mail, and Republicans like James Sensenbrenner who literally turned the lights out on debate over its extension.

Fourthly, “go fuck yourself.” Hard.

This entry was posted in George W. Bush, Glenn Greenwald, History, Karl Ruprect Rove, Lying Liars, NSA, Republican Party, Terrorism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

    I might note that a number of people on the left were busily calling out the breaches of civil liberties, including the warrantless collection of data by the Bush Administration long before Glenn stopped cheerleading for that same administration. I might also note that Glenn’s “conversion” and “concern” happened right around the time Democrats took over Congress. Then his “OMG!!!” moment appears right after a new (black) President starts making sure that there are warrants, that there’s a defined (and quite legal) procedure which also enhances privacy protections to go along with those warrants, and there are major changes in the Patriot Act about that.

    I should also note that Glenn has been very, very upset with The Guardian because they went and published a book about Snowden, thus beating him to press and not lining his pockets. Glenn’s concern for civil liberties mostly revolve around getting himself attention and a paycheck.

    • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

      Bob Cesca: “…First of all, a lot of Democrats have been very outspoken in calling for reforming the warrantless, criminal mess…”

      Yes.
      Then, Bob Cesca’s comment section crew called those Dems… “Paultards.”
      Even though Bob himself agreed with those same Dems through May 2011…
      http://bobcesca.thedailybanter.com/blog-archives/2011/05/no-sir-i-dont-like-it.html
      And right up until when…? June 2013 (Snowden disclosures)

      Did Bob Cesca say the President was on the wrong side of that issue because he’s “new” or “black” as Norbrook assumes here?

      • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

        First of all, shouldn’t you be addressing Mr. Brink?
        Secondly, many opinions and debates occur on this site and citing a singular post as being definitive seems a bit strange to me.
        In any event, Glenn Greendrone is a self aggrandizing attention whore who writes articles in defense of his own preconceived bias rather than a true investigative journalist.
        He and Snowden have become more like James O Keefe and Andrew Breitbart.

        • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

          Oh. Did Mr. Brink also say Dems calling for Patriot Act reforms were “Paultards”?

          Then yes… he’s also a hypocrite on Bob’s own site that plainly said who was on the right side and wrong side of the topic.

          • mrbrink

            With Democrats, I get all the reforming without all the psycho religious free-market fundamentalism.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            So self-described liberal “pragmatists” had to part with opportunistic libertarians on the exact same privacy concerns they once gave a damn about… because they might get some other kinda Ayn Rand crazy on them… and it’s now better to be aligned with neocons Mike Rogers, Peter King, and James Clapper?

            I see.

          • ruth crocker

            not parting ways on civil liberties and privacy concerns, but not agreeing as to what constitutes a privacy concern, and preferring to examine the evidence rationally rather than get hysterical over every non-revelation. the funny thing is greenwald resembles cheney in his absolute conviction that he is completely right, his inability to take new ideas and new evidence on board, his inability to admit he’s wrong, his idea that everyone who doesn’t completely agree with him is an enemy, and his utter lack of humor. you seem a bit that way yourself.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            Ruth Crocker: “…his idea that everyone who doesn’t completely agree with him is an enemy…”

            So back in 2001 – 2007 when liberals opposed the Patriot Act… we just weren’t giving the other side a fair shake on their disagreements with us? We should have done a better job of listening… and caring for the opinions of our opponents policies and philosophies?

            I’m having a debate with a wingnut on “voter ID as poll tax” on another site. I’ll have to be sure to mention to this idiot that I don’t really consider him “an enemy” of constitutional voting rights. Cause I care.

          • beulahmo

            How charming. Your little trick of twisting a person’s words to construct an absurd false binary choice is Greenwald’s signature debate tactic — and now it’s yours too. It’s just delightful. Seriously, you sound just like him, and I know that must make you proud.
            You and I both know those cute little ridiculous analogies you just wrote don’t reflect the meaning of what Ruth said, so I won’t waste the time to address them.

            We know and acknowledge that the collection of communication data has been vast, and I think most of us question the necessity and rationale for it too. But characterizing it as spying is misleading and, in my opinion, designed to evoke hysteria. And that deserves criticism. And that criticism has nothing to do with support for a neo-con agenda or a pro-NSA (a fucking silly term, by the way) position.

          • Badgerite

            It seems quite clear to you. It has never seemed quite clear to law enforcement and to the courts that have to parse what that amendment means in all of their operations. In fact there is a rather extensive body of case law that goes along with that amendment as with all the other provisions of the constitution that provides well defined exceptions even outside of the sphere of national security concerns.

          • Mike Lumisch

            Thanks, you beat me to it and spared me some effort.

            I will simply reiterate that principled leftists are and have always been against the National Security State and oppose the very real abuses that have been perpetrated in our name. This does not, of course, obligate us to sign on with every hysterical fantasy that pops up in the head of some tin foil hat brigadier. In fact these people make us look silly and stupid and gullible, thereby inhibiting the very reforms that we are trying to advance.

    • dubstub

      Your claim about Greenwald’s opposition to NSA spying beginning with the Obama administration is, quite simply, false. He had a long record of criticizing warrantless surveillance during the Bush administration. For example, this from 2006: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/nsa-scandal-now-clearly-includes.html

      • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

        Um, what did I say? Starting in 2006, when the Democrats took over Congress. Up until then he was busy being a libertarian, former Cato associate.

        • dubstub

          Um, you said his OMG moment “appears right after a new (black) President starts making sure that there are warrants.” Here’s what he wrote about warrantless surveillance under the former (white) President:

          Despite the uproar this weekend among right-wing bloggers who were insisting (and are still insisting) that the Administration’s warrantless eavesdropping on American citizens complied with FISA, there is actually no real controversy about this because no reasonable ground exists for disputing that the Administration violated that law – as even the Administration itself is now acknowledging.

          http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/12/claiming-right-to-break-law.html

          • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

            By that I meant that his sudden, obsessive and vitriolic screeds about it came not too long after Obama was elected. His “conversion” to being a “liberal” (so to speak) was right around 2006.

          • Badgerite

            You know, you make a point that I have thought was missing from this Snowden upheaval for a long time and that is that the reform of Bush administration abuses was going on long before Snowden was even hired by anybody for anything. The information was already out there in newspaper articles and in books for anyone who actually took an interest. The blogspot you cite was from 2005. That would have been around the time of the New York Times article which was prompted by a Verizon technician’s whistle blowing. Before the 2004 election, there was a revolt by lawyers in the DOJ, the Office of Legal Council and the FBI based on an unwillingness to proceed with the NSA programs without at least minimal compliance with warrant requirements in law. At the point, FISC Judges were brought into the picture. And eventually the 2008 legislation. The only program that has been ruled as POSSIBLY unconstitutional is the metadata collection programs that impacts American communications. Most of the ‘revelations’ have centered on spying abroad, which is horrendously constitutional and authorized by legislation as well. It has raised hackles abroad, as one would expect it to, but in no way has curtailed a practice that is widespread and prevalent throughout history and shows no signs of abating any time soon. Do you seriously think Russia or China or Iran or ______(fill in the blank) have even cut back on their spying programs? So you think it is a good liberal position that America should not engage in what most other countries engage in and have no intention of not engaging in?

  • mohammednoori

    Bob, I think Greenwald can get too partisan at times but so can you.

    Why do Democrats relentlessly defend disastrous policies this President has done, such as tripling the troops in Afghanistan, overthrowing Gaddafi, ramping up the drone wars in Yemen and Somalia, arming rebels in Syria, etc.?

    • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

      Are you guys just drones or what?
      Mr. Brink wrote the article.
      In any event, your paranoia with drones is a little late in the world of ICBM’s and guided missiles.
      By the way, can you name all the US administrations who have been dealing with relentless Middle East conflict and comment on how well they did comparatively?
      This administration is ending two of the longest wars our nation has ever seen.

      • nathkatun7

        They don’t bother to read! They come ready to defend their cult leader, Greenwald, no matter what. They are also determined to divide and conquer the Democratic party, perhaps hoping to increase the ranks of the libertarian party.

        • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

          60% of Americans are opposed to NSA overreach.
          I’m a Democrat. I do not want to lose.
          If Democrats don’t get their asses back on the left side of Libertarians on this constitutional privacy issue… enough of those crazy ass Libertarians could sway the youth vote and play 2016 third party spoiler… you are correct.

          Wise up, Democrats!!

          • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

            “60% of Americans are opposed to NSA overreach”. Be careful where you pull those statistics from because they might have Santorum on them.

          • js hooper

            lmfao…gross!!!

          • nathkatun7

            Sorry, but I am sick of people you telling falsehood about violation of privacy? Name me one innocent American whose privacy has been violated by the NSA or the Obama administration. Just name one! How can you claim to be a Democrat and then buy into lies? How can you claim to be a Democrat and then blindly follow a libertarian guy who is busy attacking Democrats with the intent of dividing them. Name me one extreme leftists, who believes in undermining U.S. intelligence gathering aimed at keeping the country safe, who has the chance of being elected President. Any youth who would support libertarians to make it possible for Republicans to win the Presidency and take over Congress, cannot then argue that he/she is for protecting the Constitutional privacy of Americans. Didn’t you guys learn anything from the 2000 election?

          • D_C_Wilson

            I’m not worried. The democrats are the only party that is actually offering concrete ideas on how to reform the NSA. Sure, Randy Paul talks a great deal about drones, usually by contradicting something he said about drones a few days prior, but he hasn’t really put anything on the table about how to curb their use or the NSA’s surveillance. The republicans really have no interest in reforming the NSA or the use of drones because they can’t wait to use those toys again if and when they return to the White House. Besides, passing an NSA reform bill would take time away from those vital votes to repeal Obamacare for the 50th time.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            D_C_Willson: “…The democrats are the only party that is actually offering concrete ideas on how to reform the NSA…”

            USA Freedom Act, championed ahead of all other 18 reform proposals (by those still interested in reform), authored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (Democrat…?)
            https://www.aclu.org/support-usa-freedom-act

            Now tell me all the reasons you can’t get behind that proposal because of Sensenbrenner’s party or past.

            Or go ahead and list for me all the Democratic Party endorsed “concrete” proposals that have been numerously backed and whole-heartedly supported (or even mentioned in passing) in the any post on this blog or by the readers comments of same said blog.

          • D_C_Wilson

            Senate Dem renew call for NSA reforms:

            http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/195074-after-meeting-senate-dems-renew-call-for-nsa-reform

            Democratic representative tells Obama to adopt comprehensive NSA spying reforms

            http://watchdog.org/124259/grayson-obama-nsa-spying-reforms/

            Here’s a bipartisan effort:

            http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/25/nsa-reform-bill-surveillance-congress

            Sunday Shows: Democrats Push NSA Reforms

            http://www.wtsp.com/video/2962027350001/1/Sunday-Shows-Democrats-Push-NSA-Reforms

            But continue your argument by personal attack because that is so persuasive.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            It was a personal attack? When I said:
            “…proposals that have been numerously backed and whole-heartedly supported (or even mentioned in passing) in any post on this blog or by the readers comments of same said blog…”

            That personal attack??
            My bad. I’m so sorry. I’m sure you can point to all the numerous posts in support of those bi-partisan reforms on this blog… anywhere. To my knowledge this is the first I’ve seen mention of them what-so-ever.

            I did acknowledge USA Freedom Act was “ahead of all other 18 reform proposals” in it’s amount of support… did I not?

          • D_C_Wilson

            When you started inserting what you imagine my views are instead of asking, that was a personal attack and yes, I do support reforming the NSA. I just disagree that the best way to do it is to beat up on the democrats while giving the republicans a free pass. But I don’t have to justify my views to you and it would be a waste of time anyway, since you’ve obviously decided that anyone who isn’t part of the Greenwald cult is automatically opposed to NSA reform.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            D_C_Willson: “…since you’ve obviously decided that anyone who isn’t part of the Greenwald cult is automatically opposed to NSA reform..”

            Decided?
            No.
            I am, for a third time, giving you the opportunity to demonstate all previous examples where you (or any regulars here) have touted, recommended, or attempted to gather support for… any of the legislative reform proposals you or I have mentioned here today.

          • D_C_Wilson

            I owe you nothing. If you want to scan through my Disqus history to see where I’ve said the NSA needs reformed, knock yourself out. I’ve said I support reform in the very post you’re replying to. If that isn’t good enough for you, you can just GFY.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            Yeah. I’m certain.

            Kinda like the way Bob Cesca “supports” reform efforts…
            https://twitter.com/bobcesca_go/status/433378970491314176
            With friends like these….

          • D_C_Wilson

            I don’t care whether you believe me or not. It’s clear you think I’m supposed to defend Bob’s statements rather than my own, so I won’t be bothering with you any more. Have a nice life.

          • Mike Lumisch

            Actually, that whole “Day We Fight Back” gimmick was pathetic: after eight months of screaming and smacking down heretics, this is the best we can come up with?

            An effective left would have started the program on 6/9 and would have kept it up for eight months and by now we might have generated enough pressure to have super majorities in both houses of Congress doing our bidding.

            But no, some of us thought our time would be better invested in burning witches who were against the NSA but not visibly against the NSA in the proper fashion.

          • Badgerite

            He certainly seems to get a lot of attention from the Greenwaldians, doesn’t he?
            What he meant I believe by that comment is that the tactics used are not going to be very effective and he was hardly the only commentor on the internets to notice that fact.

          • Badgerite

            And since when is this about ‘the regulars here’. Your contention is that the democratic party is not on board for reforms and indeed stands in the way of reforms. It seems to me that a simple run down of party affiliation for the reform legislation proposed by Sensenbrenner would belie that contention. Wouldn’t it?
            What the ‘regulars here’ object to is the continual slamming of the NSA as the greatest evil force operating in the world today.
            The meanderings of Snowden about the NSA spying having nothing to do with terrorism and that is goes on because the government wants to know everything about you. How Russia and China are champions of freedom and such. And also, inaccurate, misleading and hysterical reporting. Which there has been a lot of. I happen to think that reform has been in the cards for a long time. Starting in 2004 and continuing on since then. People here have a proper regard for what the NSA does. And what the military does. That does not translate into a blank check. But it does translate into a belief that what they do, they do for the sake of preserving the country and its freedoms and not to undermine them. And there has been no evidence shown anywhere that that is or has been their intent. What we get at this site from people who think Snowden is a God is ” The NSA is watching you watch porn. hahahah.” etc. Just stupid shit. How about you demonstrate one comment from Greenwaldians here that was not in the vein.

          • Mike Lumisch

            This. A thousand times.

          • mrbrink

            That’s adorable. James Sensenbrenner’s got reforms. President’s got reforms that actually go a long way toward turning that crazy stumble-jumble of a starting point into a pragmatic, workable overhaul. If one thing is clear, it’s that republicans are all about being helpers. We’ll put those cute little reforms on the fridge next to the sunny-themed fingerpaints.

          • dubstub

            With all due respect, Mr. Bink, you don’t seem to be terribly well informed about the reform legislation in committee right now. I mean, you reference Sen Leahy approvingly twice in this short blog post but you do not acknowledge that Sen Leahy is introducing the Senate version of Sensenbrenner’s reform bill. We have to wonder, are you unaware of the bipartisan legislative efforts for meaningful surveillance reform or do you just want your readers to be?

          • mrbrink

            I’m fully aware of where the strength and sincerity of reform comes from. You should ask the same of Glenn Greenwald.

          • Badgerite

            Will you acknowledge that most of the people supporting the bill
            ( see list of sponsors) are in fact democrats? I count 3 GOP in the list of Senate sponsors. 16 Democrats.
            The point of Greenwald’s tweet, that you are here to support, is that the Democratic party is just like Dick Cheney. I would say that the numbers in party affiliation of people actually supporting the legislation and who can be expected to vote for it look to me to be very much lop sided in favor of the Democratic party. The one that is just like Dick Cheney.
            And statements like this that do not jive with the facts is precisely what has endured Greenwald supporters to people who read and comment on this blog.

          • dubstub

            Yes, that was the whole point in my main comment on this post, where I stated that Greenwald’s criticism is inaccurate for this very. I’m happy to see more and more Democrats embracing reform. I can only imagine where we’d be if there weren’t blogs like this that have tried to make this into a partisan issue throughout. Bob hasn’t covered that bill once here and many readers seem to be under the impression that reform is being pushed only by Republicans with the interest of harming the President. As you note, this is not true.

          • Badgerite

            You stated it was inaccurate only as a throw away line.
            What Greenwald did is not criticism, it is sloganeering and bad sloganeering at that.
            Democrats have always embraced appropriate privacy reform. In my opinion it is surface tinkering but it may have some restraining effect. They just don’t embrace NSA slamming for the purpose of NSA slamming, ala Assange, Snowden and Greenwald. Or USA bashing for that matter. Or his ‘supporters’ who visit this site and say stupid stuff like “The NSA is watching you watch porn. hahahaha”
            I, for one, would also be content to let the courts take the first crack at working this out. I think the SCOTUS has to make a decision that lays down some guidelines for the future and the bulk metatdata case is the perfect vehicle to do that. So, I want to see what they have to say about this first. Before the point is made moot by legislation.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            MrBrink:
            “….President’s got reforms that actually go a long way toward turning that crazy stumble-jumble of a starting point into a pragmatic, workable overhaul….”

            Actually, 9 major tech firms and a multitude of leftist organizations agreed the President’s reccommendations are only the starting point.

            They all back the USA Freedom Act instead…
            http://asset0.cbsistatic.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim2/2014/02/11/day-we-fight-back.jpg

          • mrbrink

            “Them belly full.”

          • D_C_Wilson

            BTW, it’s not my responsibility to defend what other people say on this blog. If you’ve got a problem with something nathkatun7 has said, address it to him.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            Pretty sure I just called him out by name.

            Sorry to hear there’s such a split in AwesomeBlog pro-NSA caucus.

          • D_C_Wilson

            You realize that it’s posts like this that prevent anyone here from taking you seriously?

          • Badgerite

            Sensenbrenner is a Republican but here is the thing. He would probably get more democratic votes than republican votes for this legislation. If you look at the co sponsors listed in the Senate, what do you see? I see 3 Republicans and (wait for it) 16 Democrats.
            I didn’t go through party affiliations on the House side but I’m sure the breakdown is somewhat similar.
            There are already more democrats on board for this legislation than republican. And it does pretty much what the commission appointed by President Obama advised. No more, no less, really. So how is this a libertarian thing, other than they yell the loudest. And I consider these reforms to be mostly tinkering. They put in slightly more oversight and I can’t say that I object to that. But the NSA will not be dismantled. Nor should it be.

          • Mike Lumisch

            The hysterical ninnies have made it abundantly clear that they will accept no reform short of totally dismantling the NSA.

            In my analysis this stems from a wholesale rejection of the Rule of Law as a governing philosophy. Liberals hold that the government, powerful yet dangerous, can be restrained with laws that allow the powers to be use for good while keeping the dangers in check. Libertarians do not; Anarchists do not. As we are seeing in this comment thread, this fracture cuts across party lines and has made for some pretty strange political bedfellows.

            So of course I believe that this pie fight we all are having is much bigger than Snowden and the NSA and bed wetting hysterical left libertarians, and it will be quite interesting to see how this all plays out.

            Who knows what further shocks might be in store.

          • Badgerite

            Uh huh. How do the ‘powers’ of the NSA stack up against the military. And I don’t see the ‘anarchists’ or the ‘libertarians’ arguing to dismantle or decommission the military. Or the police for that matter. Know why? Because they rely on them too much to keep them safe in a rather dangerous world.

          • Scopedog

            Screw Libertarians.

          • nathkatun7

            “Screw Libertarians.

            I am with you all the way Scopedog! Here we are with millions of people still struggling with no jobs, while Rand Paul and the libertarians insist on denying them unemployment benefits, yet the #1 concern for these privileged emoprogs is the obsession about NSA and privacy. I’ve repeatedly challenged the Greenwald cult to produce evidence of NSA, or the Obama administration in general, violating the privacy of an innocent American citizen. So far all I get in response is about the collection of the mega data which usually do not include names, or specific content private conversations of individuals.

            As far as I am concerned, the focus of the real, down to earth, liberal progressive Democrats, should be about job creation, health care, education, equitable pay, voting rights, equal rights, end to all forms of gun violence, and the protection of the environment.

            Pardon me if I am not that sold about hype that the NSA is such an urgent present danger that must supersede all our efforts to address serious problems that are currently facing ordinary people. I know about real people with no jobs, health care, victims of gun violence, victims of discrimination and unequal pay, and victims who are being denied the right to vote. To this day, I still know of no single innocent American whose privacy rights have been violated
            by the NSA or the Obama administration.

          • Badgerite

            Well said. Potential for abuse is never going away. That is why the we have a system of checks and balances, countervailing forces and oversight.

        • dubstub

          To be quite honest, I’ve always assumed “Mr. Bink” was just the name that Bob posted under when he didn’t want to deal with the shit. Glad to learn otherwise, I guess.

          I also vote overwhelmingly Democratic and I believe that it’s a big mistake to stand against reforms that people across the political spectrum support.

          • Rollo Tamasi

            “I’ve always assumed “Mr. Bink” was just the name that Bob posted under when he didn’t want to deal with the shit.”

            Projection. Is dubstub on your birth certificate?

          • dubstub

            No. Do you suppose “Mr. Bink” is a real name? I don’t have any problem with anonymous commenting, and I’d be fine with Bob posting under a pseudonym too. It wasn’t meant as a barb.

          • Rollo Tamasi

            “It wasn’t meant as a barb.”

            uh huh

          • nathkatun7

            Can we safely assume that “dubstub” is the pseudonym that Glenn Greenwald uses “to deal with shit” from some of us who disagree with him? To be honest, It’s very hard to tell the difference between some of you members of Greenwald cult, who dump comments here, and Mr. Greenwald himself.

          • D_C_Wilson

            Long time readers of this blog know that both Mr. Brink and Ashby were commenters here long before they were invited to become contributors. In any event, Bob is under no obligation to agree 100% with what either of them say. If you have an issue with something either of them said, address it to them.

          • nathkatun7

            May be this should teach you a lesson never to assume anything before you embark on attacking another person.

          • dubstub

            Um, hey guys I never attacked anyone or even addressed Mr. Binks as Bob. I guess I shouldn’t have shared it with you, but that’s honestly what I believed. Chill out.

          • js hooper

            Greenwald and his crew aren’t calling for reforms. (unless they come from Rand Paul)

            They want a complete and unequivocal dismantling of America’s intelligence programs, covert operations, diplomatic channels etc.

            They are rabid ideologues who reject any and all govt.

            Don’t believe me? Go read his / their bullshit after the Boston Bombing. Apparently Boston became a Police state and Bostonians gave up their freedoms. The methods used to track down the terrorist brothers was “unconstitutional” and an abuse by the “surveillance state”.

            According to Alex Jones…I mean Glenn Beck…sorry I meant Glenn Greenwald.

          • Scopedog

            Yep, and while they want the US to bend over, they ask for nothing from other nations. Look at GG’s silence on Russia and China’s spying, and what Brazil is doing.
            To them, it’s only bad WHEN THE US DOES IT.

          • js hooper

            The surprising part is how bizarrely shameless they are about it.

            They’re so blatant about their agenda it’s almost comical.

            Almost…

          • Badgerite

            Wow, really. I didn’t know that. They had already killed on man and kidnapped another. They posed a serious threat to anyone in the vicinity. I didn’t blame the police one bit for this.

          • Kitty Smith

            Wow. Really? You are so full of shit.

          • Kerry Reid

            Well, you know what they say about “when you assume…”

        • D_C_Wilson

          Not only are they getting the names wrong, they’re just attacking Bob instead of countering any of the points Mr. Brink made. Greenwald has taught them well.

          • nathkatun7

            You are absolutely spot-on D_C_!

        • js hooper

          I’m glad you guys are here kicking their asses… saying exactly what I would be.

          I’m sick of their shit. They are like the Borg assimilating Liberal blogs and turning them in to Paultard swamps.

          Greenwald is a fuckin fool and it’s good to see that REAL progressive Democrats aren’t letting his bullshit pass for left wing anymore.He has a lot of money and influence behind him and his ratfucking…making it extremely difficult to keep his true agenda out in the open.

          • Scopedog

            He (Greenwald) also doesn’t give a flying fuck about real, genuine progressive issues. Back in 2012, Jay Adler over at the Sad Red Earth blog pointed out that if you search for articles on Greenwald and drones, you’d find tons of them. Google him in regards to abortion rights, the theft of voting rights from minorities in America, gay rights, gay marriage, and on what the Repubs were doing to the American people and….

            …you wouldn’t find jack-shit.

          • Kerry Reid

            Google Greenwald in regards to surreptitious surveillance (i.e., taping phone calls) of private citizens and you’ll find that he did it himself when he was defending white supremacist Matthew Hale. Not that white supremacists don’t deserve legal defense the same as everyone else, but in Glenn’s case, he went the extra unethical step — and called those who filed the civil suit against Matthew Hale “odious and repugnant.” So you know — since Glenn thought so, it was cool to violate ethics and privacy in the cause!

          • nathkatun7

            “Earth blog pointed out that if you search for articles on Greenwald and drones, you’d find tons of them. Google him in regards to abortion rights, the theft of voting rights from minorities in America, gay rights, gay marriage, and on what the Repubs were doing to the American people and….

            …you wouldn’t find jack-shit”

            Exactly, Scopedog! I am personally sick of these pretend, and very privileged, progressives who have done “jack-shit” when it comes to fighting for the real problems facing American people, lecturing us about liberalism and progressivism.

        • mohammednoori

          I’m from Canada. I have no power nor desire to “divide and conquer” the Democratic party.

          • nathkatun7

            “I’m from Canada. I have no power nor desire to “divide and conquer” the Democratic party.”

            If that’s true, how come you felt compelled to post a comment attacking President Obama and the Democrats based on lies, half-truths and misinformation? May be it is a good Idea for you, as a Canadian, to avoid taking partisan sides with regard to American politics. Otherwise, people who may not be aware that you are a Canadian (because you never identified yourself when you made a comment) may be easily influenced by your attacks on the President and the Democrats.

      • mohammednoori

        Who the hell are “you guys”? I’m an Afghan Canadian who has worked in my native home land and am naturally concerned about issues regarding the Muslim world. Who the hell do you think you are?

        • Badgerite

          As to your earlier points and Greenwald’s comments that the Democratic party is behaving like Dick Cheney
          1) the troops in Afghanistan were tripled at one point on the advice of the military. Biden opposed it, Obama went with their recommendation. They are still on track to withdraw troops in 2014 and do a draw down. I don’t know if you are aware but Senator Obama at no time opposed military operations in Afghanistan. He did oppose the attack on Iraq.
          2) In Libya, Gadaffi responded to protests that were somewhat a product of the feelings unleashed by the Arab Spring by threatening and carrying out bloody massacres. Obama went along with European allies, primarily the French, in providing crucial air support to keep him from carrying out what promised to be massacres that even members of his own government would not support. How that works out for Libya in the long run is up to Libya and the region, isn’t it?
          3) Yemen has been in a civil war almost continually for at least a decade. Al Qaeda, the organization which attacked New York and Washington and earlier the USS Cole which was refueling in Yemen, is highly active in this conflict and has previously and many times declared war on America. Why wouldn’t or shouldn’t the US be involved.
          4) As I understand it the African Union is more involved in Somalia at this point than the US but again, raging civil war for 2 decades now, Al Qaeda affiliates involved and the US is supplying aid to the non Al Qaeda side.
          5) Syria? I don’t believe the US is arming the rebels. I believe the support, at least officially, is humanitarian. It was John McCain who thought we should be arming the rebels. Obama has balked at this because of elements operating within the opposition. But Saudi Arabia is arming them. So. How exactly, is that like Dick Cheney.

    • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

      Let’s see: He said when he was running the first time, that he was going to focus on Afghanistan, where we should have been focused in the first place. So he did. He also said he’d get out of Iraq, and he did that. He didn’t overthrow Gaddafi, the Libyan people did. I might also note that it didn’t involve ground troops, and that there was no loss of American lives. He isn’t arming the rebels in Syria. He’s actually decreased the number of drone strikes.

      Mostly, you’ve just demonstrated you’re a complete idiot who mindlessly spouts the drivel coming from the dudebros.

    • Lady Willpower

      Overthrowing Gaddafi was bad? Not just bad, “disastrous?”

      • js hooper

        There is actually a bizarre segment of the “left” that actually supported Gaddafi.

        Cynthia McKinney loved him. Dennis Kucinich damn near committed treason by providing info to Gaddafi’s son.

        Their worst fears were realized when the Libyan people celebrated and thanked Obama & Hillary. Sadly all of that was forgotten once the GOP started their Benghazi smear campaign.It was interesting watching as some on the “left” twisted themselves in knots trying to parrot GOP Benghazi BS…while still maintaining their “progressive” credentials.

        Greenwald’s appearance on Bill Maher was comical.

        • Lady Willpower

          I sometimes forget about these supposed “leftists” who are actually anything but. No one who calls themselves a leftist should ever be caught dead cozying up to these fascist dictators, but here we are. Sometimes all it takes is for them to put the word “socialist” somewhere in their party name, and American leftists will get all soft and gooey at the idea.

          It’s disgusting and it’s embarrassing to see people who consider themselves progressives developing a crush on the world’s worst dictators and human rights violators.

          Strange bedfellows, indeed.

          • Scopedog

            I think British journalist Nick Cohen pointed out that the reason why they like these dictators is that they believe that these dictators are standing up to the “West”–ie, America and Western Europe–and that these societies are far too gone and corrupt.

            Funny how they don’t see that in the dictator’s own nation, but….

          • mohammednoori

            Nope, you know nothing about me.

          • Scopedog

            Your words….

            “I’m a Sunni Muslim who has several friends and colleagues who have been tortured by the Libyan government.”

            …so yeah, I guess we all know _something_ about you?

          • mohammednoori

            You’re a moron.

          • Lady Willpower

            MMMWAH!

          • Badgerite

            Chavez used to do that. A lot.

        • Scopedog

          I’ll never understand why some on the Left supported Gaddafi….but then again, they’re also supporting Assad in Syria.

        • mohammednoori

          Sorry, but I didn’t support Gaddafi. I’m a Sunni Muslim who has several friends and colleagues who have been tortured by the Libyan government. Stop generalizing about me. You know nothing.

          • js hooper

            LMAO…what a narcissistic clown.

            Nobody knows you from a hole in the wall.Nor do we care.

            WTF

          • Badgerite

            Sorry to hear it. It’s true that the initial sense of liberation has been followed by dysfunction. Can’t argue with that. Do you think it would have been better if he had stayed? You seem to have supported a negotiated settlement. But I don’t remember Gadaffi being even remotely interested in such a settlement. You assume that that could have been worked out. I don’t know that that was the case. On either side. It is like in Syria. Everyone wants that settled at a negotiating table. Except the people doing the fighting. Do you think that the international community should be more involved now?

          • Lady Willpower

            Not everything is about you.

      • mohammednoori

        Yes, for several reasons. Firstly, it went beyond the parameters of the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 which was specific in stating that NATO’s goal was for the protection of civilians in Benghazi. That had been achieved in the first days of the conflict. By essentially lying to the UN Security Council, NATO (and by extension, the United States), it jeopardized all diplomatic efforts to stop the violence in Syria because Russia and China vetoed all resolutions. Secondly, the overthrow of Gaddafi has led to a rise in militias that have carved out the country in smaller pieces. The country is currently at the brink of a civil war.

        Stop blindly supporting Obama and do your research.

        • Badgerite

          Look at Syria. The powers in the region and Russia are basically fighting it out over who will control Syria. Neither side seems to be able to win. Neither side will stop. There has been too much blood spilled and atrocities committed on both sides. They do make feints at negotiating, but do you really think that will get anywhere? A fractured country is probably going to be the result. And the reason will be the ideologies and differences that prevail in the region. Not anything that the US does or does not do. There is a tendency in the Middle East to blame everything bad on ‘outsiders’. You know, some of it, a good deal of it, is internal.

  • dubstub

    I disagree with the irrational hatred of Glenn Greenwald typical of this blog, but I agree that that this statement is somewhat unfair. The fact is that a growing numbers of Democrats are seeing the need for real legislative reform. For instance, the majority of the cosponsors of the bill to end the NSA’s bulk collection of metadata from US citizens are Democrats http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/3361/cosponsors

    • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

      Oh, I’m quite rational about why I hate Greenwald. Let’s see: He was a fellow of the Koch Brothers funded Cato Institute. Now, he’s now saying that he only “wrote a position paper,” but rather ignores that he was there for over a year, appeared at a number of Cato Institute functions, and was busily giving talks for them. He was perfectly fine with the Iraq War, and the Patriot Act, only “seeing the light of day” when, coincidentally, Democrats started making a stink about it and then took over Congress.

      Back in 2008, he and Jane Hamsher founded a PAC, called “Accountability Now.” The stated purpose was to identify and recruit progressive candidates for Congress. What it actually ended up doing was paying Glenn and Jane a pretty nice set of change in “consulting fees,” while not identifying any candidate or recruiting them. Over the past 6 years, he’s indulged in poor fact-checking, massive misrepresentation, and when called out on it, attacks whomever pointed it out.

      Then there’s the blatant hypocrisy he demonstrates on a regular basis. For someone who is a “fighter for civil liberties,” it’s remarkable how many times he’s sung the praises of countries that have absolutely no regard for them, and manages to ignore that the country he currently lives in is busily spying on foreign countries, spying on its own citizens, and basically violating civil liberties by the numbers. But you’ll never hear that from him.

      Want some more reasons? I’ve got them, but that’ll do for a start.

      • nathkatun7

        Bravo, Norbrook! Really excellent response.

      • dubstub

        Yeah, I’m familiar with these smears, and they’re not convincing once you actually dig into them. He was never a “fellow” at the Cato Institute. He gave a couple of speeches there, as many others have, and that is all. I’m not really interested in this conversation, though. Greenwald has answered these accusations himself before: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-to-Widespread-Lies-About-Him-on-Cato-Iraq-War-and-more

        • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

          Funny, how he spent well over a year there, and is identified as a Cato Institute fellow at many libertarian functions during that time. In other words, you just bought his retcon of his history.
          http://extremeliberal.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/the-glenn-greenwald-some-on-the-left-dont-know/

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            I’m not supposed to be opposed to Patriot Act intrusions (as I have since 2001) because the Cato Institute has jumped on board the issue?

            That’s silly.

          • dubstub

            Funny how that link just repeats your unfounded assertion and links to an invited talk he gave at Cato on Drug Decriminalization in Portugal. Try again.

        • D_C_Wilson

          I really couldn’t give a rat’s ass about what Greenwald’s relationship with the Cato Institute is. I dislike him because his reporting has been sloppy, he uses hyperbolic language to oversell his points, his writing on the NSA has betrayed a lack of knowledge about the technology long before it was acknowledged he was “technically (sic)illiterate”, and worst of all, when challenged on the facts, his standard response is to launch into personal attacks against his critics.

          If i wanted to read about the worldview of a egotistical narcissist, I’d look up Geraldo Rivera.

          • dubstub

            Cool because I wasn’t addressing you at all.

          • D_C_Wilson

            Sorry, I didn’t realize this was private conversation. Next time I’ll know to ask your permission before stating my opinion.

          • Lady Willpower

            Greenwald fans have the same level of tact and civility he does. That’s why they love him so. Expect nothing resembling a decent conversation from an acolyte.

          • D_C_Wilson

            I’m seeing that being vividly illustrated here.

          • nathkatun7

            Hey dubstub, you sound and behave like the real Greenwald!

          • dubstub

            Yeah ok, so “D_C_Wilson” chimes in to say “I really couldn’t give a rat’s ass about…” something I said in response to “Norbrook” and I’m supposed to just drop that conversation and go down a completely different path. I don’t think so.

    • Badgerite

      So you noticed. Of course his comments are unfair. It is what he does.
      And you can extrapolate that sponsorship to votes and which party is it that supports reform again? The GOP? I think not.
      Greenwald is a dishonest _______. Have a nice day.

  • DHaradaStone

    Moral certitude and narcissism are a dangerous mix. Those who criticize the self-righteous must be evil. As far as GG is concerned, you’re either with him or against him.

    • Scopedog

      Good points…but why the hell did you get a downvote? For speaking the truth?

      • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

        The Greenwald and Snowden disciples are a strange lot and are doing damage to a solid Progressive message….one down vote at a time.

      • Badgerite

        They always ‘downvote’ if they don’t agree with you. I think it’s silly.
        Like the sky would fall if someone didn’t agree with you. I just assume that most people will not agree with me. We aren’t the Borg for God sake.

    • js hooper

      Did you see that Greenwald lashed out at the Guardian’s new book about Snowden?

      http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/greenwald-snowden-book-bullshit

      The man is a cartoon character. The best part about it was that he admitted he hadn’t even read the book yet…but still called it bullshit.

      He is such a nasty, snotty little bitch. It’s a wonder anyone ever wants to work with him.
      He is the most shamelessly agenda driven hack I’ve seen. He makes assholes like O’Reilly look like Edward R Murrow by comparison.

      I never thought I would hate someone as much as Rush,Hannity,Bill-O, Coulter, Beck etc

      • D_C_Wilson

        It’s a wonder anyone ever wants to work with him.

        He’s already burned almost as many bridges as Keith Olberman in less time.

        I can only imagine what he was like as an attorney. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client is innocent because the prosecutor is an Obamabot.”

      • Badgerite

        Man, was his ego showing in those comments.

  • MorganleFay

    Funny, because I think Snowden is just the flip side of Cheney;

    Cheney; said, “I don’t care about no stink’n American People and
    their stink’n elected representatives nor do I care about no stinking Courts…. I
    know best and I want to do this, so I will just build this machine, by
    circumventing the duly elected government and the duly appointed Courts.

    Snowden said, “I don’t care about no stinking American People
    and their elected representatives, nor do I care about no stink’n Courts…. I
    know best and I want to do this, so I will just sabotage this machine by circumventing
    the duly elected government and the duly appointed Courts.

    • D_C_Wilson

      They’re the same side of the coin. Snowden’s online history shows that he was very vocal in his support of the Bush/Cheney administration’s surveillance policies and routinely attacked leakers and whistle blowers who undermined those programs. Like Greenwald, he only “discovered” his opposition to NSA spying once the democrats started to regain some clout in Washington.

      • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

        So since Snowden came around to liberal opposition of onerous Patriot Act provisions… I should likewise flip TOWARDS neocon illusions of safety vs civil rights, as well…?

        Weird.

        • D_C_Wilson

          Nobody said that, Sparky, so you can take that strawman down.

          • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

            nathkatun7: “undermining U.S. intelligence gathering aimed at keeping the country safe.”

            Cesca: “We’ll be blamed when the next attack comes.”

            Strawman indeed.

          • D_C_Wilson

            You really don’t grasp the concept that I’m not responsible for what other people say, do you? If you want to debate me, address what I’ve actually said, otherwise, I’m just going to ignore you.

          • nathkatun7

            Sorry Punk! I do not speak for, or represent, the vast majority of people who post comments on this blog. It’s true that I strongly believe that any one one who divulges U.S. secrets to Russia and China, as well as publishes U.S. anti-terrorists strategies in international papers, thereby making them accessible to terrorist organizations, is undermining the safety and security of this country.

            I am not sure that Bob Cesca, the owner of this blog, as well as the vast majority of the people who comment here, will agree with me. But, as far as I am concerned, Edward Snowden, and his enabler Glenn Greenwald, are traitors who have undermined and damaged the security of this country. Neither one of them have produced any shred of evidence to show that the privacy of innocent Americans were egregiously violated. All they’ve done is inflame other countries against the United states and publish strategies that the U.S. employs to deter terrorists. Again, this is just my opinion and not the opinion of Bob Cesca, or the vast majority of the people who comment on this blog.

          • Badgerite

            Preventing another attack like or WORSE than 9/11 is a valid concern. Of anyone. Particularly someone who has taken an oath to protect the country.

          • nathkatun7

            You are a total moron if you think that there are no terrorists plotting. every second, to do harm to this country!

            I’ve said it before and I will say it again, Snowden, Greenwald and all of you their enablers are “undermining U.S. intelligence gathering aimed at keeping the country safe.” That’s not a “neocon illusion of safety vs civil rights…” It’s the plain reality which you, Snowden and Greenwald have the luxury of not caring about.

            All your pretense about caring for civil rights don’t fool me. If you cared about civil rights violations you would be out there organizing to stop Republicans from denying women, minorities, and poor people their rights. Until you can show me one single innocent American whose civil rights have been violated by NSA or the Obama administration, I am just not interested in your Crocodile tears about the loss of civil rights. And just so you know, I speak for my self and not for Bob Cesca, Mr. Blink, D_C_Wilson or any other of the admirable people who post on this wonderful blog that you
            insist on defecting on. Personally, I am thankful that Bob Cesca allows me and you to express our opinions, though he may disagree with both of us. Sadly, that’s a trait that is totally lacking in your cult leader, Glenn Greenwald.

        • ruth crocker

          I think you mean civil liberties, but so far nothing snowden has exposed indicates civil liberties are being compromised.

  • muselet

    I said it on Thursday and I’ll say it again: I really can’t be bothered to care about Glenn Greenwald. He’s not worth the time and trouble.

    –alopecia

  • Scopedog

    Douche.
    I mean, seriously…talk about a fucking asshole. He’s sooo fucking above it all, staring down his nose at us. Fuck him.

  • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

    Bob Cesca’s Awesome Blog:
    “As Glenn Greenwald seems to forget, it was Democrats like Patrick Leahy
    who were obstructing passage of the Patriot Act until he received a
    letter filled with anthrax in the mail, and Republicans like James
    Sensenbrenner who literally turned the lights out on debate over its extension.”

    Uh huh.
    So now… what faction of the Democratic Party is standing in opposition of reform movement since James Sensenbrenner is writing reforms CO-SPONSORED by Patrick Leahy…? https://www.aclu.org/support-usa-freedom-act

    • mrbrink

      Who do you think is standing in the way of reform? Al Gore 2000?

      • http://twitter.com/Cody_K/ Cody

        You call this “support” for reform…?
        https://twitter.com/bobcesca_go/status/433378970491314176

        • mrbrink

          Hackers are undemocratic.

        • Mike Lumisch

          This was a foolish blurt the first time you did it, yet it has not become more intelligent with time. Odd how that works.

        • Kitty Smith

          Slacktivists and morons like you say “day”, activists and organizers think “decade”. One day isn’t going to change squat unless something drastic happens.

        • Badgerite

          He’s criticizing the tactic used, not the aim. And he seems to imply that these people are political dilatantes, which they are.
          Their interest will be this one issue. Like Pro Life people. And I think he is probably right.

  • Lady Willpower

    If I hadn’t actually seen video evidence of Glenn Greenwald on television I’d just assume he was the brilliant creation of a 12-year old who just trolling us all. No grown man should behave like he does; certainly no man who considers himself a Pulitzer-worthy journalist.

    • dubstub

      Oh no, did you see this? Greenwald has just been awarded the George Polk Award for his national security reporting on the NSA story! According to Bob Cesca he is a very bad reporter, but according to respected award committees which recognize journalistic excellence he is very good. Who should we believe?
      http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/glenn-greenwald-george-polk-award-103580.html

      • Lady Willpower

        Yeah, and Whoopi Goldberg won an Oscar.

      • Lady Willpower

        And Milli Vanilli won a Grammy.
        (which is a better comparison)

  • beulahmo

    Jesus, what a dork. He’s just gonna get sillier and sillier.

  • mohammednoori

    Wow, there are a lot of deranged Obama supporters here. It’s kind of sad.

    • Mike Lumisch

      Firebagger.

    • drspittle

      I see the Snowald Sock Puppet Circus has popped over to poop on Mr.Brink’s post.

    • Badgerite

      Would you like a tissue?

  • Badgerite

    Yeah. No political agenda there. Twitter is for sloganeering. Not reasoned debate.