Slashdot Mirror


EFF Says Obama Warrantless Wiretap Defense Is Worse than Bush

SonicSpike writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation has just said that 'In the warrantless wiretapping case, Obama DOJ's new arguments are worse than Bush's.'"

6 of 904 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Change by somersault · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, at least Guantanamo is being shut down, so we in the rest of the world can relax a little, while things stay the same for the actual US citizens..

    --
    which is totally what she said
  2. Re:This isn't a 180 by Nutria · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Obama voted yes for the telecom immunity bill. He supported the wiretapping program in the Senate, why do you think he'd stop supporting it when he was elected President?

    Substance doesn't matter to "Hope And Change" zombies.

    Not that it matters much to the "Saddam planned 9/11" crowd, but liberals are supposed to be Sooooo Muuuuch Smarter, Hipper And Rational than Bible-thumping Young Earth Creationist conservatives that you'd think they'd care a smidgen about reality.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  3. Re:RTFS?? by Niris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I love how comedy news shows are becoming a more reliable source for news than the traditional. Then again, hasn't "news" always been sort of a joke in this country?

  4. Re:Obamunism in action by Dhalka226 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This has nothing to do with Obama (other than that his DOJ is making the argument), and it is not a bullshit argument from a legal standpoint.

    It's called sovereign immunity, and we brought it over to our legal system from the British system when we declared independence. To put it shortly, it's exactly what you quoted: Congress has to waive its immunity in order for you to sue the federal government. There are a few laws on the books outlining cases in which they automatically waive that right. I don't know if this would be one of them, except to say that the DOJ obviously feels there's at least an argument to be made that it isn't.

    I agree with what somebody else said in another thread earlier: Sovereign immunity has no place in a democratic society. That said, though, it's here and as frightening as it may be, it's far from a bullshit legal argument to have a lawsuit dismissed. It's a good one.

  5. Re:RTFS?? by Poppa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bullshit. The Dixie Chicks have their views and we have ours. BTW, Pelosi says it is un-American to enforce our immigration laws. How does that grab you?

    The Dixie Chicks have every right to speak their mind. I have every right to disagree with them and not give them any more money.

    I do take offense when Americans go off to France, for example, and criticize our President or our country. All they are doing is selfishly making themselves more important at the expense of the rest of us. Its a kick in the teeth to the brave soldiers risking their lives for our safety.

  6. Re:RTFS?? by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You think Bush gave a shit about sensitivity to the families of dead soldiers?

    Yes. It's clear that he did. He personally wrote a letter to the family of *every* dead soldier, and never talked about that to the press, or used it politically. No president has even been so personally involved with each death. He might not have been in the black sedan with the two soldiers who knocked on the door at each family's house (worst job in the army), but it's clear he counted the cost.

    Your zealotry makes you look like a real ass in the face of the facts.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.