As Glenn Reynolds might say, they told me if I voted for McCain that the government would become Big Brother and listen in on my phone conversations.
[T]he Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in their–or at least their cell phones’–whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that “a customer’s Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records” that show where a mobile device placed and received calls. Those claims have alarmed the ACLU and other civil liberties groups, which have opposed the Justice Department’s request and plan to tell the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia that Americans’ privacy deserves more protection and judicial oversight than what the administration has proposed.
What fools the liberals are to have thought Obama was anything more than a smooth talking statist.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
MY GOD! He wants to shred the Constitution!
BTW, the federal govmitt was shut down for 4 days.
Anyone notice the difference?
Glad to see the ACLU jumping in on this. Perhaps this will one of those rare cases where liberal and conservative groups will work together to challenge this proposal.
Wonder what Joy Behar’s gonna say about this.
Gene:
“BTW, the federal govmitt was shut down for 4 days.
Anyone notice the difference?”
Drudge is saying that it is costing us $100M per day for the federal government to be shut down.
I say that’s a bargain! Can we keep it shut down for a little while longer? Say…a couple years?
Why do I get the feeling that the American Criminal Liberals Union’s intentions aren’t that altruistic?
It’s almost scary to think I may be on the same side as the ACLU on an issue. It’s crap that cell phones are so easy to track in the first place, by the way…
reading the confusing language of this case, it has to do with locating drug dealers. That’s what this case is about, I think.
What is not clear to me is why they can’t just get some sort of subpoena . Is there anyone out there following it more closely who can explain it better?
It would seem that if this case has to do with finding big drug dealers and locating them by tracking their location through cell phone, i don’t understand why the police can’t get a judge to allow them to do this. Or have I got this all wrong?
wow, now I REALLY can’t wait to see how Tano spins this one… I predict either “b…b…b…BUSH” or “they do that already for emergencies, so Obama’s right for you to not expect a modicum of privacy from the federal government”
anyone else want to put hypothetical money on which?
If you and your phone have no reasonable expectation of privacy as to your whereabouts, meaning the government can track your every move simply because its feasable that someone might know where you are without a cell phone then there is no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding anything about your cell phone, including what you are saying on it and to whom. Nor would any other device capable of being tracked be safe.
This reasoning goes FAR beyond anything the Bush administration ever tried to claim.
No wonder liberals are so paranoid about the lawful actions taken by the Bush administration — they knew how THEY would abuse those powers given the opportunity. Of course, its always “progressives” who stomp on Americans civil rights. It was FDR who locked up all the Japanese, it was Robert Kennedy who wire-tapped Martin Luther King, it was Bill and Hillary who used FBI files against their political opponents and who built up the “wall” between the CIA and other intelligence agencies so that their foreign campaign contributions couldn’t be detected….
…which reminds me! There was another story last week about how the Obama Administration illegally used the Patriot Act to investigate Pro-Life groups and is now illegally refusing to comply with FOIA requests by the targeted groups.
The BOPP (Bureau of Public Privacy) is a select team of highly sensitive, progressive intellectuals who weigh the moral equivalence of the need for public safety against the right to conduct activities in “privacy” which the BOPP deems dangerous to the public good. The PC (Privacy Czar) may act without a subpoena so long as the BOPP is informed within a reasonable period of time. (The reasonable period of time being defined as the period deemed reasonable by the RTC [Reasonable Time Czar.] The PC and the RTC are the same position and person, but acting in different capacities.
In all cases, the BOPP acts in an advisory capacity only and final decision lies with the PC and OB. (Ouija Board.) The OB is a select group of dedicated HC (Hope and Change) advocates whose identity is protected to preserve their independence, integrity and initiative. Anyone speculating about membership on the OB is subject to surveillance by the PC.
All computers are monitored by a separate board, but the PC and OB have total access to the data and control the monitoring. This is to ensure that integrity is maintained at the highest levels. All monitoring is on a strict “want to know” basis.
Picking up where your guy left off – thanks again George Bush.
The really funny thing about all of the current conservative outrage about a big, intrusive government that monitors its citizens is that George Bush had been doing all this stuff for years and there was nary a peep from any conservative quarter. In fact, in most cases it was just the opposite – defense of Bush’s spying programs was as universal as it was tyrannical.
This is why its bad to defend your horse in the political race reflexively. George Bush went and grabbed for a bunch of powers not reserved for the presidency, and now subsequent leaders aren’t wanting to give up those powers. Even though your delusional fear of Obama is pumped up by all sorts of ridiculous propaganda and racism, it sucks that the opposing party is now doing what your party was doing for years, doesn’t it? Makes you nervous, doesn’t it?
Maybe in the future, you can – oh, I don’t know – stop being such hyper-partisan hypocrites? Maybe if Bush was scared of some blowback from his base, he wouldn’t have started spying on Americans in the first place, and you wouldn’t see Obama continuing those same practices?
But I’m willing to bet all of you still think things like the Patriot Act and the secret surveillance programs were justified, huh?
#12
Oh Mary! You just sink into a deeper pit of dumb with every comment. You can’t even tell when you’re being made fun of.
Perhaps because we knew that the “warrantless wiretapping” had been approved already. However, the douchenozzles on the left were hell bent on lying to the American people, as per your M.O. with the intent on stirring up hatred.
Bush “grabbed” powers the POTUS used to have until liberal team-killing f***tards took them away from Gerald Ford.
Maybe in the future you could stop wasting oxygen and bandwidth?
Damn skippy. Just like liberals actually do.
Sorry, Levi, but the highly targeted and legal Bush intercept of specific calls from abroad is totally unrelated to the domestic shotgun stuff the Obama boys and girls are messing with.
Along you come saying:
Aside from being dead wrong, you are arguing that what you campaigned against and railed against is now OK if Obama does it.
Understand? Turn about is fair play. How stupid do you look by taking the high ground through saying you get a free pass for the low ground?
Of course, you have to say that a very narrow, legal intercept of highly limited calls coming into the country is equivalent to unfettered domestic cell phone monitoring. I can understand how this might be a tough distinction to teach a kindergartener, but otherwise, it is fairly clear to the average sentient being.
Where’s that “change” you voted for, Levi?
And how about we discuss Obama’s signing statements? Wanna go down that road?
Come on guys, we know Levi’s for it.
How else is he going to drag us to the future he wants?
I love it when the liberal trolls in defending Obama-lini
resort to the “Bush did it too”.
Hope n change…..the fraud and the apologists.
Oh Bush had a 5% unemployment rate…remember the good ole days?
#15 yeah Obama-lini lied about that too, no signing statements on my watch…..fascist.
Levi certainly is the dutiful little brownshirt isnt he.
Idiots like Levi can’t even fathom enormous differences such as those between “foreign” and “domestic”, yet they think they’re “nuanced”
They are outraged that Bush would want to tap phone calls to the Taliban in Afghanistan, but if Obama wants to track your every move in your own home town, well that’s just peachy with him!
Levi you would have made an exemplary brownshirt. A freakin poster boy!
With everything allegedly being Bush’s responsibility, isn’t it safe to say that Obama hasn’t done a damn thing since he’s been in office?
#19 AE
Levi does seem to have a singular mission which I suppose he thinks he is somehow unnerving. The problem is, he is so comical and ham-handed that he only succeeds in entertaining. I wonder if his cell has an anthem? I know the Obama flag has that Pepsi thing in a field of blue and the Obama mantra/slogan is “Hope and Change.” Beyond that, the Levi unit doesn’t quite line up with the ACORN army or the SEIU brigade or the new-world-order Obama Youth Corps. They need a flag and a uniform and an anthem. Something like:
Forward, forward call the bright fanfares…….
We march for (%#@*) through night and suffering with
the banner for freedom and bread.
Our banner means more to us than death.
All the big time nation transformers had adoring and obedient citizen organizations to pump up the volume and sing out the praises of the leader and the new state order. There must be a slew of old sycophantic youth anthems to recycle.
So I remember the greek columns and the soaring rhetoric.
The fainting females and gay men in the crowds.
Gosh it seems so long ago.
Gene, another point:
And Jessie wept.