Obama Administration

Pundits Finally Agree: Obama Really Is as Much a Control Freak as Bush


Reason 24/7

Even before the Washington Post and the Guardian reported that the National Security Agency's spying on the phone records of Verizon customers (and by implication all phone users in the U.S.) had been compounded by its siphoning of data directly from the servers of nine major Internet companies, journalists, pundits and casual observers were starting to get the impression that the Obama administration's obsession with security matters and its cavalier attitude toward civil liberties seemed somehow … familiar. Where, they asked in a deja vu-ish manner, have we seen this before? Oh. That's right. This is all a horrible expansion of the programs and priorities of the guy Barack Obama spent so much time slamming as the devil incarnate when he first ran for office. Sharply titling its take on the subject, "Bush's 4th term," Politico correctly points out that the president's lingering fan club members are clinging to aging promises while ignoring the incumbent's actions.

From Politico:

The outrage over President Barack Obama's authorization of a nearly limitless federal dive into Americans' phone records obscures a hiding-in-plain-sight truth about the 44th president many of his supporters have overlooked for years:

For all his campaign-trail talk of running the "most transparent administration" in U.S history, Obama never promised to reverse the 43rd president's policies on domestic anti-terrorism surveillance — and he's been good on his word.

Obama's effort to strike what he's repeatedly called "a balance" between personal liberty and homeland security has exposed what amounts to a split political personality: Candidate Obama often spoke about personal freedom with the passion of a constitutional lawyer — while Commander-in-Chief Obama has embraced and expanded Bush-era surveillance efforts like the 2011 extension of the Patriot Act, which paved the way for a secret court order allowing the gathering of Verizon phone records.

In an irony now being savored by his conservative critics, Obama administration officials are now relying on Republicans to defend him against charges from liberals and the libertarian right that he's recklessly prioritized national security over personal liberty.

Bonus kick in the nuts: As Mike Riggs noted earlier, the reliable government-establishment cheerleaders at the New York Times editorial board say, "[t]he administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it."* How very, very true. And yet, how familiar …

Well, at least they finally noticed.

* Note: Shortly after I quoted the New York Times, the editorial was reworded to read, "The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue." (emphasis added). No mention of the change has been added to the editorial. Friggin' wimps.

Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7 news and Reason articles. You can get the widgets here. If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at 24_7@reason.com, or tweet us stories at @reason247.

NEXT: NYPD Officer Convicted for Concealing Role in Wrongful Search

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s the government that needs changing, not just the people who are in it today.

    1. And its going to take a big honkin’ diaper, too.

  2. Pundits Finally Agree feign agreement

    I just posted the same in an earlier thread, and at the risk of being redundant, because I’ve said it before:

    Obama could appear on a nationally televised broadcast and bite the heads off of live puppies and kitties, declare that he is Satan incarnate, and declare that he is going to personally murder all the children of his enemies, the baggers, the Christians, the Republicans, whoever, and his minions will cheer him on. How do you think that it’s already come to what it is now? We haven’t seen anything yet.

    1. I said the same thing over and over since forever, but I didnt see this coming. I am stunned.

      Is it too much to hope for his impeachment and public flogging?

      I know, I shouldnt get carried away by the moment…but….just wow.

      1. Enjoy the moment. Things will end up differently than we hoped. Sometimes, even, better than we hoped.

        1. If you are anything like Suthenboy reality is not your strong suit at all.

          1. Hey, guys! It talked to me! Do I feed it a cracker, or what?

            1. By “cracker” I hope you mean two .38 slugs to its brainpan.

            2. It only enjoys Obamas asshole, nothing else will satiate its hunger for slavery.

              1. More homoerotic musings from the GOP loving peanut gallery.

                When you grow up you will realize party identity means nothing.

                1. Oh look, the pot calling the kettle black.

                  1. Oh look, the pot calling the kettle black

                    Quite laughable, is it not?

                  2. It is the pot calling the bone china black.

                    ( yep, double racist there!)

                2. Sez’ the guy slinging the GOP sobriquet at libertarians with no sign of irony.

                  1. That sniveling little piece of shit knows very well that we hate the party of stupid only slightly less than the fascist party. He also knows that the commentariat is chock full of solid atheists.

                    It is a mendacious little shithead.

      2. Is it too much to hope for his impeachment and public flogging?

        The first Black POTUS! Nuff said, you racist!

        1. Wasn’t Slick Willie the 1st black President?

          1. I’ve had a feeling for sometime that Reagan must have been a secret octoroon, and only black people knew about it and they never spoke about it, except among their own company. The hatred I’ve seen expressed by black democrats towards Reagan is of such a fevered pique it can only be explained as a family matter.

            1. “secret octoroon”

              I prefer the Heroic Mulatto myself.

      3. You can’t impeach him, because BOOOOOSH. And you can’t impeach the next Republican, because OBAAAMA. Well, that’s what fucking dipshits believe, anyway.

    2. …”and his minions will cheer him on”

      And declare him the most forward-thinking politico since FDR and pat each other on the back for their mutual intelligence!
      And when some rethuglican gripes about the blood, they’ll gripe that the chosen one can’t be perfect!

    3. “Let me be clear.. I.. Uh… These people are Uhh…Jews… And, uh… I’m now uh.. Going to uhh… Throw them in this… Uh… Oven.”

      Supporters: “look what the republicans made him do!!!”

  3. ProL was only first cause he cheated. I’m on to his scam.

    1. I was under the impression that being first only counted on the A.M. and/or P.M. Links

      1. No one understands the rules for this, and we make them up as we see fit. We learned it from big gubmint.

        1. That does it! I’m now going to monitor your phone calls!

          1. ^^You know, after listening to just one of your phone calls, I realize that this was a dreadful mistake.

        2. Calvinball is not big government.

          1. Are you sure? Because the President sure seems to like making up rules every time he doesn’t get his way.

    2. I’m indifferent to such things. In fact, I hereby request that a comment be inserted ahead of mine.

  4. And they looked from Obama to Bush, from Bush to Obama, and from Obama to Bush, again, and they could not longer tell which was which…

    1. It’s almost as if both parties were exactly…but that’s crazy talk. Nevermind.

      1. I still consider the Democrats and the Republicans to be essentially the same party, with a few differences on non-important issues.

        1. Well, except for Rand Paul, Justin Amash, and Thomas Massie, your statement is pretty accurate. But the diiferneces between the aforementioned and both the major parties are a little more than trivial.

          1. We should revive the Locofoco Party.

          2. Hey, let’s add Udall, Wyden, and possibly Polis to that list, so we aren’t accused of being secret Republicans. They might suck on the economy, but they seem to be serious about civil liberties.

            1. Yeah, Polis, Udall and Wyden are wonderful on civil liberties, with the exception of gun rights. Udall actually voted against the gun control this year, but he’s come out in favor of federal gun control legislation before.

              1. Polis was against the federal gun control this time around. He actually said that banning assault weapons and requiring universal background checks wouldn’t reduce gun crimes.

                Though he is, as previously mentioned, as economically illiterate as you could expect of a Congresscritter.

        2. In practice, pretty much. Not as much in rhetoric, which is why a handful of Republicans are actually fairly libertarian.

    2. “And they looked from Obama to Bush, from Bush to Obama, and from Obama to Bush, again, and they could not longer tell which was which…”

      Yeah, well, shreek is still signing His praises from the hills.

    3. The left/right and Dem/Repub are both distinctions without differences.

      The only dichotomy that holds up is statist/libertarian.

      The republicans have been complaining about the dems because their statist agenda is very slightly different from the republican statist agenda. Shreek and his lot are just beginning to throw pres shitweasel under the bus because he is discrediting their statist agenda.

      What the dems are missing here is that shitweasel is discrediting their agenda by putting it into action and now everyone can see what it looks like in reality.

      This is not what I would wish for if I could have everything I want, but it is still welcome. Sometimes just winning a small battle gives hope that the war will be won.

  5. OT: I listen to it over and over and over…

    I wonder if Zimmer will incorporate Williams’ iconic theme; as much as I like the original Superman theme, I hope not. This new movie evokes a different feel than the 70’s/80’s movies, and should have its own theme.

    1. I will walk out of any theater showing a Superman without that theme. THAT’S A THREAT.

      1. You say that about every movie. Remember when you threatened to walk out of Transformers if they didn’t use the theme from the cartoon? And did you? NO.

        1. You don’t walk out on perfection which is what that movie was. I hadn’t seen so blatantly racist characters since the Star Wars prequels.

          1. If you don’t love a movie with a jive-talking robot and Anthony Anderson screaming like a little girl, there’s something wrong with you.

          2. Speaking of Star Wars…

            *”or, as assholes say, “Star Wars: Episode IV, A New Hope”

  6. So now Obama is a “control freak”? OK, fine.

    But recently the wingnut talking points were that Obama “didn’t care”, was “aloof and distant”, and “detached”.

    Got to love how political enemies pan for gold in a red Georgia mud.

    1. Talking points can change based on situational changes. Stop being such a control freak.

    2. Absolutely nothing will keep this sockpuppet from sucking dirty democrat dick.

    3. Palin’s Buttplug| 6.6.13 @ 7:37PM |#
      “So now Obama is a “control freak”? OK, fine.
      But recently the wingnut talking points were that Obama “didn’t care”, was “aloof and distant”, and “detached”.”

      Dipshit, how far did you drag that strawman to get it here?

    4. Go change your pants. Yes, I know you shit your pants when you saw the NYT and HuffPuff where dumping on your mancrush, so go change.
      You go have yourself a nice day there skippy.

      *big smile*

    5. But recently the wingnut talking points were that Obama “didn’t care”, was “aloof and distant”, and “detached”.

      No, those are the talking points of moderates who either don’t want to be accused of being racist (on the right), or want to be able to criticize the government without suggesting Barack Obama has anything to do with its failures (on the left).

      The wingnut talking points are that he’s pure distilled Muslim Communazi evil.

  7. many of his supporters have overlooked for years

    Did they “overlook” it, or did they just assume that this sort of nonsense would never come around to them?

    1. They ignored it, blinded by the radiance of the chosen ONE!
      See dipshit shreek, above.

      1. I don’t believe in Messiahs – that is for you conservative fundie asshole types.

        See also Falwell, Jerry.

        1. Palin’s Buttplug| 6.6.13 @ 7:53PM |#
          “I don’t believe in Messiahs – that is for you conservative fundie asshole types.”

          You fundie asshole, you bleeve in the CHOSEN ONE. And prove it every time you post.
          Now, you lying pile of shit, show me one post where I:
          1) Defended Bush
          2) Promoted any religion.
          Go fuck your daddy, dipshit

    2. That’s really the question. I mean, if you’re just getting it now, you have two choices: you are dumb-as-fuck gullible retard…or you don’t care until it happens to you or your TEAM.

      1. One more:
        Well, he’s better than Bush!
        You don’t have to look far to find it.

      2. Well, a lot of them are dumb-as-fuck gullible retards.

        1. Sure, but my point was that of those two choices, both suck. These scandals can’t being doing good things for the self-esteem of his prior cheerleaders. And they utterly deserve that.

    3. “…did they just assume that this sort of nonsense would never come around to them?”


      They never see the consequences of their agenda until it is upon them. They really do always assume that they will be above it all, the chosen ones.

      I hope they all get assraped by a syphilitic elephant.

      1. To be fair, I wish I could go back in time and slap my younger, “Team Red Pill” self around. I would not now feel bad about voting for Bush a second time (I excuse the first time, because Bush campaigned on a different platform than he implemented, and his opponent was Moonbat Gore of the Left Chakra).

  8. What news program do you guys think will inform Obama about this?

    1. Weekend Update?

      1. ‘I, uh, did not know, um, we were, uh, looking at people’s internet information, uh, until I saw it on the Daily Show.’

    2. I would pay real cash to see all of their individual, private first reactions to the NYT editorial. Not Dora-up-the-ass money, but still, actual real money.

    3. The Daily Show.

  9. Made me jump back to this sort of speechmaking:


    Ignore the conspiracy theory bullshit interspersed throughout the video’s main clips. It’s a good speech.

  10. NYT: “Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it.”

    The comments on their editorial have lots of Obama bashing, but plenty of he’s still better than McRomney.

    The salty ham tears are mighty tasty tonight!!

    1. Fret not. Christy Matthews is still carrying Barry’s water.


  11. Taking odds on which big-name Republican will be first to call for the censure of B.O.

    1. None. What he did was legal and has been legal for a long time.

      That’s the scary part.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.