In response to a Guardian report about the National Security Agency's collection of data on millions of Verizon customers, Pres. Obama told reporters today, "Nobody is listening to your phone calls." In the same speech, Pres. Obama explained that "there are some trade-offs involved" in keeping America safe. "You can't have 100% security, and also then have 100% privacy and zero inconvenience," Obama said.
How does that claim stack up against what Obama's said in the past--both as a president and a senator? We'll show you:
President Obama's inauguration speech in January 2009:
"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals."
Sen. Obama in August 2007:
"[The Bush] administration puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our constitution and our freedom."
From Sen. Obama's office in Dec. 2007 regarding his support of a filibuster of FISA:
"Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill …"
Sen. Obama in Jan. 2008, after threatening to filibuster FISA, spoke out against "wiretaps without warrants."
How things seem to have changed since Obama's time in the Senate. Check out Scott Shackford's analysis of the logical fallacies in Obama's recent speech here and Reason.com's coverage of the NSA scandal here.