And how.
After the president finished his futile attempt to extol the virtues of Obamacare in California, he graciously took one question from a reporter totally selected at random:
And here comes the rehearsed question and answer from Obama on #NSA. Journo is Jackie Calmes of NYTimes.
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) June 7, 2013
Political theater: NYT's Jackie Calmes hardly just asked the president a question; she asked him to read his prepared statement. #NSA
— Beachwood Reporter (@BeachwoodReport) June 7, 2013
#NYT reporter Jackie #Calmes gets to ask only ? at #Obama Presser. While she's good, she is a strong liberal and Obama supporter
— The CampoGroup, Ltd. (@CampoGroup) June 7, 2013
How convenient. After asserting that the government isn’t listening in on phone calls:
Obama: Nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That’s not what this program is about.
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) June 7, 2013
Obama: they are not looking at names, they are not looking at content
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) June 7, 2013
He was able to get personal:
Obama gives the example of needing to go to a judge to listen to Jackie Calmes's phone calls. Maybe not the best example given DOJ actions.
— Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) June 7, 2013
Potus: No one is listening to Jackie Calmes phone calls. #badexample
— HansNichols (@HansNichols) June 7, 2013
Why bother listening to your own talking points repeated back to you? MT @michellemalkin "Nobody's listening to Jackie Calmes' phone calls"
— Gerard S Harbison (@GerardHarbison) June 7, 2013
Fave moment of Obama/NYT journo Jackie Calmes dog&pony show: "Nobody's listening to Jackie Calmes' phone calls. We'd have to go to a judge."
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) June 7, 2013
Weird example, Mr. President. As Jake Tapper pointed out:
POTUS says "nobody's listening to your telephone calls." No one said the NSA was.
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 7, 2013
To be fair, though, the president never seems to know what his administration is up to. But, he assures us, our other elected officials are totally in the loop (so you can blame them, too):
Obama: It is important to understand that your duly elected representatives have been consistently informed on exactly what we are doing.
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) June 7, 2013
Pres Obama says every member of Congress briefed on the surveillance progam: "consistently informed what we're doing."
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) June 7, 2013
Pres Obama stresses that surveillance program is overseen by Congress and by Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) June 7, 2013
"Secret in the sense they're classified but not secret in sense that..every member of congress has been briefed" on phone record data
— Kelly O'Donnell (@KellyO) June 7, 2013
"Your'e duly elected representatives have been" informed. -POTUS
— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) June 7, 2013
Don’t worry! It’s all good.
Shorter Obama: Yeah, "I" didn't implement some secret data mining program. YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS DID.
— Elon James White wears a Mask (@elonjames) June 7, 2013
Obama: "Some of hype we've been hearing…nobody's listening to content of ppl's phone calls. Program overseen by Congress & FISA court."
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) June 7, 2013
And we can all rest easy knowing that the president is committed to protecting our privacy:
Obama: "When I took office, I made two commitments…to keep this nation safe and to uphold the Constitution and the right to privacy."
— Roger Simon (@politicoroger) June 7, 2013
Well, as long as we’re cool with “modest encroachments”:
.@barackobama calls dragnets of Internet and phone data "modest encroachments" on privacy… part of a trade-off for security.
— Zach Wolf (@zbyronwolf) June 7, 2013
President Obama describes government phone surveillance program as "modest encroachments on privacy."
— Chris Moody (@moody) June 7, 2013
"modest encroachment" — WTF
— Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) June 7, 2013
'Modest encroachments' RT @mckaycoppins: Was it just me, or was that Obama lecture a little tone-deaf?
— Joel Gehrke (@Joelmentum) June 7, 2013
Hey, everybody, relax, these are just "minor encroachments" of privacy.
— Jim Geraghty (@jimgeraghty) June 7, 2013
I would really hate to see what a major encroachment of privacy is.
— Bethany S. Mandel (@bethanyshondark) June 7, 2013
Obama assuring me these are just “modest encroachments on privacy” is good enough for me!
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 7, 2013
"ENCROACHMENT. Number 44, Washington. Five yard penalty. Automatic first down."
— Jim Geraghty (@jimgeraghty) June 7, 2013
Comrades, is modest encroachment on privacy in name of glorious revolution! Cease this fifth column hype at once!
— Sunny McSunnyface (@sunnyright) June 7, 2013
President Obama made it clear that sometimes such “encroachments” are necessary:
Obama: Obama: You can’t have 100 percent security and also have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience.
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) June 7, 2013
For the purpose of national security:
"They help us prevent terrorist attacks," Pres Obama just said of the phone and internet surveillance programs.
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) June 7, 2013
PresO: says these programs make a difference preventing terrorist activity (note from me: Boston?)
— Greta Van Susteren (@greta) June 7, 2013
Fine. But the issue with Obama’s surveillance program is that it goes above and beyond Bush-era domestic security policy. Not only is Obama now sanctioning policy he had previously denounced, but he’s reportedly grown the government’s scope exponentially and cast his dragnet over all Americans rather than focusing solely on potential terrorists.
And context is everything. As Michelle Malkin noted, “revelations about Obama’s expansive collection of domestic phone call data come amidst the still-exploding IRS witch hunt scandal, the DOJ/AP snooping scandal, and the invasive DOJ/James Rosen spying scandal — not to mention the gangrenous distrust of government fostered by the stonewalling, lies, and obstruction at the heart of the Benghazi and Fast and Furious national security debacles.”
How is this supposed to make the citizenry feel more secure? Guess what, Mr. President: we don’t.
"We're going to have to make some choices as a society." – Obama on #NSA. Sadly, we made that choice in November. We're stuck with this fool
— Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) June 7, 2013
Same administration that let IRS off the chain to harass Tea Party opponents says not to worry about their eavesdropping on calls and emails
— Sam Valley (@SamValley) June 7, 2013
And apparently that’s going to be a problem for this administration:
"We're gonna have some problems" if you can't trust us
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) June 7, 2013
*New Video* Obama: If you can't trust government, we're going to have some problems http://t.co/neagFRk6k9
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) June 7, 2013
Obama: If people don’t trust the executive branch, and also congress and the judicial branch, then we’re going to have some problems here.
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) June 7, 2013
"If people can't trust not only the executive branch" but also Congress & Judiciary, "then we're going to have some problems." –@BarackObama
— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) June 7, 2013
Is that an ultimatum?
"These are modest encroachments on privacy…pray I don't encroach on them any further."
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) June 7, 2013
Obama: It's kinda-sorta your obligation to trust the government, no matter what we do http://t.co/92SBBPBPYI
— Ursus, Director of Weather and Banana Programming (@AceofSpadesHQ) June 7, 2013
Congressional scapegoats might “have some problems, too”:
Obama really shifting the blame on Congress. .
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) June 7, 2013
The President again and again mentioning oversight of these intel programs by Congress & FiSA court judges
— Jamie Dupree (@jamiedupree) June 7, 2013
He's blaming congress and federal judges… #NSA
— Teri Peters (@hipEchik) June 7, 2013
https://twitter.com/jimmiebjr/status/343040907941126144
Yep, we’re in very capable hands.
Obama sneers: "You can complain about Big Brother…but when you look at the details, we've struck the right balance."
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) June 7, 2013
***
Related:
Awkward pic of the day: Is anyone buying what Obama’s selling?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member