Skip to main content

And just a week ago, he was calling President Obama a hypocrite.

Sorry, Sean. If Americans "have a right to privacy," and if the actions of the president "are a very clear violation of the Fourth Amendment" and do not "respect and honor the Constitution," then it's just as bad under one president as it is the next one.

Or it is for people who aren't hypocritical, bloward dicks.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:31 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (23+ / 0-)

    "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. [...] There would be no place to hide."--Frank Church

    by Joan McCarter on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:31:12 AM PDT

  •  too funny, given that half the people HERE (13+ / 0-)

    think it's OK if you are a Dem.

    Our entire political dialogue is just partisan patter. And the reality remains that on the national security state and the war on terror, both parties are one.

    •  Yeah, need to be careful with the name-calling (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gunnarthor, mookins, Mannie, Janet 707 people who support a program when one president does it but criticize a program when another president does it are "hypocritical bloward dicks".

      If true, that applies to a lot of dkos readers, based on what I've seen written in many comments here.

      Myself, I actually think Sean Hannity is indeed a hypocritical bloward dick.  So it makes me pretty uncomfortable when I see those with more liberal leanings falling into the same trap.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:33:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah funny.... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Puffin, aitchdee, Janet 707

      That what Hannity was defending was direct wiretaps and seizure of data without a warrant or any oversight other than executive branch.  What the Democrats are defending is the fact that such activities are initiated only after a warrant has been approved by the judicial branch and after Congress has been informed and approved.

      Where as I agree that we have ceded too much in allowing the Federal Government to do this as a top secret action.  Saying that Obama's actions are the same as Bush's disregard for laws regarding how such operations are done is specious at best.

      A person's character is measured by how they treat everyone. Not just your pet group.

      by Tempus Figits on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 05:58:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Then what are we here for? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      If both parties are the same, what's the point of participating in a blog that is for electing "more and better Democrats?"

      That doesn't seem too funny to me.  It seems too sad.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:16:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Some Leakers Could've Leaked Under an Earlier (0+ / 0-)

    President, for that matter.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:37:19 AM PDT

  •  There's a lot of Democratic supporters guilty of (11+ / 0-)

    the same crimes. Stuff that was unacceptable under Bush is now ok when Obama does it. mcjoan, by making this post about Sean Hannity (whose hypocrisy is more than well known around here), you wasted a good opportunity for a decent discussion...

    “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

    by 420 forever on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:39:25 AM PDT

    •  Really (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      4CasandChlo, aitchdee

      I haven't seen many people around here saying the surveillance is ok.  (I have no idea what's going on TV though because I refuse to watch it)

      Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

      by yet another liberal on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 05:43:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, you are correct, but Hannity is further wrong (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RonV, Mannie

      We, and I mean "we" as in I have been plenty guilty of the same ok by one, not ok by the other thinking (though not on NSA), that is certainly true, it's been hashed over pretty good, but you are right to point it out in a thread directly about "hypocrisy."

      On another related note, Hannity can't even get his constitution reading right. There is NO "right to privacy" in the US constitution. Many states do have it set out in their constitution.

      It was those "librul, activists judges that "found" it among a "penumbra" of other ideas spread out through the bill of rights and the fourteenth amendment substantive due process clause.

      It is a minor point to be sure, but Hannity misses so many minor points that he is a major ass.

      Blessed are the peacemakers, the poor, the meek and the sick: The "party of Jesus" wouldn't invite him to their convention - fearing his "platform."

      by 4CasandChlo on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 05:46:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  And wlthouh many might not think it significant (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Wisper, koNko, Mannie, Puffin, aitchdee, sviscusi

    under this President, a warrant approved by a Court preceded the actions, unlike the warrantless searches under W.

    Required disclaimer:  This doesn't mean it's a good idea.  Just that it's one of a myriad of ways in which Obama is much better -- something that seems to have been forgotten by many here.

    The GOP: "You can always go to the Emergency Room."

    by Upper West on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:45:03 AM PDT

    •  It's not a warrant (5+ / 0-)

      it's a fishing license.  Warrants have probable cause.

      What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

      by happymisanthropy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:50:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Never seen a court-ordered Fishing License (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Upper West, Puffin, aitchdee, sviscusi

        Odd that what Snowden leaked was an ACTUAL court-order.  The official legal document was leaked.  Not an opinion, memo, policy decision or anything, but a formal authoritative document duly signed by the proper office-holder with jurisdiction and authority under the US Code.

        ....about a program we now know had been briefed to Congress for years, whether or not they chose to attend the hearings....

        Strange that I don't recall those details under Bush.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:05:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Look it up then. (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          maryabein, MRA NY, RonV, Angryallen, Not A Bot
          Odd that what Snowden leaked was an ACTUAL court-order.
          I didn't say it wasn't.  I said it wasn't a W-A-R-R-A-N-T. It's in the fourth amendment, look it up: No warrant shall issue without probable cause.

          There is no probable cause to search the phone records of every Verizon customer.  Therefore it's an extraconstitutional workaround to thwart the fourth amendment.  Along with similar orders going to every other telecom, it's a permission slip to troll through private records of every American who used a telephone.

          A fishing license.

          What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

          by happymisanthropy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:15:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Your problem is with the statute then -- (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            If it's unconstitutional it should be repealed or found so by the Supreme Court.

            Of course, that's not likely if the R's take back the Senate because, inter alia, Dems who become one-issue voters on the NSA matter stay home.

            The GOP: "You can always go to the Emergency Room."

            by Upper West on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 10:45:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The law does not say (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              "get every single phone record."  It says they can get business records relevant to terrorism investigations.  This is way beyond what the statute was intended to implement.

              What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

              by happymisanthropy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 11:19:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Democratic hypocrisy (4+ / 0-)

    The Republican hypocrisy is to be expected.  The Affordable Care Act is a conservative bill that makes use of the language and policy of "individual responsibility" (the mandate) and "choice" (the exchanges) rather than the right of citizens to health care.  Fox News will use this to drum up anti-Obama sentiment although the Republican Party itself is behind Obama almost 100%.  Amash, Lee, and Paul would be noted exceptions.

    I'm less bothered by the fully expected GOP hypocrisy than I am by the shameless Democratic hypocrisy.  Lawrence O'Donnell and Toure are great examples of this on MSNBC because I'm sure that they weren't so gung-ho about spying under Bush. And every single poll that has come out so far has shown that Democrats are now the biggest supporters of the surveillance state.

    From the Guardian poll:

    For instance, 68% of those identifying themselves as Republican said they thought Congress had not done enough oversight of the agency, while only 40% of Democrats were similarly worried.
    Interestingly, both D- and R-leaning independents clocked in at 59% here.

    Democrats, and especially African Americans, were more likely to support Obama and the NSA in the Guardian-PPP poll.  

    According to TIME, Democrats (58%) were much more supportive of PRISM than Independents (50%) and Republicans (39%).

    The Pew poll that came out earlier this week showed that the numbers of Democratic support/opposition flipped between 2006 and 2013.

    Obama has basically turned Democrats into the champions of the national security state.  Thanks, Obama! (At least, Congressional Democrats don't follow along with the public opinion quite as much.  For the most recent PATRIOT and FISA votes, a majority of House Dems opposed.  The Senate, however, is its own beast.)

    One of the main positives, IMHO, from both the TIME and the Guardian-PPP polls has been the skepticism of my generation (18-30 crowd/millennials) to government surveillance.  

  •  "...hypocritical, blowhard dicks." (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    koNko, maryabein, MRA NY, Matt Z, Mannie, Not A Bot

    A bipartisan epidemic, it seems.

    A slower bleed out is not a sustainable alternative.

    by MrJayTee on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:56:12 AM PDT

  •  The only good thing about this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mannie, PALiberal1

    The people on the far right who defended these actions under Bush are now screaming their heads off. Anyone making a call for action against these surveillance tactics when Bush was in office was branded a traitor by Hannity and friends. Now there are Democrats who will join the righ-wing outrage and we may get actual legislation restricting this kind of snooping.

    "That being said, I do agree I am going to hell. But for other reasons. Mostly boring tax stuff ' Amy Pohler

    by Annie B on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:57:59 AM PDT

  •  I call them idolators (0+ / 0-)

    And this site is infested with them as well.  No need to point out the hypocrisy of the GOP.  We're well aware.  On the other hand, I figured progressives were above that.  It's definitely been proven that's not the case.

  •  Be fair (0+ / 0-)

    He thought the spying stuff only applied to Arabs!

  •  Are we criticizing Hannit for finally being right? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm less concerned with the sudden outburst of sanity from Republicans on this issue than I am with the hypocrisy of Democrats on the current issue.

    Yes indeed: If it was wrong under Bush, it's STILL WRONG NOW.  Similarly, if it's okay under Obama, then it must have been hunky dorey when Bush and Cheney did it.

    The difference between them and us, then, is that Bush is gone and Hannity is entitled to change his opinion.  We're not.  That would be monumental hypocrisy.

    Maybe it took a scary Democratic president for some Republicans to realize how much they don't want any Whitehouse to have this much power.

  •  a masterful, uneducated assho..... (0+ / 0-)

    He is symbolic of why I hate Republicans. Not just "dislike," but hate.....There is a zero chance in hell I would ever date, much less be in a relationship with a republican. I just do not need that much hatred in my life,

  •  Meanwhile, back at the ruins of Conservative (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Dreams Ann Coulter is whining that Sean is a wimpy liberal. While on his show railing about rubio even thinking about 'immigrations":

    Hannity pressed Coulter about what she thought should be done with the 11 million undocumented immigrants after the border was certified secured if they they were not allowed to become citizens.

    “You are like a liberal making a silly argument!” she exclaimed. “It’s a straw man argument. Nobody cares! This idea that it’s an emergency, it’s a crisis, it’s preposterous.”

    So, asking a conservative to 'think' about something prompts an evasive tirade.

    Soooooo funny to see it bite Hannity.

  •  I saw just the screencap and I couldn't help it... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ... I literally slapped my forehead before I could stop myself.

    "We see things not as they are, but as we are." - John Milton

    by Jasonhouse on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 05:51:55 PM PDT

  •  Ack! You made me look at Ann Coulter (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Also, I can kill you with my brain.

    by Puffin on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 06:01:49 PM PDT

  •  Fine, I'll bring it up. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    What's up with his hair?

    It's smaller.
    The part in his hair is miniaturized.

  •  Hannity is one of my favorite intellectuals, so (0+ / 0-)

    learned, curious and kind of heart.  I also have a pet cobra whose name is Sean.

  •  Is it just me ... (0+ / 0-)

    ... or does Hannity look like Lou Costello with bad hair?

  •  Conservatives discover privacy rights (0+ / 0-)

    Ever since Roe v. Wade, it's been an article of faith among conservatives that there is no Constitutional right to privacy. Now all of a sudden we not only have that right, it's a bedrock principle.

    "There is no room for injustice anywhere in the American mansion." Lyndon Johnson

    by pkgoode on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:44:31 PM PDT

  •  Stupidity with a microphone. Why pay (0+ / 0-)

    any attention to this guy?  There are more important things like climate change.  

    If we really want to straighten out all this crap we really need to think about shit - Holy Shit.

    by John Crapper on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:30:37 PM PDT

  •  Great! Hannity sees the light (0+ / 0-)

    And naturally he NOW understands the issue relating to women's personal medical choices...come on Sean..SAY IT!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site