Representative Maxine Waters made some disturbing comments to Roland Martin, stating that President Obama has "put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life," which "will have information about everything on every individual..." How creepy is this? If someone said this about President George W. Bush, the mainstream media would surely be outraged.
During a conversation about Obama's second term with Roland Martin, Waters notes that now President Obama will "move forward in a very aggressive way." Aside from speaking of a desire for Obama to address the "Black Agenda," a racist concept, Waters describes something in a chillingly casual manner; but it is frankly frightening. While lamenting that Obama will be done his second term in 2016, making it difficult for the progressive agenda to continue, Waters says reassuringly that "The President has put in place an organization that contains the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life. That's going to be very, very powerful..." Nobody has seen this "before in life"? "Very, very powerful"?
Will anyone in the mainstream media stand up and ask what the heck Maxine Waters is referring to? Anyone?
She continues to say, "And that database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that it's never been done before." She is not worried so much about Republicans, it seems, but Democrats. She says "And whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They're going to have to go down with that database and the concerns of those people, because they can't get around it." These comments leave room for interpretation, but the author takes it that if any new Democratic candidate wants to run for president, they had better have the right viewpoints, as this "database" will know "everything".
Watch the interview here:
Image Source: AP via Huffington Post
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 134 ( 1 removed by Renee Nal )
I'd like to put you in an iframe and display you on the Daily Stirrer tomorrow if you've no objection. Your post comes up exactly as here, gather logo, all comments, ads etc. but it is embedded in a Daily Stirrer holding page.
We had a big problem with Orwellian plans for total surveillance when the Labour government was in power, the coalition government have backed off a lot. What is it with socialists and surveillance I wonder?
Again you did not read the post or watch the video before rushing in to spew hatred at those you perceive as your enemy. At no point is it mentioned that those on the political right will be the only targets.
Richard, what comes around, goes around! Be careful for what you wish for!
If the tables were turned and Bush was one bad Dude, I would be protesting against him! No president should be a bad Dude!
Richard, if you give any government power that it should not have, that power will corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely!
First they came for the gun owner, but Richard does not own a gun, so he did not care. Then they came for the republicans, but Richard is not a republican, so he did not care. Then they came for the Catholics, the evangelicals and the Jews, but Richard did not care. But one day they came for Richard and no one was left to care. I pray that Richard is smarter than that.
It is interesting that you hope for a better future yet you give those who are killing the republic, political cover. Can't have it both ways. Choose one!
And just when did Representative Maxine Waters the president of the United States.
The data base that Representative Maxine Waters is referring to is how the Democrats won the presidential election in November and why Faux News number uno idiot and prognosticator Dick Morris is out of work.
Fear mongering is nothing new around this joint.
Personally I put no weight in anything that certain individual say's and it is a complete waste of one's time striving to applicably communicate with such one person.
In domestic terms... IGNORANCE IS BLISS. ; )
Therefore, I say... IGNORANCE IS BLISS. ; ) Are you feeling me now Opti.
They did, and they weren't
I agree though, Big Brother is not a nice benevolent guy, no matter who steers the ship.
I agree with you Renee. The mainstream and all media should be the watchdogs. They gave that up long ago during the Bush era as well. Gave him a pass when he spied on American citizens without a warrant, when he specifically said that was not going on. An outright lie. When the Iraq war came up, they helped Bush sell the idea that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 even though there was no evidence of that. Then when the fighting started they bought into the administration's plan to embed reporters with the troops where they could make a public display (televised) of cheering the troops on. The media hasn't been any better since then. At this point, if we were to have another 9/11 event, the government could install cameras in every room of all of our houses and half of the public would go along with it and so would the media. The "media" (and not just the mainstream media) is a tragic joke.
And Mark-John: Uh... this problem is WAY larger than left or right.
As though there never has been a right wing totalitarian regime in the world!!!
Tragically, we no longer have checks and balances of three branches of government. We have four branches; the fourth being the lobbying interests which are now the most powerful and overriding branch of government.
When Bush was caught authorizing wire taps of American citizens without a court order, and having made a recorded public statement that specifically said that there were no surveillance events without court authorization, and then having him and Alberto Gonzalez come along and say that the Constitution and Authorization of Use of Military Force Act gave him the authorization to do that. WHY didn't anyone I ever heard in the media ask EXACTLY WHAT verbiage in the Constitution allows that? Or specifically what verbiage in the AUMF allowed that? Nobody in the media was asking that. But you know what... If Obama was caught in the same lie, and doing the same thing, I'd be pissed as hell if the media gave him a pass... again!
I bring up the Bush outrages because that's where a lot of this stuff went out of control, especially with the Patriot Act. But this isn't a partisan thing. When Obama does this sort of thing, he needs to be held accountable. I mean... who ever said it was ok to scrap the Constitution in favor of a dictatorship?
He's NOT.
"I mean... who ever said it was ok to scrap the Constitution in favor of a dictatorship?" -
Obama and his Regime...and every Leftist, Pacifist, Isolationist, Commie and "progressive" that supports him.
"Lamestream" media is just the "other side" of the tripartite ploy to fool all of the public ... both sides work for the same B$M interests that in effect own all such media.
The "3rd side" is the hidden B$M interests that fund the lobby industry ... it is all smoke and mirrors to keep us confused and fighting with each other while we ignore "Them".
THE SYNARCHY
Uh... ever heard of The Beast 1 & The Beast 2? If not it is worth your while to look into. The Beast 1 is located under The Denver Airport and The Beast 2 is located somewhere underground London?
Every person ever born and deceased is in those Two Super Computers. The Denver Beast 1 covers The Western Hemisphere and The London Beast 2 Covers The Eastern Hemisphere. Any, and everything about you from Birth is stored in one of the two computers.
"The Beast," a supercomputer in Belgium, is Being Used to Track Every Human Being on Earth - Fiction!
Urban Legends have often been {Truths}. Besides the Govt.'s are not going to tell you the TRUTH about The Super Computers in the first place. The Govt. often uses debunking material {That Like Project Blue Book } to cover up that which is TRUTH.
The "REAL" Tony Stark agrees. ; )
Sure there is. Can't tell ya how I know. {Classified} Sorry.
And have often not been truths. That's the point - until something is proven, it's nothing more than wild speculation. And why would the government waste their time discussing paranoid delusions? If these supposed supercomputers were actually found, then they might have something to answer for. Until then, the "REAL" Tony Stark hopes they spend their time on more pressing matters. ;)
Yeah. Sure.
Proven to whom, Tony? Please tell us who it is that all things must be "proven" to, before they become real?
"With a final vote for full passage of the bill expected Friday, the defeat of the amendments spells near complete legalization of domestic spying practices which would have previously been found criminal. First uncovered during the Bush years and slammed by Democrats, the FISA law passed in 2008 gave retroactive immunity to the Bush era abuse and strove to codify the program going forward.
Though he ran against such measures during his first run for president, the secret spying laws have now been embraced fully and championed by President Obama."
REP. WATERS: The President has put in place an organization [Organization For America] that contains the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life. That’s going to be very, very powerful, and whoever –
MR. MARTIN: In terms of the Organizing for America that he’s now shifting to become a 501(c)(4).
REP. WATERS: — that’s right. That’s right. And that database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that it’s never been done before.
It depends on what she means by "every individual". Every individual in America, or every individual that's a member of the Organization For America? Also, it would be nice to have some type of confirmation that she even knows what she's talking about. A common failing of right wing pundits is not being able to reserve judgment until all facts can be weighed. Stir up hysteria first, get facts later.
Seriously?
Rational adults.
And Tony decides who is rational.
Yes, there was, and still is. The conversation in this thread is whether or not there are supercomputers in Denver or London. True to form, you're here to insult and obfuscate with dumb comments about deciding who's rational. The only joke here is you.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
(It's just Tony, that's the "proof court" I'm rather sure, but he lacks the self awareness to realize that. He thinks it's a verdict coming from a sort of god or magical crystal ball in his head ; )
Still playing to the crowd.
It's of no surprise that you don't know any rational people and need to have some pointed out to you. Stop hanging out at right wing posts and you won't have that problem.
Well, I don't much point in trying to reason with you on the matter, Tony. I asked a simple question, and got insults rather than an answer . . You apparently believe there are things like "proof panels" that are telepathically informing you of what has been "proven". You go into a childish tantrum mode when someone asks a simp0le question about what you said . . repeatedly.
I can't help it if you (and many others, apparently) are stuck in some infantile fantasy-land wherein some imaginary "high preists of proof" are mulling over what is real and what is not, for you. I grew up long ago, and realized we are the high preists that must decide such things, as individuals. This is not even slightly hard to understand, for responsible adults, as far as I'm concerned. It's kid stuff, literally.
My answer....
"Seriously?
Rational adults."
No insult.
"You apparently believe there are things like "proof panels" that are telepathically informing you of what has been "proven"."
Cool story, bro. Tell it again.
"That's the point - until something is proven, it's nothing more than wild speculation." (you wrote)
Proven to whom, Tony? Please tell us who it is that all things must be "proven" to . .?
I want the readers to face that question too, Tony, and I want them to see how you have no real answer . . but to attack me. You play the authority game, and I reveal it for what it really is, I believe. Folks like you are gathering and compiling information on all of us, because they are driven to attack any that disagree with their authority games, I am convinced, and not because they care in the slightest about others, or want to do anything wonderful for society or the world. Just like the Nazis/Gestapo gathered information in Germany as that nightmare got rolling in earnest.
Not sure if that qualifies as a "proven" to you, but I'm not really sure I'm speaking to a sane human being . . . I see no indication I am speaking to anything but a psychopath, frankly.
Also, I've grown tired of your insults and I think it's time to let Mr. McGuire in on your "psychopath" assessment. Hope the trolling was worth it.
Get ready for hell on earth guys, or get ready to challenge these crazy control freaks and their sinister plans, I warn.
(The new Amerikan hero . . flexing his new muscle ; )
This makes sense to you? Is this man a god to your mind?
Brightest thing you've said in quite some time.
"Obviously, he doesn't process any thoughts that come to his mind or there is no mind for them to go to."
Care-o-meter regarding your latest batch of insults....
On the contrary, Sue, he did understand what Graham meant, which demonstrates Graham was right, he must have known what I meant when I used the same form of expression.
His interest is in destroying rational discussion, I believe, and provoking "insults" . . to aid in that "mission".
I've chosen not to play your game where you ask stupid, patronizing questions about gods. Once you display some form of rational discussion, I'll entertain the notion of acknowledging you. Until then, continue to chase your own tails.
lol
This is a person performing in character, so to speak, I conclude (based on numerous interactions/observations), and the person is not concerned about the character's status in our eyes, in the same way a person is concerned about their status in other folks eyes. It shows up once in a while, in things like this strange acting ignorant about a common use of English, if he was really feeling patronized. The character did not receive realistic/natural ego protection, because the character is not an actual person, I believe.
There is no recognition of anything someone says that Tony does not consider a "rational adult" in the first place. Tony decides who is and isn't a rational adult for whatever reason because only Tony knows, but if you're not a fan of Tony's, Tony will not recognize a word you write. If you want to call it obfuscation, you can, but it's obfuscation on steroids. Every single reply starts another Tony tangent. There is no continuity of thought beyond any single obfuscatory remark he offers. It's just one right after another. He doesn't care what you think as long as you don't share whatever he says he thinks, and he's not about to recognize any logic from anyone who doesn't at least have the potential to fawn all over Tony, the hero. That's why, unless you want to make a joke of it, there's no point in arguing with Tony because he won't stand for it.
In a sense, he is the straw man, I believe, and you go on to describe something very similar to what I perceive. He's "endlessly" pulling the discussion into him, and his supposed indignations and obtrusive pomposity. That's the effect he wants to have on us, wants us to react to with (perfectly natural and justified at times) comments about his inability to detect/grasp rational discussion and so forth. The topic/discussion is obfuscated, defacto one could say. Its not all that different tactically speaking, than shouting over a real discussion, so as to drown out attempts to discuss something. Exactly what is shouted loses the sort of significance that an attempt to actually engage in discussion would have. The real interest is not in that "victory", but in stifling communication about something, as the goal.
Hence the ego will not really be engaged in defending the character, as egos defend real people. That's just one form of "tell", but with this "shtick", there is a constant need to do things like act offended and act above being offended by us . . Every bit the expert on how to determine precisely what is proven or not and unable to decipher the common tongue ; ) There's no way to maintain (once a blunder is caught, as I did with the "Who" question, and Graham did with his echoing of that phrase) any real continuity of thought, that I can imagine anyway.
"That's why, unless you want to make a joke of it, there's no point in arguing with Tony because he won't stand for it."
I don't argue with him. Often I don't even address him, when speaking about his comments. I put him on the spot once in a while, but you'd have to pay me money to argue with him ; )
No, I wasn't saying you personally were arguing with him. hahaha
It was just the general conclusion to what I had written.
Nailed that one.
Will anyone in the mainstream media stand up and ask what the heck Maxine Waters is referring to? Anyone?
She continues to say, "And that database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that it's never been done before." She is not worried so much about Republicans, it seems, but Democrats. She says "And whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They're going to have to go down with that database and the concerns of those people, because they can't get around it."