Rule number one of plumbing: Shit flows downhill.

He habitually fires inconvenient people. If they leave gracefully, like Susan Rice did, he brings them back as something else.

In politics, you fire those below you to save yourself. Even if they did right by you.

People would only be fired if this program is scandalous to the American public.

All the evidence suggests that the American public doesn't mind privacy violations as long you say "child pornographer" and "terrorist" a lot when you talk about them.

Justifications for some, sacrificial firings for others. Just like Abu Ghraib.

New data? Do you really think this is news to Obama?

> Do you really think this is news to Obama?

Do you really think the NYT headline was known to Obama? So yes: The reaction of the populace is news.

Again: Some people change course when presented with new data. While politicians and partisans rarely fall into that camp, I'm hopeful that Obama does.

He presumably changed course once already (when he received 'the news' that he could get away with the sort of shit he had many convinced he wouldn't do). With any luck he'll change course again with the new 'news' that the first news was wrong.

However I cannot say that I am optimistic.

So the "new data" you're talking about is the fact that he got caught? Maybe the change he'll make as a result is more secrecy instead of less of this kind of program.

Maybe the 'new data' in this case is how we react to finding out about the existence of the programs.

What will it take for Obama-ites to finally give up on the man? If you had video of him eating a baby saying "fuck america!" would that be enough, or would you still hope he could turn things around?