Obama data mining Verison - good

It was the right thing to do when Bush did it and it is the right thing to do when Obama is doing it. Data mining shows trends. It threatens nobody, except maybe terrorists trying to harm our country. “Information collected under this program is among the most important and valuable intelligence information we collect, and is used to protect our nation from a wide variety of threats,” said an Obama Administration official. He is right.

I defended this during the Bush time because I knew it was necessary and not a threat to our liberties. It would be wrong to attack it now that Obama is doing the same thing both because it would be dishonest AND because it could hurt our country.

My liberal friends attacked like mad when Bush did it. Don't you feel stupid now? Oh yeah, it is different when Obama does it. But I will not stoop to that partisan level. Obama is right on this; so was Bush ... and even Cheney.

After all, it is not like spying on journalists or the IRS attacking Administration enemies. Now that would be wrong.

Posted by Christine & John at June 6, 2013 9:44 PM
Comments
Comment #367066

I would rather have another terrorist attack on American soil than to sell away our civil liberties for the veneer of security.

Posted by: Warren Porter at June 6, 2013 10:47 PM
Comment #367070

So Warren, what does that mean? Are you saying there is a pattern of violation of our civil rights by the Obama administration? Then what do we do about it?

Unlike C&J, I was against the Patriot Act under Bush and I’m still against it. The problem with the Federal Government is; there is no limit to the power they seek. A crack in the 4th Amendment results in a complete violation of our civil rights. Name a law that is not pushed to the very limit of violating the Constitution, by the Feds?

But I do agree with C&J, where is the outrage of the left? We are seeing complete hypocrisy; it was wrong under Bush, but it is okay under Obama…the logic…because Bush first did it. So the left was lying then (under Bush) or they are lying now.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 6, 2013 11:17 PM
Comment #367072

Casper,
If you want to see outrage on the left, see DailyKos, HuffPo; in fact, see if you can find a left-leaning web site that does NOT feature this issue and oppose the surveillance programs. It keeps spreading. The telecoms and technological companies coordinated this with the federal government. These databases track internet use, and they also can use cell phones to track a person’s location. The data is available to tell whether a person attended an Occupy protest, a mosque, an abortion clinic, whatever.

So these databases are collected and maintained by the government. The information is available and used to track down terrorists. Personally, I already assumed it existed.

C&J,
So, the question… does the collection of this data and the maintenance of these databases violate our constitutional rights? I think it does. Now, I do believe these databases and searches have actually stopped terrorist attacks, and saved lives. I do not doubt the good intentions of the various Senators, judges and others in the Obama administration to make the nation safe; nevertheless, this data represents a terrible threat in the wrong hands, and the temptation will be tremendous.

Posted by: phx8 at June 7, 2013 12:22 AM
Comment #367073

Hmmm, so how you feel about the liberals desire to create a gun registry, or a federal health registry under obamacare?

Or perhaps the outrage is when it affects the cell use or internet activity of the left as well.

Haven’t you ever heard the old saying, “Hell is full o people with good intentions”. Politicians never do things for good intentions, they do things for votes.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 1:11 AM
Comment #367076

Warren & Phx8

It is data mining. It looks at general trends and finds patterns. Those patterns give clues for further investigation. That is the time that our liberty safeguards become important. Data mining in this case is really no different than the cop sitting on the side of the road watching traffic. It is only if he sees something and stops a car that you need worry and even then likely not.

If you are worried about you liberties in this kind of thing, you gave them away already if you use Google or Facebook. Personally, I trust the Feds more than I do somebody like Zukerberg and those other uber-nerds who structure our lives.

Casper, Phx8 & Warren

Casper’s question about a gun registry, ObamaCare etc is certainly valid. The data mining has no names associated with it. A gun registry would have names and locations.

If you are against this data mining, you must be against these other, more intrusive, lists.

Posted by: CJ at June 7, 2013 6:23 AM
Comment #367077

I explained to my wife yesterday the dangers of the data collecting of the federal government. On the surface, the data collection seems innocent and needed for national security. But as I said before, giving the Feds an inch, causes them to take it a mile. If you add to the collecting of personal data the events that have take place at the IRS; then you see the potential for the government to harass the American people at will. The IRS went after conservatives and conservative groups; they also went after people associated with, or related to, these people and groups. The governments investigation into the press, led to the investigation of friends and family of those in the press.

Yesterday Illinois Senator Mark Kirk asked AG Erick Holder if he could assure the committee that the cell phones of the Congress were not being listened to; Holder wouldn’t answer the question. Phx8’s comment that Huffpo and Kos listed the left’s stand against these things only proves that invasion into private lives is only bad when it is the lives of the left. This is the result of politicians voting for laws, that will be revealed after they are passed and signed.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 9:14 AM
Comment #367080
Are you saying there is a pattern of violation of our civil rights by the Obama administration?

There was a pattern of civil rights violations by the Bush administration. Obama has lessened the violations a little bit, but the rollback is nowhere near sufficient.

Then what do we do about it?

Speaker Boehner, Eric Cantor and the rest of the Congressional GOP need to get off their asses and do their jobs: pass meaningful legislation. Repeal the PATRIOT Act, repeal the the amendments to FISA. Darell Issa should stop wasting taxpayer dollars with phony investigations (Benghazi or Fast & Furious) and focus on the true scandals.

the liberals desire to create a gun registry, or a federal health registry under obamacare

A gun registry or a health registry are anathema to liberalism. Recent bills involved expansions to background checks, but they prohibited the creation of such a registry.

It is data mining.

At this point, I don’t trust Obama to limit himself to data mining. The government is looking at the content of Americans’ correspondence and that is egregiously wrong.

Posted by: Warren Porter at June 7, 2013 11:00 AM
Comment #367083
Obama has lessened the violations a little bit, but the rollback is nowhere near sufficient.

Explain how Obama has lessened the violations a little bit. I will counter with how he has expanded them severely…

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 11:54 AM
Comment #367084

“President Obama is squeaky clean and has never done anything wrong in his life. Why do we automatically assume this is for evil?” - Chris Matthews suggesting this is all about race…

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 12:12 PM
Comment #367085

Casper,

“Phx8’s comment that Huffpo and Kos listed the left’s stand against these things only proves that invasion into private lives is only bad when it is the lives of the left.”

The depth of your partisanship is simply breathtaking.


Warren,

Data mining is a fact of life. Every time you register a piece of software, sign up for a grocery store discount, hell just walking down the street in the city, you can be subject to some sort of data mining.
Were you aware that there are millions of video “security” cameras scattered about the cities of this country?
I know they are there because I have installed some of them. They have been there since at least the late ’80s, and they have been there ostensibly to enhance our safety.

This is even more chilling;

http://www.businessinsider.com/facial-recognition-technology-and-drones-2013-5

Franklin said; “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

To take this one step further we have all heard the statement; “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear”.
This statement is tyranny on it’s face.

These issues have been on going for decades;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee

“The Church Committee was the United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, a U.S. Senate committee chaired by Senator Frank Church (D-ID) in 1975. A precursor to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the committee investigated intelligence gathering for illegality by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) after certain activities had been revealed by the Watergate affair.”

Fortunately the “right” doesn’t hold the franchise on outrage.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 12:14 PM
Comment #367088

Agreed. The Internet is for porn, and any expectation you think you have to privacy ends when you hit the send button, enter a keystroke, or whatever.

Same with phone call records (but not converations). You might have a privacy agreement with Verizon, but I doubt you have much recourse should there be a disclosure of your records. Wiretapping would be a different subject however.

Honestly I’d be more worried about facial recognition and cameras, or DNA collections, then I would be about my phone records. At least with the records it’s just numbers and durations.

And PH, if you feel that this program has violated your constitutional rights, do you also call for President Obama to be impeached? As I remember you did so for President Bush based on his use of the NSA.

Posted by: George in SC at June 7, 2013 12:30 PM
Comment #367090

George,

“As I remember you did so for President Bush based on his use of the NSA.”

Yeah, and we all know how that worked out.

Rocky


Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 12:39 PM
Comment #367091

Seriously, people really can’t see the difference between people willingly giving up some information, that they choose, to private companies, who have no legal capability to do anything with that data that could kill you/put you in jail and the government forcibly taking that information, against your will, while having the ability to use that information against you to put you in jail/kill you?

I think there are a lot of people that the founding fathers, especially Jefferson, Madison and Franklin, would live to kick square in the balls.

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 12:43 PM
Comment #367093

Warren Porter said:

“There was a pattern of civil rights violations by the Bush administration. Obama has lessened the violations a little bit, but the rollback is nowhere near sufficient.”

Once again Warren, could you possibly answer a question without invoking Bush? This makes you look infantile like the rest of the liberals. Who cares what Bush did? As I said, I was against the Patriot Act then and I’m against it now. The Patriot Act allows the Feds to by-pass judicial search warrants, and have unlimited power to gather information. If Obama had “lessened” the gathering of information, then why is everyone, including the left crying foul?

“Speaker Boehner, Eric Cantor and the rest of the Congressional GOP need to get off their asses and do their jobs: pass meaningful legislation. Repeal the PATRIOT Act, repeal the the amendments to FISA. Darell Issa should stop wasting taxpayer dollars with phony investigations (Benghazi or Fast & Furious) and focus on the true scandals.”

You are lumping together two different thoughts: first is the repeal of the Patriot Act…some of the parts of the Patriot Act are due to expire shortly, and any attempt to repeal the Patriot Act would be blocked by Harry Reid. Remember, it is Reid, who is telling people to slow down. Reid is not upset at the events taking place; Reid wants what Obama wants, and Obama wants to gather information on Americans. Secondly; there is sufficient evidence to warrant an investigation on both Benghazi and F&F; Americans died in both cases and Americans have the right to know why they died. You may not like the investigation, but there it is.

“A gun registry or a health registry are anathema to liberalism. Recent bills involved expansions to background checks, but they prohibited the creation of such a registry.”

There are many liberal Democrat politicians calling for a gun registry and an outright gun ban. Warren, you can say it’s not true and you can cry it is an “anathema” all you want, but the facts do not support you. Let’s look at the major cities controlled by Democrats; they have tried gun registration and outright gun bans and had it not been for groups like the NRA/ILA fighting in the courts, these liberal Democrats would have gotten their way. So to say Democrats do not seek a gun registry or a gun ban is absolutely false. Regarding the health registry; part of obamacare will allow the government to gather health information on Americans. The ultimate goal of the gathering of information will be to determine who is and who is not worthy of medical attention. Obamacare is a prerequisite to national health care like is found in Europe/Canada and in these countries the Government determines who gets the healthcare and when.

“At this point, I don’t trust Obama to limit himself to data mining. The government is looking at the content of Americans’ correspondence and that is egregiously wrong.”
Posted by: Warren Porter at June 7, 2013 11:00 AM

This comment is a complete opposite to your previous comments. You defend Obama and then you declare him to be dangerous. Which is it?

Rocky’s response to my comment to phx8:

“Phx8’s comment that Huffpo and Kos listed the left’s stand against these things only proves that invasion into private lives is only bad when it is the lives of the left.”

“The depth of your partisanship is simply breathtaking.”

Okay Rocky, I’ll bite: why don’t you list the news outlets, including Huffpo and Kos, or list the Democrat politicians who were outraged about the invasion of government into our private lives before it came out in the UK Guardian? This information was readily accessible to the press and the politicians and yet nothing. In fact the left never said anything until it involved them.

The question by George in SC:

“And PH, if you feel that this program has violated your constitutional rights, do you also call for President Obama to be impeached? As I remember you did so for President Bush based on his use of the NSA.”

The answer by Rocky is to blow off the question, the response by any on the left will be to protect Obama at all costs. There were things that took place under the Bush administration that we on the right objected to, and we voiced our opinions against Bush’s agenda. We never tried to defend Bush for the things he did that we disagreed with; but the left, even though they are really upset, will NEVER speak a word against Obama. They will blame low level employees, they will blame Bush, they may even blame the heads of Obama’s cabinets, but they will NEVER blame Obama.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 1:19 PM
Comment #367096

Casper,

“The answer by Rocky is to blow off the question, the response by any on the left will be to protect Obama at all costs.”

Really, how did the “left’s” attempt to impeach Bush work out?
Where exactly have I protected Obama, or even defended any of his policies?

I think you just make this crap up as you go along. There are things I believe in that I believed long before Obama took office, and believing them in no way justifies his existence.

“Okay Rocky, I’ll bite: why don’t you list the news outlets, including Huffpo and Kos, or list the Democrat politicians who were outraged about the invasion of government into our private lives before it came out in the UK Guardian?”

Where were you when ATT and others rolled over for the NSA?
That outrage lasted what… 15 or 20 minutes?

We aren’t going to fix the decades of abuse by the intelligence community unless we are capable of putting aside the partisan differences that divide us.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 1:58 PM
Comment #367097

“Really, how did the “left’s” attempt to impeach Bush work out?”

What’s the matter Rock, no original thought? Must you always invoke the Bush name. He’s not the president and he’s been gone for 4 1/2 years.

“Where exactly have I protected Obama, or even defended any of his policies?”

So, you condemning Obama for the scandals?

And finally:

“We aren’t going to fix the decades of abuse by the intelligence community unless we are capable of putting aside the partisan differences that divide us.”

Where does this partisanship start? Shall we start with Reid, who supported the Patriot Act, and did his best to block Rand Paul, who according to Warren Porter was the only one he could support to defending America’s privacy:

“Senate Majority Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday used a procedural move to circumvent Sen. Rand Paul’s efforts to offer amendments to a bill granting a four-year extension of expiring provisions of the Patriot Act.

The parliamentary maneuver allows the chamber to finish debate on the legislation sooner and move past what was sure to be a drawn-out amendment process lead by Paul, the Kentucky Republican and tea party favorite who is a vocal critic of the law.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55645.html#ixzz2VYT8N7Tk

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 2:12 PM
Comment #367098
could you possibly answer a question without invoking Bush?

I wasn’t the one who brought up Bush, that would be you and C&J.

any attempt to repeal the Patriot Act would be blocked by Harry Reid
Bullshit. Mitch McConnell would filibuster such a bill first.
Americans have the right to know why they died.
Americans have known why they died for months. They were killed by foreigners who seek to harm the US.


There are many liberal Democrat politicians calling for a gun registry and an outright gun ban. Warren, you can say it’s not true and you can cry it is an “anathema” all you want, but the facts do not support you. Let’s look at the major cities controlled by Democrats; they have tried gun registration and outright gun bans and had it not been for groups like the NRA/ILA fighting in the courts, these liberal Democrats would have gotten their way. So to say Democrats do not seek a gun registry or a gun ban is absolutely false.
This is completely unsubstantiated libel. Show me one instance where an effort to create a gun registry gained the support of a majority of Congressional Democrats or President Obama.

Regarding the health registry; part of obamacare will allow the government to gather health information on Americans. The ultimate goal of the gathering of information will be to determine who is and who is not worthy of medical attention. Obamacare is a prerequisite to national health care like is found in Europe/Canada and in these countries the Government determines who gets the healthcare and when.
This is a crackpot hallucination out of accordance with reality that you parrot from conservative media talking points.
This comment is a complete opposite to your previous comments. You defend Obama and then you declare him to be dangerous. Which is it?
It isn’t the complete opposite because I don’t live in your dualistic universe. It is entirely consistent to believe Obama is dangerous, but not as dangerous as Bush*.

*Regarding Bush: I understand that the guy is 4.5 years removed from power, but his ideologies remain the core of the Republican base, which means his ideas remain very relevant to today’s political debates. If you truly want to keep liberals from bringing up Bush, you need to adopt policy positions that are 180 degrees from Bush’s flawed ones.

Posted by: Warren Porter at June 7, 2013 2:17 PM
Comment #367099

For decades the feds have maintained dossiers on every American citizen. They were maintained in Atlanta. This latest round of taking of our liberties is old hat.

The tyrants use stepping stones to get to where we are now and where we are heading. They never jump to the final goal. That would cause a revolt. Those tyrants had to go a little bit at a time. They considered the goal as the reference to their success.

Those same tyrants where and are loyal to globalists that want to rule the earth with a single government. This has been going on for all of our lifetims and before.

Our Constitution is being challenged daily.

You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Posted by: tom humes at June 7, 2013 2:24 PM
Comment #367100

Casper,

“Where does this partisanship start?”

It starts with you and me pal. It starts with Americans that vote these bozos into office. It starts when we place party ahead of country.

It’s not just the politicians, everybody is at fault.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 2:27 PM
Comment #367101

Rocky, True!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at June 7, 2013 2:47 PM
Comment #367104

“but his ideologies remain the core of the Republican base, which means his ideas remain very relevant to today’s political debates.”

Wrong, the Bush ideologies are not part of conservatism. Never have been and ever will be. The difference between you and I is that we, conservatives, recognize there is a power struggle within the Republican Party, between RINOs and conservatives; on the other hand, socialist liberals have taken control of the Democratic Party an you have resulted to defending a socialist agenda.

I provided a link in the next column showing Reid’s support for the Patriot Act and blockage of any amendments by Rand Paul.

“Americans have known why they died for months. They were killed by foreigners who seek to harm the US.”

Where those foreigners Islamic terrorists, or were they criminals? So, we don’t know who killed them.

“This is completely unsubstantiated libel. Show me one instance where an effort to create a gun registry gained the support of a majority of Congressional Democrats or President Obama.”

I did not say Congressional Democrats or Obama; what I did say was, “major cities controlled by Democrats; they have tried gun registration and outright gun bans and had it not been for groups like the NRA/ILA fighting in the courts, these liberal Democrats would have gotten their way. So to say Democrats do not seek a gun registry or a gun ban is absolutely false.”

I don’t have to prove this, because it is fact. Federal judges have ruled that DC, NYC, and Chicago cannot refuse to allow it’s citizens to own guns. Now what you have to prove to me is that the agenda of Democrats in control of cities or states, is different from the agenda of Democrats in the WH or Congress. I submit the agenda is the same; a socialist agenda. I won’t copy and paste the comments made by Obama referring to gun registry or gun ban, but you can read the facts for yourself:

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

Regarding obamacare health registry:

“This is a crackpot hallucination out of accordance with reality that you parrot from conservative media talking points.”

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/05/31/the-irs-obamacare-and-you-the-government-is-coming-for-your-health-insurance-records/

I won’t argue with you on this one. The Heritage Foundation is flawless and you are naïve to think that the IRS enforced obamacare will not keep private health records.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 2:52 PM
Comment #367105

Rocky, so this means you are willing to vote for conservatives like Rand Paul, or for libertarians?

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 3:04 PM
Comment #367106

Casper,

“Rocky, so this means you are willing to vote for conservatives like Rand Paul, or for libertarians?”

As I said before, the right doesn’t hold a franchise on outrage.
There has to be a middle ground where we can meet, and we can’t have it all our own way.

Unfortunately it appears that my move rightward is a much shorter trip than your move leftward.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 3:19 PM
Comment #367117
Mr. President and the NSA, Going through our private phone records is a lot of work, and very expensive. And since we aren’t huge fans of paying you to invade our privacy, we thought we’d save you the time and save ourselves the money by answering your questions openly, publicly, and transparently:

Q: Are Libertarians associated with any organization with any anti-government goals of any kind?
A: Yes. Our goal is to dismantle most or all of government. Many of our members are associated with many other anti-government, pro-freedom groups as well.

Q: Do Libertarians intend to use violence?
A: No, we leave that to the experts: the Federal government. Our goal is to stop you from engaging in nonstop and unnecessary violence around the world. No terrorist we know of has caused as many needless civilian deaths and as much destruction to property as the U.S. Federal government.. We want to shut down military bases and bring our troops home. At home, we want to end the ludicrous swat team raids on peaceful civilians, and have the government stop using violence against peaceful citizens.

Q: Do you intend to distribute government secrets to enemies of freedom?
A: Right now, the Federal government IS the biggest enemy of American freedom. Distributing Federal government secrets to the Federal government would be as pointless as, well, most government programs.

Q: What other subversive goals do you have?
A: We plan to take back our fundamental rights to live our lives without unjustified interference. We will regain control over our education, our recreation, and the fruits of our labors. You can read a full list of our subversive goals here: http://www.lp.org/platform .

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 4:21 PM
Comment #367119

From Glenn Greenwald:

just spend a moment considering the options available to someone with access to numerous Top Secret documents.

They could easily enrich themselves by selling those documents for huge sums of money to foreign intelligence services. They could seek to harm the US government by acting at the direction of a foreign adversary and covertly pass those secrets to them. They could gratuitously expose the identity of covert agents.

None of the whistleblowers persecuted by the Obama Administration as part of its unprecedented attack on whistleblowers has done any of that: not one of them. Nor have those who are responsible for these current disclosures.

They did not act with any self-interest in mind. The opposite is true: they undertook great personal risk and sacrifice for one overarching reason: to make their fellow citizens aware of what their government is doing in the dark. Their objective is to educate, to democratize, to create accountability for those in power.

The people who do this are heroes. They are the embodiment of heroism. They do it knowing exactly what is likely to be done to them by the planet’s most powerful government, but they do it regardless. They don’t benefit in any way from these acts. I don’t want to over-simplify: human beings are complex, and usually act with multiple, mixed motives. But read this outstanding essay on this week’s disclosures from The Atlantic’s security expert, Bruce Schneier, to understand why these brave acts are so crucial.

Those who step forward to blow these whistles rarely benefit at all. The ones who benefit are you. You discover what you should know but what is hidden from you: namely, the most consequential acts being taken by those with the greatest power, and how those actions are affecting your life, your country and your world.

In 2008, candidate Obama decreed that “often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out,” and he hailed whistleblowing as:

“acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled as they have been during the Bush administration.”

The current incarnation of Obama prosecutes those same whistlelblowers at double the number of all previous presidents combined, and spent the campaign season boasting about it.

The way things are supposed to work is that we’re supposed to know virtually everything about what they do: that’s why they’re called public servants. They’re supposed to know virtually nothing about what we do: that’s why we’re called private individuals.

This dynamic - the hallmark of a healthy and free society - has been radically reversed. Now, they know everything about what we do, and are constantly building systems to know more. Meanwhile, we know less and less about what they do, as they build walls of secrecy behind which they function. That’s the imbalance that needs to come to an end. No democracy can be healthy and functional if the most consequential acts of those who wield political power are completely unknown to those to whom they are supposed to be accountable.

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 4:27 PM
Comment #367120

BTW, for the people who are demanding bipartisanship in our government, let it be known that the NSA spying, Patriot Act and myriad of other civil rights offenses have come about because of BIPARTISANSHIP. That is what we get when we don’t have anyone standing up against the administration and leadership…

Bipartisanship is the LAST THING the individual American needs.

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 4:30 PM
Comment #367122

Rhinehold,

“Bipartisanship is the LAST THING the individual American needs.”

And if we don’t hang together we shall surely hang separately.

Rocky


Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 4:39 PM
Comment #367126

“Unfortunately it appears that my move rightward is a much shorter trip than your move leftward.

Rocky”

Posted by: Rocky Marks at June 7, 2013 3:19 PM

Well, it depends what you mean by moving rightward. According to Warren Porter, Rand Paul is one of the only Republicans that can be trusted. Rand Paul is very conservative and libertarian. On the other hand, republican RINOs like McCain, Boehner, Graham, to name but a few, supported the Patriot Act. I don’t support the RINOs, but I do support Rand Paul. So when you say move right, are you talking about RINOs, or are you talking about conservatives? It would appear conservatives are “right” of the RINOs, but it is the conservatives who want to protect your 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments. So are you willing to go far enough to support those who defend your rights? Since many democrats, who are now outraged, worked to support the Patriot Act; I’m assuming you don’t support them.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 6:21 PM
Comment #367129

CasperWY,

Rand Paul is definitely a RINO. No true conservative would ever care about the Constitution like he does.

Posted by: Warren Porter at June 7, 2013 7:04 PM
Comment #367130

CasperWY,

Rand Paul is definitely a RINO. No true conservative would ever care about the Constitution like he does.

Posted by: Warren Porter at June 7, 2013 7:05 PM
Comment #367131

“or list the Democrat politicians who were outraged about the invasion of government into our private lives before it came out in the UK Guardian? “

CasperWY,

Let’s look at the voting record on the Patriot Act. The only senator to vote against the original Patriot Act in 2001 was Russ Feinghold, one of the most liberal politicians.

Let’s look at the voting record for re-authorization in 2011 of the Patriot Act provisions related to the data mining. Tea Party senators who professed to be in favor of “constitutionally limited government” voted for passage at a rate of 87%. The exceptions, Rand Paul and Mike Lee. There were a total of 18 nay votes, the majority were Democrats (13 Democrats, four Republicans and 1 independent (Bernie Sanders)).

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2011/05/29/senate-tea-party-roll-call-vote-on-the-patriot-act-may-2011/

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2011/05/26/13-democrats-4-republicans-and-1-independent-vote-to-stop-patriot-act-reauthorization/

Perhaps the most vocal critics of the Patriot Act “business record” provisions and NSA programs have been Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. and Mark Udall, D-Colo. “Wyden, D-Ore., has been after the NSA on this issue since well before the Obama administration, and his colleague Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., has joined him in fighting to uncover the Obama administration’s phone record policy.” Wyden and Udall’s criticisms were stated well before the recent revelations. http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/06/06/nsa_collecting_verizon_phone_records_two_senators_have_protested_patriot.html


Posted by: Rich at June 7, 2013 7:33 PM
Comment #367134

“Seriously, people really can’t see the difference between people willingly giving up some information, that they choose, to private companies,..”

Seriously, Rhinehold, many people think that they are simply purchasing a communication channel. Most don’t realize that their IP provider, cell phone company, search engine, etc. are actually monitoring and tracking their searches, e-mails, purchases, etc. and targeting them for marketing and other purposes.

If people do understand that, it is not “willingly giving up some information.” It may be legal and consented to in the fine print in their contracts but “willingly?” I doubt it. There is also little choice in many cases. In many areas of the country, there is limited opportunity for internet access due to cable monopolies. Even if there were multiple choices, what major search engine protects your privacy?


Posted by: Rich at June 7, 2013 8:00 PM
Comment #367135

Rich, even if we take your argument into consideration, users who ‘sign away their information’ are not subjecting themselves to being jailed or killed by the company they are signing up with, those companies do not have that power.

It’s THE reason that we have to diligent with what power we give the government, they are the only ones who has that kind of power over us…

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 9:05 PM
Comment #367136


I hear a lot of gnashing of teeth but nothing of substance going to the heart of the problem. Seems many are eager to diss the ‘old white men’ and give up their 4th amendment rights.

Acting on emotions ‘of the moment’ without trying to understand how we got to this point. Did the citizens cry out for a big influx of muslims? If not, then who did? Ahhh, Corpocracy - - - what an efficient way to check the wages of the working class. Bring them in by the millions, druggies, fanatics, etc and dump them on the streets of America. No civics, no history. Let them compete for jobs and support them with tax dollars as needed.

I suggest a druggie, used to making big money, is unlikely to take on being a cabbie, etc. Likewise, a muslim will look to befriend those who ‘knew his family’, etc. Some 3000 citizens have lost their lives thus far but the corpocracy doesn’t mind as long as things don’t go to crazy. And, a few bomblets placed here and there can do a lot to spend those tax dollars, grow gov’t for ‘more security’, etc.

IMO, the corpocracy had the votes to build the super data center in the Midwest and they have the votes to keep and ‘improve’ the Patriot Act. Highly unlikely they would shut it down. But, debate, misplaced as it is, is good, keeps the lips and gums exercised and healthy, etc.

Seems we are much going the way of the Roman Republic, building a bridge too far, etc. If the Mexican population can slip in and take root in sufficient number to change the political structure of the country then it would seem to follow that Sharia law could possibly carve out a piece of the judicial system.

I do hope guggle is listening - - -

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at June 7, 2013 9:05 PM
Comment #367139
what major search engine protects your privacy?

https://ixquick.com/eng/

https://ixquick.com/eng/protect-privacy.html

The only search engine that does not record your IP address.
Posted by: Rhinehold at June 7, 2013 9:50 PM
Comment #367141

Thanks Rhinehold, already using it.

Posted by: CasperWY at June 7, 2013 10:04 PM
Comment #367143

Wow, interesting link, Rhinehold. The only search engine in the world that protects privacy!

Its the impersonal nature of the intrusion and the subtle manner in which it occurs that is a problem. If a librarian began giving me unsolicited suggestions as to what books I might like based on what he/she observed me reviewing, it would creep me out. Some real person was actually tracking me in the library. If the Fedex guy started commenting on what was in an unmarked package I was sending, it would be disturbing. But, it happens all the time on the internet. Nobody ever seems very disturbed about it. They don’t even notice it most of the time. Perhaps if Google or others explicitly said in a search, we have been observing you for a while and we think that you would like x,y or z, it would make people think more about privacy.


Posted by: Rich at June 7, 2013 10:30 PM
Comment #367183
When the pollsters at Pew asked Democrats in January 2006 how they felt about the NSA’s surveillance programs, 37 percent labeled the programs “acceptable,” while 61 percent said they were unacceptable. Today, those numbers are exactly the opposite: 64 percent of Democrats now think the NSA’s surveillance programs are acceptable, while only 34 percent say they’re not.

Republicans polled much the same way (in reverse, obviously). Back in 2006, 75 percent of Republicans supported the NSA “scrutiniz[ing] phone calls and emails of suspected terrorists.” Today, only 52 percent of Republicans say such actions are acceptable.

Could it be that sharing a party ID with whoever’s in the White House is a better indicator of one’s opinion on major civil liberties issues, than, say principle? I AM REALLY STARTING TO THINK SO.

Whole damn poll—including the frightening statistic that only 12 percent of 18-29 year-olds are following the NSA story—right here.

http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/10/majority-views-nsa-phone-tracking-as-acceptable-anti-terror-tactic/

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 10, 2013 5:22 PM
Post a comment