Republicans defending Big Government Surveillance, again....

[dblack]

While violating the Constitution is reprehensible, as weapons technology improves, we're going to find ourselves facing down weapons and attacks that'll make 9/11 seem like the good ol' days. Government surveillance may be illegal, but it may also become something we learn to live with since the alternative is much worse. And of course as the old counter-arguement goes, if not doing anything wrong, what do you care if the government knows about it?

Oh, please. That tired old hunk of shit wont stick to the wall anymore. And as far as doing nothing wrong is concerned, the government is the one who decides when someone is doing something "wrong" and can use such sweeping information in very Orwellian ways.

So, yes, it does matter whether or not I'm doing anything wrong. I have a RIGHT to privacy in my person and property.

Other than knowing the word 'Owellian,' can you actually list any consequences of a law-abidding citizen being negatively impacted by government surveillance?

Every goddamn one of us have now lost any sense of privacy when it comes to emails and phone calls.

 

[The T]

While violating the Constitution is reprehensible, as weapons technology improves, we're going to find ourselves facing down weapons and attacks that'll make 9/11 seem like the good ol' days. Government surveillance may be illegal, but it may also become something we learn to live with since the alternative is much worse. And of course as the old counter-arguement goes, if not doing anything wrong, what do you care if the government knows about it?

Oh, please. That tired old hunk of shit wont stick to the wall anymore. And as far as doing nothing wrong is concerned, the government is the one who decides when someone is doing something "wrong" and can use such sweeping information in very Orwellian ways.

So, yes, it does matter whether or not I'm doing anything wrong. I have a RIGHT to privacy in my person and property.

You also have the right under the 4th Amendment against illegal search and seizure, and any search or seizure must be secured with a warrant. Period.

The entire program is a massive infringement on all of our civil liberties.

yeah, and they get that from a 'Secret Court'. How does that work?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Should read my '4th Amendment suspended in Texas and Alabama' thread in the Law and Justice group.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Oh, please. That tired old hunk of shit wont stick to the wall anymore. And as far as doing nothing wrong is concerned, the government is the one who decides when someone is doing something "wrong" and can use such sweeping information in very Orwellian ways.

So, yes, it does matter whether or not I'm doing anything wrong. I have a RIGHT to privacy in my person and property.

Other than knowing the word 'Owellian,' can you actually list any consequences of a law-abidding citizen being negatively impacted by government surveillance?

Every goddamn one of us have now lost any sense of privacy when it comes to emails and phone calls.

Given many people's conversations take place in the presence of others as on a cellphone, I don't think that's the sane arguement you seem to think it is. Again, if it's a lawful conversation, what's it matter if the government listens in? Government's been doing that sort of thing for decades, isn't like it's new or we suddenly lost our privacy. We lost our privacy a long time ago.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

George W Bush famously got caught spying on American citizens without a warrant. With his Patriot Act, he tried to do an end-run around the Constitution in order to formalize and legalize spying.

Obama, who lacks the moral courage to challenge Dick Chaney and his constant appearances on FOX News defending NSA Spying and the Patriot Act, has failed to destroy the Bush Surveillance State.

Recently, because of the Snowden leaks, it has come to light that Big Government (NSA) has been over-tracking phone, internet and consumer activity of free Americans - and creating huge data bases, stored in massive data silos in Utah. Information on nearly every American now exists so that future administrations could use it however they like, despite Government assurances that they would never, ever do anything wrong or un-Constitutional with this data. But who really knows what will happen once a particular form of Government Power exists? Maybe a president will come to office who wants to analyze gun purchases, and he will use these new concentrated data collection powers for unintended purposes. This is why Libertarians (and the Constitution) protect privacy, because once compromised at the institutional level, it can be used in ways that have unintended consequences. [Don't try explaining this to Republicans because they tend to trust Big Government, and they couldn't imagine how mistakes and abuses could take place once Bush awarded concentrated surveillance powers to big government. This is why Republicans never opposed the Bush Surveillance State, because they tend to be more obedient to their leaders than the Constitution].

Fast forward to the 12/22 episode of "This Week w/George Stephanopoulos", where, once again, the Republicans are defending the invasion of privacy.

House Intelligence Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich, was defending Big Government Surveillance Power against one of its harshest critics, Democratic Senator Mark Udall. And now Obama, because of mounting pressure from the Democrats, is considering taking legal actions to curb Big Government's power to spy on free Americans.

Of course, everybody anticipates that Dick Chaney will appear on FOX News to intimidate the President from curbing the Government Power that he (Chaney/Bush) put in place.

But a question remains.

Why do Republicans like giving Big Government so much power? We all want a perfect utopia of total safety where big brother protects us every second of every day from terrorism, but why do Republicans ALWAYS believe that giving Government more power will solve this and other problems? What if giving Government more power will actually make things worse? When Republicans destroy the Constitution to make us safe, they are actually putting us in more danger. Do they know this?

[Psst: the Republicans are coming back in 2016, when I predict they will defeat Billary and re-take the White House. When this happens they will re-kindle the War on terrorism, and shore up the Patriot Act and NSA Spying. Remember: their last president created these new government powers, and they just need one more homeland attack to create even greater surveillance powers. Meaning: you ain't seen nothing yet. If you thought Bush's warrantless wiretapping was a turning point in American History, than just wait... and see what happens once they re-kindle the War on Terrorism, with all its strategically used fear and terminal color coded warnings on every channel. The party that created the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security is coming back in 2016, and they always govern using a Big Enemy and National Security, always.]

[Psst 2: Attention Republicans, please follow this link and read about the Department of Homeland Security, which was created under Bush. This is what happens when you give government more power, despite your best intentions. Click me]

^ Obama Fluffing leaves a bad taste in your mouth

 

[bripat9643]

While violating the Constitution is reprehensible, as weapons technology improves, we're going to find ourselves facing down weapons and attacks that'll make 9/11 seem like the good ol' days. Government surveillance may be illegal, but it may also become something we learn to live with since the alternative is much worse. And of course as the old counter-arguement goes, if not doing anything wrong, what do you care if the government knows about it?

Oh, please. That tired old hunk of shit wont stick to the wall anymore. And as far as doing nothing wrong is concerned, the government is the one who decides when someone is doing something "wrong" and can use such sweeping information in very Orwellian ways.

So, yes, it does matter whether or not I'm doing anything wrong. I have a RIGHT to privacy in my person and property.

Other than knowing the word 'Owellian,' can you actually list any consequences of a law-abidding citizen being negatively impacted by government surveillance?

Of course. Some sleaze bag could get ahold of the information and use it to blackmail you. In particular, government employees. Take the example of Joe the Plumber. Government employees broke the law and released some confidential government records of his purely for the purpose of discrediting him.

The idea of government having such information should scare the hell out of everyone. There's a reason we have the 4th Amendment.

 

[WelfareQueen]

This quote is from the Father of the U.S. Constitution. Please consider it carefully.



"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."

James Madison

 

[bripat9643]

Other than knowing the word 'Owellian,' can you actually list any consequences of a law-abidding citizen being negatively impacted by government surveillance?

Every goddamn one of us have now lost any sense of privacy when it comes to emails and phone calls.

Given many people's conversations take place in the presence of others as on a cellphone, I don't think that's the sane arguement you seem to think it is. Again, if it's a lawful conversation, what's it matter if the government listens in? Government's been doing that sort of thing for decades, isn't like it's new or we suddenly lost our privacy. We lost our privacy a long time ago.

If you were negotiating a highly sensitive business transaction and you didn't want your competitors to know about it, your phone records could obviously alert them to the fact and get the deal quashed.

That's just one way your private information can be used to hurt you.

We only lost our privacy because of servile toadies like you.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Joe the Plumber was discredited because he was discreditable.

Unless you're over 90 years old, you've never actually had secure communications. It's only ignorant techno-weenies who seem to think communications are private. Any kid with a receiver can listen in on your cell calls (unless they're encrypted,) and anyone can intercept wi-fi links ever easier. Privacy's long-gone.

Dunno how true this is, but they say from the moment you get off a plane in Las Vegas, you're on a surveillance camera. And you're not off one until you're in your hotel room. Sooner people learn to live recognizing they're under surveillance all the time, the sooner life becomes much easier.

 

[bripat9643]

Joe the Plumber was discredited because he was discreditable. .

You're obviously just a dolt who should be ignored.

Unless you're over 90 years old, you've never actually had secure communications. It's only ignorant techno-weenies who seem to think communications are private. Any kid with a receiver can listen in on your cell calls (unless they're encrypted,) and anyone can intercept wi-fi links ever easier. Privacy's long-gone.

One kid isn't going to listen in on 5 billion calls a day 24 hours a day and keep a record of them. The danger from the government listening in is 10 million times greater.

Dunno how true this is, but they say from the moment you get off a plane in Las Vegas, you're on a surveillance camera. And you're not off one until you're in your hotel room. Sooner people learn to live recognizing they're under surveillance all the time, the sooner life becomes much easier.

Only a sniveling worm who doesn't mind living in a police state wouldn't object to government tracking his phone calls. Why should the American public tolerate this?

 

[WelfareQueen]

Many foreign companies are no longer buying expensive U.S. computer systems from companies like Cisco and IBM because the NSA has forced these companies to put in back door encryption keys for the NSA to access and spy. It is completely stupid.

 

[Dot Com]

Thanks a lot Bu$h II/Cheney Big Government contractor fluffing Today's Repub party

Started w/ the likes of Carlyle & Halliburton/KBR/Blackwater etc...getting rich off of sending kids to vietraq and ends w/ a ginormous Security Industrial Complex that rw'ers here are paying for because a Repub admin was asleep at the wheel.

 

[The T]

Thanks a lot Bu$h II/Cheney Big Government contractor fluffing Today's Repub party

Started w/ the likes of Carlyle & Halliburton/KBR/Blackwater etc...getting rich off of sending kids to vietraq and ends w/ a ginormous Security Industrial Complex that rw'ers here are paying for because a Repub admin was asleep at the wheel.

Obama has really embellished it to extremes...WORSE than Bush & company...and YOU are just OK with that, and going to blame BUSH for it? Really?

Blame, minimize, Deny, obfuscate...NONE of this is correct, and hasn't been since day one.

 

[Dot Com]

DHS, TSA, etc... were created on Bush II/Cheney's watch. Not to mention the exponential growth of funding to black agencies like N5A. Take a guess why? They screwed up big time.

 

[dblack]

Thanks a lot Bu$h II/Cheney Big Government contractor fluffing Today's Repub party

Started w/ the likes of Carlyle & Halliburton/KBR/Blackwater etc...getting rich off of sending kids to vietraq and ends w/ a ginormous Security Industrial Complex that rw'ers here are paying for because a Repub admin was asleep at the wheel.

Obama has really embellished it to extremes...WORSE than Bush & company...and YOU are just OK with that, and going to blame BUSH for it? Really?

Blame, minimize, Deny, obfuscate...NONE of this is correct, and hasn't been since day one.

"It's different when we do it"

 

[The T]

Thanks a lot Bu$h II/Cheney Big Government contractor fluffing Today's Repub party

Started w/ the likes of Carlyle & Halliburton/KBR/Blackwater etc...getting rich off of sending kids to vietraq and ends w/ a ginormous Security Industrial Complex that rw'ers here are paying for because a Repub admin was asleep at the wheel.

Obama has really embellished it to extremes...WORSE than Bush & company...and YOU are just OK with that, and going to blame BUSH for it? Really?

Blame, minimize, Deny, obfuscate...NONE of this is correct, and hasn't been since day one.

"It's different when we do it"

As a matter of course. And the same as to Socialist/Statist policies....they can just do it better.

 

[kiwiman127]

George W Bush famously got caught spying on American citizens without a warrant. With his Patriot Act, he tried to do an end-run around the Constitution in order to formalize and legalize spying.

Obama, who lacks the moral courage to challenge Dick Chaney and his constant appearances on FOX News defending NSA Spying and the Patriot Act, has failed to destroy the Bush Surveillance State.

Recently, because of the Snowden leaks, it has come to light that Big Government (NSA) has been over-tracking phone, internet and consumer activity of free Americans - and creating huge data bases, stored in massive data silos in Utah. Information on nearly every American now exists so that future administrations could use it however they like, despite Government assurances that they would never, ever do anything wrong or un-Constitutional with this data. But who really knows what will happen once a particular form of Government Power exists? Maybe a president will come to office who wants to analyze gun purchases, and he will use these new concentrated data collection powers for unintended purposes. This is why Libertarians (and the Constitution) protect privacy, because once compromised at the institutional level, it can be used in ways that have unintended consequences. [Don't try explaining this to Republicans because they tend to trust Big Government, and they couldn't imagine how mistakes and abuses could take place once Bush awarded concentrated surveillance powers to big government. This is why Republicans never opposed the Bush Surveillance State, because they tend to be more obedient to their leaders than the Constitution].

Fast forward to the 12/22 episode of "This Week w/George Stephanopoulos", where, once again, the Republicans are defending the invasion of privacy.

House Intelligence Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich, was defending Big Government Surveillance Power against one of its harshest critics, Democratic Senator Mark Udall. And now Obama, because of mounting pressure from the Democrats, is considering taking legal actions to curb Big Government's power to spy on free Americans.

Of course, everybody anticipates that Dick Chaney will appear on FOX News to intimidate the President from curbing the Government Power that he (Chaney/Bush) put in place.

But a question remains.

Why do Republicans like giving Big Government so much power? We all want a perfect utopia of total safety where big brother protects us every second of every day from terrorism, but why do Republicans ALWAYS believe that giving Government more power will solve this and other problems? What if giving Government more power will actually make things worse? When Republicans destroy the Constitution to make us safe, they are actually putting us in more danger. Do they know this?

[Psst: the Republicans are coming back in 2016, when I predict they will defeat Billary and re-take the White House. When this happens they will re-kindle the War on terrorism, and shore up the Patriot Act and NSA Spying. Remember: their last president created these new government powers, and they just need one more homeland attack to create even greater surveillance powers. Meaning: you ain't seen nothing yet. If you thought Bush's warrantless wiretapping was a turning point in American History, than just wait... and see what happens once they re-kindle the War on Terrorism, with all its strategically used fear and terminal color coded warnings on every channel. The party that created the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security is coming back in 2016, and they always govern using a Big Enemy and National Security, always.]

[Psst 2: Attention Republicans, please follow this link and read about the Department of Homeland Security, which was created under Bush. This is what happens when you give government more power, despite your best intentions. Click me]

So three Republicans defend the NSA surveillance program, and one of them isn't even in office. You're forgetting that Obama defended it, and so have numerous Democrats. Most rank and file Republicans oppose it.

Oh yeah, they were for it before they were against it Of course they went against when a Dem took the office of the presidency.
And we can say the opposite about the Dems, who were against before they were for it.

 

[SwimExpert]

And of course as the old counter-arguement goes, if not doing anything wrong, what do you care if the government knows about it?

I'm sure you'll feel differently when the government spies on you, and uses what they collect to post hoc conclude that you were doing something wrong, even if you really weren't.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The neocons in both parties are wrong.

The NSA has to be reined in or outright throttled.

 

[OriginalShroom]

For those who are blaming President Bush for Obama's misuse of the NSA and other violations of the Constitution....

Please either grow up or go back to the sand box and play with other children.

President Bush is no more at fault for what Obama does than Ford or Chevy is at fault for what a drunk driver does.