Slashdot Mirror
Gov't Computers Used to Find Info on "Joe the Plumber"
After Joe Wurzelbacher of Ohio gained fame as "Joe the Plumber" in the course of the current presidential campaign, it seems that he's drawn more than idle curiosity from people with access to what should probably be confidential information. An anonymous reader writes with a story from The Columbus Dispatch that "government insiders accessed Joe the Plumber's records soon after the McCain-Obama debate. 'Public records requested by The Dispatch disclose that information on Wurzelbacher's driver's license or his sport-utility vehicle was pulled from the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles database three times shortly after the debate. Information on Wurzelbacher was accessed by accounts assigned to the office of Ohio Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers, the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency and the Toledo Police Department.' Welcome to 1984."
So, do you think that there are three people, quite rightly, trembling in their boots at the moment? Shouldn't be too hard to find. And if it is shame on the organisations.
.
Of course all that information that in that vast government database won't be abused by curious government workers. Whatever gave you the idea that it would?
The fact that it is people (who are always going to be curious, even if not malicious) who have access to these records means that they aren't going to be private. (Not to mention, I've got something to hide ("I like to watch") that I don't want the spooks to know about.)
I wank in the shower.
Something like seven people in the State Department were caught looking up passports of people without permission. I lost track what happend to them, though I recall some lost their jobs.
One would do well to actually read 1984 (as opposed to just scream its title every time the Right does something you don't like).
1984 was an comment by Orwell on the Communists. Orwell, himself a socilaist, learned to hate and fear the Communists after the Spanish Civil War.
Big Brother was an obvious stand-in for "Uncle Joe" Stalin.
In 1984 you will see: ... with a life penalty?) and University speech codes (University "Free Speech Zones" are a wonderful example of NewSpeak, DoubleThink, and ThoughtCrime wrapped into one)
* The Ministry of Truth, the media manipulation of news and history (ala the recent Reugter's Photoshopping of pictures from the Israel/Lebanon war; Dan Rather's falsification of documents)
* NewSpeak, the changing of language to make certain thoughts impossible (ala the politically correct language redefinition we experienced in the 70s/80s e.g. "differently abled" for "handicapped", in Sweden "husmor" replaced by "hemmafru" or their English cognates "housewife" with "stay-at-home-mom")
* DoubleThink, the simultaneous holding of two or more mutually exclusive ideas (e.g. "homosexuality is something you are born with" and "homosexuality is a personal and private decision"; or "racism is always wrong" and "affirmative action is the right thing to do")
* ThoughtCrime, making the mere ability of thinking something a crime. You see this all the time in Hate Crime legislation (what murder wasn't already a crime
* also the breakdown of the family and sexual relationships (which has less obvious parallels but "PolPot & the child turns their parents in" (like Winston's neighbor) would be an example)
* furthermore the mild anti-semitism, the hatred of Goldsteinism, today you see this all the time however this is mostly thinly veiled as an attack on "Zionism"
We really shouldn't be surprised by the EU and The Left's fascination with this kind of behaviour. Orwell saw and predicted it nearly 50 years ago.
I'm a small business owner, and while we do well over $250K/year in revenue, I don't make more then $100K/yr. I don't believe I should be paid any more then my highest paid employee. Let's assume though that I did take more than $250K out of the business a year (which is what you'd have to do to hit the $250K limit Obama talks about). I have no problem with a higher tax rate kicking in above $250K/yr of my income, as long as the money is spent properly (i.e. NOT on bailouts, wars, etc).
We've had public health care for years in Canada, our social security is better and we are a welfare state, you can join the club too it's a lot nicer on the other side; we don't turn the aged away because they cannot afford medical service, we actually have a huge booming retirment industry; oh and did I mention that we keep crazy people off the street by giving them money (and possibly preventing them from harming others)....just a thought. Oh and after these bailouts, our tax bracket will be even lower than yours ;)
99% of your inmates should have had medical attention but now you get to pay for them for the rest of their known lives.
~Bullets and electrictity are far cheaper than re-education.
Now remember everyone belongs to everyone else, repetition is key.
(Of course if Russia invades we are turning to you to save us :'( )
In my mother tongue, the old, pre-twentieth-century term referring to being declared an outlaw is to be declared "voêlvry" -- free as a bird. Free to go where you will, and free to be shot on sight.
Complete freedom is not particularly desirable.
One very, very rarely makes an income of more than a quarter of a million dollars in a year solely through one's own hard work. One usually makes it by leaching, to some degree, off the hard work of others. (The exceptions are mostly matters of dumb luck - a superstar performer getting "discovered", for example.)
And the answer to the GP's question is, yes, Joe (who is not really a plumber, under city of Toledo regulations) would get a tax break even if he owned the business, as will the vast majority of small businesses, assuming an Obama victory and that his plan goes ahead pretty much as stated.
In our capitalist system, the government does a tremendous amount to help those who have wealth, get more. It's so basic to the system we rarely think about it, but how much concentration of wealth would there be without government-issued corporate charters, land and resource deeds, copyrights, and patents? Not to mention a reserve banking system that lets privately owned banks make money out of thin air, and an economic policy that uses the DJIA as a measure of economic success.
These government actions and policies are so successful at concentrating wealth that the top 20 percent own 90% of all financial wealth. And it stays in the family; the U.S. has lower intergenerational mobility than France, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Finland, Norway or Denmark
The small effects of progressive taxation and social spending - spreading around the wealth that other government policies helped concentrate - act as a (small and inadequate) governor on the machinery of state capitalism.
Now, I would rather get rid of that machinery entirely, but I think that unlikely, at least in the near term. If we're going to have it, I'm all for decreasing the power of the government to help the wealthy become wealthier by adding some negative feedback to the system.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
I'm surprised that we found out about it so quickly. Someone with real political power must really like Joe. (Mod: Inciteful / UnFunny / Informative / Scary ) (N.B. that's a c not an s)
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
I was working on a project where I had to be given access to a state's law enforcement computer system, which was the access point for their Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), the US National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and several other systems. I had to watch a videotape and read and sign a document promising all sorts of hell if I ever abused my access by, say, running someone without cause. One real-life example was a cop who would notice an attractive woman go by on the road and run her license plate to get her home address, where he would subsequently show up. I was glad to see that they had such strict policies. Anyone who uses their access privileges to stalk or attempt to dig up info on someone should be prosecuted.
Cue the tape! Fast-forward to minute 5. This video shows employees who were hired by "Homeland Security" to spy on a potential terrorist. Instead, they decided to spy on a private house where man/lady were having sex.
This spying on Joe the Plumber is essentially the same thing - an invasion of privacy. Now I know you'll probably argue this is just a show, but having worked for the government, I can confirm that your information is Not secure. People are reading things about you that you don't want them to know (like how much you're paying to child support, or how much you earn, or how many times you got speeding tickets).
LINK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92xf94JPoB8&feature=related
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
He'd fit right in over at IngSoc.
I seriously doubt that, since his question was about Obama's socialist programs, where he'll be "spreading the wealth around". I can't imagine he'd be particularly fond of English Socialism.
Why do the same people that constantly harp on 1984 surveillance continue to demand larger government with more widespread social programs? The government can't conduct 1984 style surveillance unless everyone works for, and is part of, the government.
You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
Obama has claimed 95% of people will receive tax cuts. However, 40% of people pay no income tax to begin with. If you read the fine print on his tax plan, they'll receive their "tax cut" as more welfare, earned income credits, etc. That's not cutting taxes, it's redistributing wealth.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
I find that impressive, that they're keeping an audit trail of everybody who accesses a record in the DMV database.
Since Joe's comments have noticeably harmed Obama and/or helped McCain, it's reasonable to assume those doing so were Obama supporters or surrogates hoping to find evidence with which to smear Joe.
That's actually not a reasonable assumption.
It's just as possible that McCain supporters or surrogates were looking for evidence with which Joe might be smeared, before McCain started talking about the guy in front of 56 million people.
Campaigns go and dig up dirt (aka "vetting") on their own people.
Maybe McCain learned from his complete failure to vet Sarah Palin.
It's also just as likely that a bunch of curious idiot employees of the State did it.
Until an investigation is done, your speculation is no better than mine.
And at least I'm keeping an open mind.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
One very, very rarely makes an income of more than a quarter of a million dollars in a year solely through one's own hard work. One usually makes it by leaching, to some degree, off the hard work of others.
One very rarely makes an income solely through ones hard work - any income what-so-ever.
It's not a matter of who is leeching from whom either.
Let's take a farmer. She does all the work of raising her crop of tomatoes and getting it to market. No leeching there, she doesn't get government farm subsidies, she just works. But, whatever she makes for selling her crop, it depends in large part on having roads to transport it. It's not that she's a leech, nor lazy, but if she had to transport those tomatoes over a dirt path, in a little hand cart hewn from wood on her own land, and repair that cart within her own little toolshed every time it breaks, she would make a whole lot less, trading with only her immediate neighbors.
She could buy her truck from a private business, and get it worked on by a private garage, and she could drive on privately owned (toll) roads. Or she could drive on state roads, and at least in theory, get her truck serviced at a state owned facility. She could rent space from a for-profit farmer's market, or create a non-profit co-op with fellow farmers to buy land to establish a farmer's market at a good spot, or for that matter, be taxed by the state for the privilege of setting up at any wide spot along the state's roads. Which is more efficient, which benefits her and/or other people the most, varies widely. It's not a one size fits all solution, where private alternatives are always more efficient.
Who is John Cabal?
You do know a government is in place for the benefit of the people
Lets go down the list of the biggest socialist regimes in history. The Soviet Union...check. Their nationalization of all private property and gov't distribution of everything from jobs, to schools, to health care, to cars places them at the leftest of the leftists. And the communist party was for the benefit of the people? Ok.
North Korea....oh, check. Kim Jung-Ill gives a fuck about his people? Or does he just like being in charge? His collective farm system works SO WELL that NK needs regular shipments of...everything?
Communist China (before they moved to the more profitable fascism). Mao "benefitted" over 45 million Chinese into the ground.
We can keep going. The truth is: In capitalism, man exploits man, and in communism it is the exact opposite. The difference is I have some choices and property in capitalism and a chance to change my station in life with enough hard work.
I agree with you that corporate welfare is a problem. I dislike government-owned corporations as much as i dislike corporation-owned governments. If Jefferson where here he'd probably mention a "wall of separation" between corp and state.
And yes, the world IS organized pretty well. You can choose from every form of government you can think of. You can even join a hippy commune and have your own. But you leftists seek to homogenize the world into 1 class, the poor. And that my friend is an absurd attempt to remake the world.
THL phish sticks
In Indiana I can go run plates for $5 dollars each in person. For a $50 dollar fee I can run as many as I want for $4 dollars.
In Oregon you can buy a CD with every Oregon driver on it. Someone put it on the internet and there was wailing and gnashing of teeth. The phone company in real time can and does sell off everyone's name, address and phone number.
And on and on....
It may be illegal to use that particular system in Ahia but I'm curious if there is a legal way to do it?
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
Why bother trying to dig up dirt on "Joe the Plumber"? All that Obama and their supporters have to do is pretty much nothing at this point to win the election, so there really isn't any point to trying to smear some random dude who asked Obama a question. Besides, it's pretty obvious that Joe the Plumber doesn't know what he's talking about anyway, so it's not like they have to discredit him anyway (though his misconceptions are pretty common amonst middle/lower class people who support the Republican tax plans, so I suppose it wouldn't hurt to try to address some of these).
Wealth is being spread all the time. One cannot but marvel at the way the little "spread the wealth" phrase has been repeated like the most damning line ever, while the whole US has seen in slow motion how hundred of billions of dollars have been "spread" to a small, specific part of society, without essentially any reaction whatsoever from the proponents of not-"spreading the wealth", whatever it is that that may possibly mean.
Again: wealth is being spread all the time. The key point is who are the beneficiaries of all that spreading which is happening all the time.
Really? Well guess what happens when you call into question McCain's 5 crashed planes, tailhook or the fact that his Daddy being CINCPAC he got more "leniency" on Navy policy. Or that those that knew him in the navy thought he was as "spoiled brat".
Both of these fucktards have fucked us over in their time in office. However, Obama has only been there 4yrs. so he has time to "Change" He has not been there very long so if he leaves in 4more I'm fine with that.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
....may be enough to reduce my gross income so that I have to choose between food and fuel....
A solution might be to tax OUTgo rather than INcome and get rid of all other taxes. That tax would have to include ALL spending, not just necessities. A rich person or company buying stock or another company or anything else would be taxed on that also, not only the consumers buying bread and gasoline they buy, as it is with sales tax today. In short have a flat TRANSACTION or MONEYFLOW tax. All the incessant speculative trading in all "markets" could be taxed. This tax might only have to be a percent or two. However it would work only if NO transaction was exempt and all transactions were taxed the same. One big company buying another for $10 billion would pay $100-200 million in taxes.
A normal working person might only have to pay $1 or $2 when buying a $1000 item. A $200,000 house purchase might cost $2000 to $4000 in tax.
The big problem would be not in collecting the tax, but in distributing the collected taxes equitably among the various levels of government.
All theory is gray
This is bullshit. Thousands of man-hours are spent investigating the lives and pasts of those who seek the Presidency. Not only the media but also the political opposition. The truth is there is nothing glaringly negative in Obama's past.
Say what? Here's a guy with a very brief resume, so we have to look into his past (less so that with McCain or Biden, since they have extensive record in public). So let's see the things the mainstream media has not dug into:
1) Obama rose to prominence through the Chicago Machine, a system so notoriously dirty it's a cliche. Where is the Palin-like digging into that?
2) Obama wears this community organizer thing on his sleeve as if it really means something other than partisan rabble-rouser. WTF did he accomplish?
3) What were and are his ties to ACORN, the wildly partisan and corrupt get-out-the-dead-vote organization?
4) What about his ties to William Ayers, in whose living room he essentially launched his political career. The Ayers who tried to blow up the Pentagon and only didn't get life in prison due to a botched investigation that got evidence thrown out. Rather than deny it, Ayers said on 9/11 his only regret was "not doing more."
5) Tony Rezko, slumlord, Obama buddy, and general scumbag. Where is the story investigating their ties?
6) Reverend Wright. Where is the penetrating investigation as to why Obama had his children going to this nutty racist's church. The guy he called his "spiritual mentor" who called 9/11 "the chickens coming home to roost." Already covered? Not quite. Obama gives one speech lecturing us on race, and the media nods in approval and drops it. Meanwhile, 25 years later we are still hearing about the "Keating Five" about McCain, something McCain has long since explained away as non-criminal error in judgment. That's fair?
7) Obama's advocacy for the CRA in pressuring and suing banks to make bad home loans. Relevant?
8) Obama's "I sent a letter" nonsense about the mortgage mess, while opposing McCain's reform bill in 2005. Sent a letter? My grandma could have done that. Where's the media scrutiny?
9) Obama's admitted drug use, likely a felony. Apparently off-limits, unlike Bush's supposed DUI two weeks before the election.
I could go on, but it doesn't matter. if you can't see that the media is so far in the tank for Obama for it's scandalous, I can't help you. Never before have I had lower respect for the media. To me, journalism is now up there with phrenology and astrology, a total, absolute scam. They are partisan hacks. 85% of the reporters cover Gore-Bush 2000 voted for Gore. I'll bet this year it's closer to 95%.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
It is illegal not to register to vote in this country, although many people choose not to for various reasons and avoid punishment.
Bullshit. Lots of people don't register to vote, and there is no legal requirement to do so - although there should be.
I've always wondered what all that "registering to vote" business in the US was about. Where I live, as long as you're a citizen, you're automatically registered. You don't have to do anything special; about four weeks before an election, they even send you a letter containing directions to the voting booths closest to your place of residence. Voting is also "compulsory" (it's considered one of the citizen's duties), but nothing will happen if you don't go (for whatever reason).
CJ
Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
We run into issues when those systems remain after the threat has passed, and find new things to do with them by redefining things like "crime," "terrorism" and "right and wrong."
This is why ANY time the government asks for more power, people should fight it. Once they get it, they never give it up. Study some freaking history, won't you? I mean, you should have gotten this lesson fed to you during Attack of the Clones, I really don't think you have an excuse for not knowing it yet.
Also:
That was a figure plucked from the air by a journalist. It came from counting the number of CCTV cameras in one small section of the main street of a particularly unpleasant part of London, and then scaling that up by the total length of roads in the whole of the UK.
[Citation Needed]. Just sayin'.
That's certainly correct. Yet another generic observation to be made one the incident, is that our government (State and Federal combined) has gotten so huge, it is self-sustaining. There are enough people on the government's payroll to influence elections by voting and by helping their favorite find dirt on the opposition.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Your misconception of what "spread the wealth" means is disappointing.
Spread the wealth happens in many different ways. School supplies for underfunded schools, after school programs to keep kids off the streets, subsidizing medical bills for veterans, maintaining parks and other public places, etc.
Since welfare reform in the 90's, the government is not giving away money to people who don't work. It's not taking your tax money and directly lining the pockets of people with a lower income. At most, "spread the wealth" may apply to people whom, after getting laid off, are collecting unemployment while looking for something to do. But these people have been paying taxes into the system for so long, you'd think it's only fair that they get a little bit of assistance when they're in trouble.
You know, the funny thing is, unless you were earning over $250K a year, "spreading the wealth" probably would make you wealthier, or at the least no worse off than now. Wealthier in terms of quality of life, in terms of how many growth opportunities you have (as a small-business owner) or the quality and integrity of your employees.
It means you don't have to worry about the guy who cuts your lawn for you for $20 because he's not worried about what his kid is doing after school, or worried that his kid can't afford college. It means you can walk down the street at night without fear of being harassed by drunks or mugged by someone trying to make ends meet without an honest job. It means your business will get customers, and you won't have to undercut your competition by a lot because your existing customers are shopping for the best deal for their money because they don't have much money anymore.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."