Slashdot Mirror
House Passes CISPA
wiedzmin writes "The House approved Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act with a 248 to 168 vote today. CISPA allows internet service providers to share Internet 'threat' information with government agencies, including DHS and NSA, without having to protect any personally identifying data of its customers, without a court order. It effectively immunizes ISPs from privacy lawsuits for disclosing customer information, grants them anti-trust protection on colluding on cybersecurity issues and allows them to bypass privacy laws when sharing data with each other."
George Orwell
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
House of Representatives, for peculiar values of "Representatives".
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
I'm gonna take a wild stab here and assume that Ron Paul, R-TX, voted "No" on this shitpile.
.. just told a Smug Orwell to shove it when he started the 'I told you so' dance
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind" - Dr. Seuss
The Internet empowered the "Arab Spring" revolutions world wide.
The absolute last thing The US Government wants is anything like that here. Gotta prevent it while you can.
Roll call here. He was among the 15 who did not cast a vote. Thanks, Ron.
Dog is my co-pilot.
did people who are willing to allow that bill on the floor let alone vote yes on it even get into office?
... and then tell me "there's no difference" between Democrats and Republicans.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Whine all you want. How many sent a message to your representatives on this issue? How many will lounge at home come next election? Taking advantage of lethargy is what democracy is all about. Sit around and whine about it and do nothing .... perfect.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
who voted what ... http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
Here's how each representative voted (or not):
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/h192
But does anyone know where to find the details about what each of the various amendments was? ('amendment 10' isn't really all that useful)
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Because here is how modern American politics work: the state gets expanded at every possible opportunity. This is what the Democrats want (so long as they can get more entitlements) and what the Republicans want (so long as they can get free rein to send the military into new wars). The only question is, what gets expanded?
As I have said elsewhere, it's pretty obvious that the government plans on listening to everything going on on the Internet. This is just legal formalism.
Dog is my co-pilot.
Actually, executing traitors who brazenly break their solemn oath to uphold the constitution WOULD be a positive step.
All of them. Throw them all out.
expandfairuse.org
Actually it is.
When you're executing someone you're only taking their life.
When you violate someone's constitutional rights, that's a crime worse than murder. It is taking away the human rights that we're all entitled to and deciding that your profits, your business, and nebulous "threats" are a reason to go through the trash and history of every single person that has never been accused of a crime.
It's better to have a bomb attack every day -- even on my house -- than to give ISPs the ability to be immune from lawsuits, to share my private data, and to allow the government to decide that you know what, warrants are a pain in the ass after all.
Those are not the actions of a democratic government, or even a republic. If they aren't ready to put the integreity of the constitution ahead of their meagre lives, then yeah, that's treason. And the US is at war. Hang 'em up in from of the Capitol as a warning to the others.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Holy moly, the US is becoming a cesspit hour by hour.
I know you're commenting with extreme sarcasm, but I do think that's actually the case. An elected official using their power in a manner designed to undermine the Constitution isn't technically treason by most definitions, but I feel it should be punished just as severely.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
my long-time girlfriend and I have been debating whether to leave the country. I guess the strategy is to keep our heads down as long as possible, ignore using the internet, learn another language or two, save up as much as we can, and get the fuck out of this country.
For some reason I was really starting to think I could settle down in this country, have a family, and be productive.
-
When does this go into effect?
-
"When they took the 4th Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't deal drugs. When they took the 6th Amendment, I was quiet because I am innocent. When they took the 2nd Amendment, I was quiet because I don't own a gun. Now they have taken the 1st Amendment, and I can only be quiet."
-- Lyle Myhur
from their governments. Everywhere. They are not your friend.
Strong crypto, anonymizing proxies, onion routing....
It's not just for users in China and Iran anymore.
I currently have a VPS that I use as a VPN server for my mobile devices and laptop when I am on travel and redirect all of my traffic through. I do this mainly to keep Verizon and ATT (specifically ATT when I tether) grubby little mitts of my data.
I think it is time to switch to a foreign VPS provider, somewhere in the EU or Asia, and reroute ALL of my traffic through there. My only issue is currently my FIOS speeds far exceed my throughput at my current VPS..
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
It's like smurf. It means whatever the DOJ and LEOs want/need it to mean.
Just started the procedure to move my last two servers off US soil. No more dollars for you my friend!
Isn't this just a good excuse to send people's email addresses off to SPAM central? For a small security fee of course.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Yes, it's much better to vote for a government that gives us nothing but can still take everything we have.
All of the Massachusetts representatives voted "No." Join us! We're sane!
All you GOP hack lovers who espouse about their love of Privacy, Liberty, Guns, blah, blah, blah take a look at the count:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
AYES: GOP 206, DEM 42
NOES: GOP 28, DEM 140
NOT VOTING: GOP 8, DEM 7
Don't tell me the GOP is for your privacy. Stew in your own bull****.
...Ms American Pie.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
I'll do it right after you go first, Mr. Armchair General.
Let me just give you a sample of the kind of data they will have access to, without a warrant, if Obama doesn't veto this.
Every transaction you have made involving a card, ever, including the date, time of day, name of the merchant, city and state of the merchant, ID number of the terminal where the card was swiped, amount of transaction, etc etc etc.
Every time you withdrew money from an ATM. it stores the amount, the location of the ATM, the time of day, etc.
The same goes for online transactions.
An image of every check you have ever written.
Every deposit slip you have used.
Every time you have talked to a teller in person, the interaction is recorded.
Every time you have called the bank on the telephone.
It is all there. Waiting for the government to use it, as it sees fit.
---
Now, link that up with records from places like Wal-Mart. They can correlate card numbers with items. They know what brand of toothpaste you buy. They know what kind of toilet paper you use. They know if you like to buy a lot of baggies (are you a drug dealer?), if you buy a lot of cold medicine (are you a meth dealer?), if you buy a lot of condoms (are you a pimp?), etc etc etc.
---
Now, link this up with projects like the CINDER (Cyber Insider Threat) ADAMS, and PRODIGAL (some of which have been program-managed by former hackers like Mudge from l0pht heavy industries). If you dig through these 'proposals', you will find academics saying things like "Maybe a target goes to lunch at a different time of day. that might indicate a threat". This is where our tax money is going. This is what is being built.
it makes you wonder if Orwell was a prophet or someone attempting to describe what to do for future rulers rather than warning them.
agreed.
Too much time spent on 'security', not enough time on jobs, education, infrastructure, ... At least they'll know everything about us when the USA goes down the shitter and China, India, etc.. take over. Shit, even Canada doesn't take the US seriously anymore.
If ISP's can only provide "threat" information just don't do anything that constitutes a "threat" and you'll be fine.
Can't get it through your heads, but it's true:
Your
Republic
is
Gone
The throw little bones your way, called things like a "Ron Paul" or a "Democratic Alternative" so you can't quite give up hope, in pursuit something which became quite impossible, some time ago...
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Everywhere is saying the vote was supposed to happen tomorrow. I'm guessing Ron Paul was planning on returning to Washington from the campaign trail to vote on it tomorrow, and someone rushed it to the House floor early before the Internet caught wind of this and stopped it like SOPA. WTF.
When you violate someone's constitutional rights, that's a crime worse than murder.
Please explain how murdering someone does not take away all their natural and constitutional rights. Oppression is neither so complete nor so permanent a state as death. Rights are only relevant to the living.
Some may choose death over abandoning their principles, for the sake of their own integrity and/or as an example to others, but that is hardly the same thing as claiming that murder is morally superior to oppression. It merely means that you can't safely assume that someone would rather be oppressed than accept the risk (or even certainty) of death—or vise-versa. That is an individual decision, and no one has the right to make that choice for another.
Whether it is better for a few to die or for many to suffer lesser violations of their rights... one might as well ask how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Like most matters involving interpersonal preferences, there is no objective answer. So far as I am concerned, however, the only principled answer is that you shouldn't do either—even if other people make difference choices. If there is a way to prevent the deaths without violating anyone's rights, great. If not, we must learn to live with the risk.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
Yes, but then executing your political opponents could become a viable strategy.
Just because someone adds something to a bill it does not override other laws unless it specifically provides such provisions. I do not see anywhere in this law where Title 50 is amended to allow for collection of this information without a warrant. If a US corporation where to provide PI of a US Person in any threat report for which there was not an outstanding warrant covering the collection of that information the government would be unable to report on that information or utilize it in any manner. At some point you have to trust the government will follow the law otherwise whats the point, why even care if they are passing this bill if they would do it anyway. This is not some Orwellian we are watching you bill, it really just provides a framework for sharing information between corporate entities and the government and controlling who maintains liability for the collection and storage of that information. IE if in the case your information where included in a report in violation of the law it would be the government who is liable not the providing entity. Again, this does not modify the rigor to which a government entity must prove a collection is necessary.
Hmm, it was the conservatives who voted for this travesty.
Obama is threatening to veto it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-threatens-to-veto-cispa-cybersecurity-bill-citing-privacy-concerns/2012/04/25/gIQAkS3khT_story.html
Goldwater, Eisenhower, Teddy, and Lincoln are no doubt rolling in their graves.
The republicans have been taken over by neo-cons who only care about big business and themselves. IOW, the end justifies the means.
I can only hope that the true republicans will create a new party, perhaps the first person will be David Walker (a social moderate, strong fiscal conservative), and call it the GoldWater party. Let the neo-cons and religious fanatics have their own damn party. As it is, the neo-cons have invaded the Libertarian party over the last 8 years to the point that I quit going to meetings. I was ready to blow the head off the next GD neo-con that screamed that we needed to support W and fight against abortion and gay marriage. At this time, I would gladly join a GoldWater Party.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Google and other companies receive immunity from any consequences, so they're ok with it.
-
than one government. The biggest technical hope there is to reduce spying is to migrate services into anonymous networks.
The citizens have to be motivated to get up and use those bullets for the greater good, at great personal risk and with great personal sacrifice.
Until enough people get to that point, the bullets do no good at all.
People will not get to that point if they are largely stupid and complacent, which most Americans are.
Americans have elected politicians over and over again who write and pass laws like this and the Patriot Act. It's what the majority of your people want. Those too lazy or docile to vote differently have to accept their fate.
To become a Law in your country, doesn't a Bill first have to pass both legislative bodies with a 66% vote? It failed to pass the House with this required % because of the 15 non-voting folks so there's no real way it can become a Law, is there? Please correct my US government "how-it-works"-fu if I'm mistaken.
DaveyJJ
but he keeps meeting with them. Maybe that's where he was during the vote.
I deny the position. I am a horrible leader.
Well it's like Kevin Arnold said, some men are born great, some men pursue greatness, and some men have greatness thrust upon them... while they're in the bathroom.
By the way, while you were in the bathroom we took a vote. Go get 'em, tiger!
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
Apparently you're misinformed...
Half the laws we pass will be pushed your way soon enough (and your government will oblige), the other half we got from you to begin with.
I agree. I think we need a mechanism for citizens to sue their representatives for treasonous legislation. The problem, of course, is that uncompromising ideologues will clog the court system with such protests. I'm sure there's a working solution, but it probably wouldn't be easy to implement. Anyways, it's probably idealistic and naive to expect that it would even accomplish anything, even if it did get implemented.
People from US are screwed anyway, but at least they voted the current government. But the rest of the world don't deserve being stripped from privacy for stupid US laws. Out of US backbones, social networks not owned by US companies, local providers for mail servers, by default hard encrypted traffic and so on. Internet was a nice dream, and is turning into a nightmare. Staying in things like they are is like keep living close from Chernobyl or Fukushima shortly after their accidents.
You prefer the Obama or Romney brand of liberty? While I may not agree with everything Paul says, he's still the best voice in Congress for liberty and the Bill of Rights. I agree with him on 99%.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Despite the paniced bleatings, I firmly believe that companies should not be subject to lawsuits for co-operating with police or reporting people who are abusing their systems to perform illegal activities.
Is the legislation subject to abuse? Sure it is -- just about any legislation with any teeth is subject to abuse. Take, for example, false reportings of child abuse to CPS, or kids claiming teachers "sexually harassed" them.
Reporting abuse isn't a charge; it's only grounds for a warrant to do further investigation. I don't believe the legislation goes much beyond providing whistle-blower protection for companies reporting the abuse. And I can't think of any way the legislation could have been written to provide that protection from lawsuits without causing fear and panic amongst rabid privacy advocates.
There's a huge difference between companies voluntarily reporting abuses of their systems and the government mandating that they monitor and track their customers and users, and the latter is not what this legislation does.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
No Vote R Paul, Ronald “Ron” TX 14th
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/h192
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
No he did NOT do the former ... he abstained today. You're confusing today's vote with the 2011 bill and vote.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll073.xml
DaveyJJ
My family emigrated here a few hundred years ago. Perhaps we've overstayed and it is time to pull up roots and move along. Vote with our feet, like great granddad.
My bad ... that roll was http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml as cited above. Tired. But he still abstained.
DaveyJJ
Many people will be looking twice at their hosting needs, local privacy laws and new US telco laws.
The only thing the US can still offer is the word "unlimited" on cheap shared best effort servers deals.
http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/cloud/what-will-you-do-when-the-us-comes-for-you-20120125-1qhc1.html
http://www.dsd.gov.au/infosec/cloud/cloud01.htm
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Excellent argument. Thank you for your input.
Like most matters involving interpersonal preferences, there is no objective answer.
It may not be objective, but the vast bulk of society has agreed that torturing somebody every day for 20 years is a worse crime than 'simply' killing them. See the Geneva Conventions for one example of how this is codified.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
It seems to me that the information that the IRS collects on me is far more worrisome than what is implicit in this information.
The difference is safeguards, which are missing here.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Smurf that then.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Obama also promised to:
Increase the capital gains and dividends taxes for higher-income taxpayers, expand the child and dependent care credit, create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners, provide the option for a pre-filled-out tax form, require automatic enrollment in 401(k) plans, require automatic enrollment in IRA plans, end income tax for seniors making less than $50,000, end no-bid contracts above $25,000, repeal the Bush tax cuts for higher incomes, phase out exemptions and deductions for higher earners, sign the Employee Free Choice Act, making it easier for workers to unionize, forbid companies in bankruptcy from giving executives bonuses, allow workers to claim more in unpaid wages and benefits in bankruptcy court, allow imported prescription drugs, prevent drug companies from blocking generic drugs, allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper drug prices, appoint federal-level coordinator to oversee all federal autism efforts, double federal funding for cancer research, direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a comprehensive study of federal cancer initiatives, provide the CDC $50 million in new funding to determine the most effective approaches for cancer patient care, fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), create a National Commission on People with Disabilities, Employment, and Social Security, change federal rules so small businesses owned by people with disabilities can get preferential treatment for federal contracts, reduce the threshhold for the Family and Medical Leave Act from companies with 50 employees to companies with 25 employees, provide a $1.5 billion fund to help states launch programs for paid family and medical leave, require employers to provide seven paid sick days per year, expand the Family Medical Leave Act to include leave for domestic violence or sexual assault, form international group to help Iraq refugees, work with Russia to move nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert, close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center, develop an alternative to President Bush's Military Commissions Act on handling detainees, secure ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), seek to negotiate a political agreement on Cyprus, reinstate special envoy for the Americas, double the Peace Corps, create a public "Contracts and Influence" database, allow five days of public comment before signing bills, enforce tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyists and former officials, double funding for afterschool programs, expand the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity, urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws, allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage, increase the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour, restore Superfund program so that polluters pay for clean-ups, re-establish the National Aeronautics and Space Council, support human mission to moon by 2020, pay for the national service plan without increasing the deficit, reduce the number of middle managers in the federal workforce, strengthen the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, limit term of director of national intelligence, give annual "State of the World" address, reduce earmarks to 1994 levels, enact windfall profits tax for oil companies, create cap and trade system with interim goals to reduce global warming, use revenue from cap and trade to support clean energy and environmental restoration, require plug-in fleet at the White House, require more flex-fuel cars for the federal government, mandate flexible fuel vehicles by 2012, provide an annual report on "state of our energy future," allow penalty-free hardship withdrawals from retirement accounts in 2008 and 2009, recognize the Armenian genocide, ensure no family making less than $250,000 will see "any form of tax increase," negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN, create a public option health plan for a new National Health Insurance Exchange, and introduce a comprehensive immigration bill in the first year.
(From PolitiFact.)
So you'll understand if I don't take Obama at his word.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
I knew I should have bought stock in Anonymizer yesterday...
Simple: this bill takes these rights away for all 300+ million Americans. At a pen stroke. Poof, gone.
I don't know how you do your crime calculus on this issue, but it would have to be a pretty strange method for any conceivable level of murder to exceed this level of violation of our rights.
What is the murder equivalent of the loss of 3e8 rights?
If this passes and doesn't get repealed, double that cost in lost rights every 74 years, because the crime continues while new Americans are born.
That would be it. If it passes, American freedom is royally smurfed.
Does this apply to all USA data keepers, so foreign customers that make use of these systems as well? This could (probably would) mean that most of the European businesses that use services from USA companies are now forced to cancel their business, due to European privacy laws forbidding them to do business with companies that will not uphold the European privacy laws. Could someone explain if I need to move large amounts of data and services out of the USA now please?
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
One reason could be that it mostly affect US citizens. SOPA would have affected everyone who had access to the internet (at least .com-adresses).
I've never seen any of the "I'm gonna leave the country," types who've ever done any real planning. They tend to have this simplistic world view of "the bad US" and "everyone else". Basically they figure that since (in their view) everyone else doesn't like the US and they don't like the US, they'll be welcomed with open arms wherever they go. Some even really seem to think the US has the harshest immigration law and is the only country that doesn't freely welcome people. They never look in to what is actually involved.
(Score:5, Tinfoil)
1984 called. They want their dystopia back.
1909 called. They want their foil back.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
The NSA is not only allowed but EXPECTED to spy on foreign assets. You know that, right? If they wanted to sniff around at your server's traffic it would be much easier if those servers were foreign. No sticky legal situations there, the NSA has been allowed to gather foreign intelligence since, well, its creation and it is a rather uncontroversial position (just saying it is, not if it should be).
Not saying don't move your servers if you've other reasons, just saying if the reason is "Oh the US might spy on me," that's a rather silly reason. They can do that easier when you stuff is outside the US.
Boo! Rubbish! Filth! Slime! Muck! Boo!
Life, ultimately, boils down to the Four Fs: Fighting, Fleeing, Feeding, and Mating.
He wants to outlaw abortion. That's not being for liberty.
Then take it out of party hands. Perhaps a committee for executing traitors. We can call it the committee for public safety.
Since 2000, we've seen the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, Warrantless Wiretapping, telecom immunity for the aforementioned, indefinite detention(and now assassination!) of U.S. citizens without charge or trial, NDAA ... and this relentless effort to legalize internet espionage.
Furthermore, it's no secret that the NSA is building a huge new data center in Utah.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1
This stuff isn't in the realm of "conspiracy theories" nor exclusive to wearers of tinfoil hats.
Not true. The government cannot circumvent the 4th Amendment by coercing a third party to do their dirty work for them ... at least until CISPA becomes law.
If you mean "cyber threat information", the definition is part of the bill:
(6) CYBER THREAT INFORMATION. - The term cyber threat information means information directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to a system or network of a government or private entity, including information pertaining to the protection of a system or network from -
(A) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or
(B) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information.
I don't know how you do your crime calculus on this issue...
I believe I already said that there is no objective answer, no "crime calculus". You can only compare preferences ordinally, within one individual. Preferences cannot be objectively compared between separate individuals. There is no way to objectively determine whether crime X affecting group A is better or worse than crime Y affecting group B, regardless of X and Y or the sizes of groups A and B. If there were then you could objectively justify aggression against one group on the basis that it reduces aggression overall, but in fact there is no such justification.
What is the murder equivalent of the loss of 3e8 rights?
There is no "equivalent". The violation of one right of one person is already too much. You can't justify one violation by weighing it against another, or even many others.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
It is for the unborn.
my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
Last I checked, though he wants to outlaw abortion personally he also is against the Federal government having the power to make it illegal.
Like it or not (and I am pro-choice), that is in line with the Constitution and the way our governments (state and federal) are constituted. Yes, it's a step backward for a certain type of progress, but that progress has been made in a way which has compromised the integrity of the system by ignoring certain things which should have been done to change it. Ignoring those requirements has also lead to many other things which are harmful to the continued liberty of the people. Ignoring important things for the sake of expediency will ultimately end the US as a recognizable system of government.
He's not big on gay rights either. Liberty!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
For being prepared to give up getting your way for the sake of legitimate government, I commend you.
http://marriedmansexlife.com/
When are these people going to realise they work for us AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
....however Edolphus Towns of NY district 10 voted yes!!??? WTF???
Want to know how your vote was place? then search for your representative - http://www.house.gov/representatives (by zip code in top right) and then see how they voted on this critical law;
- http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
http://velazquez.house.gov/ (mine for brooklyn) voted No
http://clarke.house.gov/ New York 11 also voted no
http://towns.house.gov/
If you are in his district i suggest you contact him to let him no that this didn't go un noticed
Hours of Operation
Office Hours: 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM (Constituent Services by appointment – 10:00 AM – 3:00 PM)
Address
10408 Flatlands Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11236
Phone: (718) 272-1175
Fax: (718) 272-1178
Its obvious you copied pasted that from some politically balanced site, like FOX news.
As an exercise, please re-list, indicating where the president can unilaterally act and did not, in passing said promises.
Otherwise its all political BS like every president makes every election. Like Newt magically making gas cost $2 a gallon, like that's going to happen because a presidential candidate promises it. Were you born yesterday?
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
Its obvious you copied pasted that from some politically balanced site, like FOX news.
Man, if only I had linked my source in my post. Oh, wait, I did! Here it is again: the PolitiFact Obameter.
And I suppose PolitiFact may be biased in some way, but as I understand it they're generally accused of having a liberal bias. Which is why I chose to use their list.
As an exercise, please re-list, indicating where the president can unilaterally act and did not, in passing said promises.
No. It's all crap that Obama promised, and you're right, a ton of it is crap that he simply has no way to actually do. Which is why he should have never promised it in the first place - especially because, as a Constitutional scholar, he had to have known some of promises were blatantly unconstitutional - but he did.
Not to mention that Obama specifically asked people to hold him accountable in that fashion. So, there you go, there's the list that Obama himself asked people to keep.
And again, because you apparently can't read links: The PolitiFact Obameter
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
The Republithugs, strike again.
Just another reason not to use US companies or store data in the US for any IT projects.
Patriot Act was bad enough, but at least it had the decency of being somewhat sneaky about it. This seems like it is just saying to the world, "Hey guess what? We are going to look at everything you have, and you know what? Too bad!"
The US is doing a great job moving all those IT jobs someplace else, well done.
Canada is really close by the way, we have awesome privacy laws, and it isn't all that cold by the border, we speak English, have a highly educated workforce, and now our dollar is probably worth more than the US... Oh our Corporate tax is also lower... Oh and free health care, so no need for expensive health care plans for employees. I would suggest you move all your IT related work north of the border.
You may have to put up with a few "ehs" and hockey playoffs, but its probably worth it in the long run.
I would guess the unborn child / fetus / growth would find not being murdered / killed / removed somewhat liberating. I don't think it's fair to state his pro-life stance (whether you agree with it or not) is anti-liberty.
This space intentionally left blank.
How did this get modded informative? Ron Paul has stated many times that he is anti-abortion, BUT he believes that it should be up to the individual states to decide whether they want to allow it or not for themselves. That's about as close to "let the people decide" as you can get. I'm sure many of us here wish that he said "abortion should be legal all over the country" but 'here's my personal view, I don't believe I've been granted a mandate to force it on everyone' is pretty damn good for a politician (or a person in any leadership position) to have.
You might be a criminal if:
you use the internet.
You might be a criminal if:
you want to get on a plane
You might be a criminal if:
you post bird songs on you tube.
You might be a criminal if:
You build a better widget than a big corp and try to sell it.
You might be a criminal if:
you take photos of police officers.
Feel free to add your own.
Missing. The. Point.
Violating someone's Constitutional rights is worse than murder. Why? Because it does not just affect that one person. You let precedence get set that violating X Constitutional right is okay, or not that bad, or whatever and you diminish the rights of every citizen.
If you murder someone, that one person is dead. The family will mourn and it will still be a horrible tragedy. At the same time, it doesn't immediately diminish the rights of every citizen.
In any event both are terrible, but I would value the rights in the Constitution for everyone over my life any day.
The site you copied this stuff from has 4 pages of promises not kept and 9 pages of kept promises.
You are NOT providing a balanced picture.
He's against the EPA, which means he's for Monsanto to have the freedom to ruin MY air. No thanks; as the libbies say, your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins -- and the same goes for your freedom to spoil my air. The feds need to be involved because pollution doesn't respect state lines and all pollution is a result of commerce.
There are things you should not be free to do, including polluting the air and water. I grew up near a Monsanto before the Clean Air Act, and you literally could not drive past with the windows down, the air burned your lungs. As long as Paul is aganst the EPA I'm against Paul. To be against the EPA is close to proof that one is in corporate industry's pockets, which is why I suspect was the real reason he didn't vote on this bill.
Free Martian Whores!
But nice to see you dance around the comparison to the reppellicans. Practice all the dancing you can, you are going to need if your man wins. The bar for dirty politics has been raised quite a bit by the current vocal minority, don't cry (too hard) when it comes back at ya.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
says "Attacks like this one aren't typical of Anonymous". He is rationalizing his disbelief.
The hacked site actually is typical of an Anonymous target... like that website trafficking in underage girls. Anonymous also go after individuals. One thing that isn't typical of Anonymous, however, is fabricating lies.
Ron Paul has stated himself that he accepts the support of groups like 'stormfront' although claiming to disagree with them. He has also posed for a picture with them on at least one occasion.
Just like he said he would veto NDAA....right before he turned around and signed it into law anyway--AFTER adding a provision which made it 10x worse--just like a bitch on New Years Day, when everyone's attention was distracted elsewhere.
You seriously are naive enough to still believe a word that comes out of that lying sack of shit's mouth?
Stop getting your "knowledge" from the mainstream media. TV really is warping your mind.
And don't give me that crap about "look it up yourself". You wouldn't tell your college professor to just "look it up yourself" if they started questioning where you came up with some outlandish claims in a research paper.
If I had spent hours upon hours and hours studying the matter, and having personal experience in the matter, and thus coming to an "outlandish" conclusion....and a professor choose to ignore my findings and argue til he's blue in the face out of his own inability to understand.....then yes, I would probably just shrug my shoulders, turn around, and walk off.
There comes a point in every human being's life when you have to start working for your own benefit, and the benefit of those who also "get it" and are going in the same direction, and quit burning every calorie of energy you possess in trying to convince morons who can't, won't, and never will get it, and will go to their dying days in old age never getting it and yelling at kids on the lawn who do.
I dunno....why did you post as Anon? Shame?
Wow, the media assholes are trolling slashdot too? Do us all a favor--sign in and drop the pretentious non-sequiturs. Ron Paul IS winning.....and those in the know are laughing, because we know days are numbered for rats like you :)
Why do you apply rational thinking towards the actions of people you like (Ron Paul) and not those you hate (Barack Obama)? Can you even really call it rational thinking, if you selectively apply it like that?
I don't know. Since you're the expert on hypocrisy, why don't you tell us if the message should be judged by the man, or by its own merit?
Wow. I get moderated into oblivion and at least one "foe" for mentioning that murder is bad.
Only on Slashdot.
You really need to get over your Ron Paul man crush.
Why are you so afraid of Ron Paul?
If you're not, why do you (and the millions of clones of you out there) feel the need to attack this man every time he's mentioned?
Good.
Now that all the speculation is over, can we accept that the USA is broken and just route all internet traffic around it? Surely the rest of the infrastructure is grown up enough to do without the rotting corpse that may have started the internet but is now too foobar.