Slashdot Mirror
Hillary Clinton: "We Need To Talk Sensibly About Spying"
dryriver writes "The Guardian reports: 'Hillary Clinton has called for a "sensible adult conversation", to be held in a transparent way, about the boundaries of state surveillance highlighted by the leaking of secret NSA files by the whistleblower Edward Snowden. In a boost to Nick Clegg, the British deputy prime minister, who is planning to start conversations within government about the oversight of Britain's intelligence agencies, the former US secretary of state said it would be wrong to shut down a debate. Clinton, who is seen as a frontrunner for the 2016 US presidential election, said at Chatham House in London: "This is a very important question. On the intelligence issue, we are democracies thank goodness, both the US and the UK. We need to have a sensible adult conversation about what is necessary to be done, and how to do it, in a way that is as transparent as it can be, with as much oversight and citizens' understanding as there can be."'"
"as transparent as it can be"
"with as much oversight and citizens' understanding as there can be"
Just fucking words. From the mouth of a presidential hopeful. I can't think of anything more meaningless.
"We need to talk sensibly about violating our own charter, repeatedly, then attempting to hide it all under the guise of some unending war on terror."
Do you spell bullshit with 1 L or 2? The totalitarian state will do as it pleases and have discussions to appease the masses.
Do you really think the people behind the sureillance will one day say "yea..i guess you are right we should not be doing this" to people, countries and businesses? That would be like the wall street bankers saying "yea..you are right..here is your money back"
We need to stop doing it. Period. There's nothing to talk about.
Just don't do it.
The name Hillary Clinton does not belong in the same sentence with the phrase "sensible adult conversation."
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
The level of abuses - both the spying itself, subsequent known abuses of the data, and countless likely unknown abuses - has already done enough damage to the fabric of the ideal of democracy, that an open and straightforward conversation is not enough. When there are very real threats that people will be tortured to preserve government secrecy about this...
It's too late for the straightforward sensible conversation. Heads need to roll. Figuritively or literally. I stopped voting when Obama broke his 1 year GITMO pledge. I thought I would make an exception if Hillary was the only female top spot on one of the two main parties. I think this slashdot troll headline will make me give up on that. It'd be nice to see a non-male president of the U.S. But Hillary Clinton is day by day demonstrably failing to live up to the kind of standard which I would use if I could muster the belief that voting could help this in the same sensible fashion she is after. Things are *messed up*.
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
. . . but given how hard it is for empires to break old habits, I doubt it is not realistic to expect the USA and/or GBR to stop now. It's just such a cornerstone of doing business at that level.
After all, when you drive down your street and a neighbor leaves their garage door open, you can't help but take a look, right?
She really means that the unwashed masses have to "educated" to shut up and accept it, which will take large amount of scare stories and perhaps some *cough* carefully engineered incidents to bring home the point that the function of government is to spy and watch over all aspects of society. For "It Takes a Village" Clinton to use the term "Adult Conversation" should fool no one.
The story, is without a single suggestion from either the British authorities or Clinton, that the spying should be reined in. Rather, everyone seems to suggest simply placed under more "political oversight" is the answer. But Politicians are the LAST people we would trust with oversight. They are the ones that got us into this mess.
And, at least in the US, the Judiciary can't be trusted either. We have judges who took oaths to defend the Constitution, approving whole sale monitoring of phone metadata of every person in the US,yet again.
Why should judges, entrusted to protect us, be above the law? Why can't they be prosecuted or sued?
Is there anyone surprised by Clinton making obscure coded statements about a spying program that she would redouble? This is a very corrupt woman, who is politically ruthless. She left her minions twisting in the wind in Egypt, and if she gains a position from which she perceives the rest of us a "her children" she will assuredly not do a single thing to remove her parental control.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I don't think that's what she meant. I read no promise to do better in that statement at all.
We have a surveillance program for the Brits. One if by land, two if by sea.
Yes, them jews have been blowing up shit all over the US. We need to watch them close.
I don't think that's what she meant. I read no promise to do better in that statement at all.
Oh, I assure you, it was a promise to "do better". Not a promise to do less.
It was a promise to sit you down like a school child and tell you what the rules are.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
How many if by suitcase?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
with as much oversight and citizens' understanding as there can be
I can't think of a more condescending tone. I love how the state always knows best.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
Here's a proposal to try on for size. All covert surveillance with any domestic component must be approved by a secret court, with the decision made not by a professional judge, but by a citizen jury in an adversarial court setting. Now clearly the jury can't just be random dudes off the street, so how do you make sure they can be trusted with government secrets? They're selected by another jury, and if they agree to serve, they consent to total surveillance for a period of time during and after their service. These juries also select a people's advocate, who acts as a defense attorney and is required to argue against whatever the state is trying to do.
Enough of this nonsense! We need these invasive spying programs so that we know what the terrorists are up to. I know you all like to live in a world of fantasy, where privacy and freedom are paramount, but this is the real world. When things like terrorism are on the table, it's time to put away the kids toys and talk like serious, mannered adults. A world where the government does not watch over our every move is unthinkable and completely unrealistic.
-- cold fjord
What is with you morons? Enough of this "privacy" talk; our very lives are at stake! How can you really expect to live in a world where the government does not know what you're doing? The government cannot possibly protect us from terrorism, or even revolution, if they do not see everything we do. Fortunately, it's only a matter of time until they can read our thoughts.
-- cold fjord
Stop! No more privacy! Privacy is a tool used by freedom fighters! Do you know what freedom fighters do? They fight against freedom! They're fuckin' terrorists! Get 'em boys!
-- cold fjord
The constitution is an enemy of the state, and should be treated like one.
-- cold fjord
She is not from the "top of society", she was an activist and real estate speculator from Arkansas who hitched her wagon to an even more egregious scumbag and held on for dear life.
Her problem is that she is a liberal and a social climbing parasite, with stupid 60's hippie notions imprinted on her brain.
Brett
We elected the current turd sandwich that we have right now because too many people felt guilty about not ever having a president with black skin.
I'd say the US elected whom they did because too many people didn't consider third party (and the second party didn't offer a credible alternative). Not to suggest that the current guy is doing a great job, but the US had a choice between him and a 72 year old with a Labrador for a running mate (the first time around). The second time around, the challenger's platform was "Don't ask about the specifics about our plans, you peasant! Just hear my rhetoric and grandstanding, and I'll say everything so just hear what you want to hear.". Unfortunately, all politicians tell you what they think the majority want to hear. Romney wanted to also say (in quick succession) what the minority wanted to hear.
Hell, I think the US should get Bill Clinton back (even if under a Hillary disguise) - he seems to be the best you've had in a while, and the current crop of hopefuls are a joke.
Wrong. We elected the current turd sandwich because at the time it wasn't apparent that he was a turd sandwich, but it was apparent that the alternative was a double-turd sandwich with a douche chaser.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I mean seriously. Just stop. It's that simple. Free country? Life? Liberty? Constitution? Remember all that stuff?
Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
The world is not a perfect place. The West does need spies and it does need an infrastructure to support them and gather intelligence.
However, we should remember who we actually need to be spying on. Nation states, failed states, and yes terrorist training camps and what not.
What we should not be engaging in is dragnet surveillance where everyone is entered in to some giant database. This is a really bad idea for a number of reasons.
Firstly, the databases are not really likely to be that useful. Prism didn't stop the Boston Marathon bombers. You might have every text, every phone call, every e-mail but if you can't spot the connections it doesn't help you.
Second, the massive database is a security risk in its own right. The NSA might think the Snowden leak is bad but it's child's play compared to what would happen if somebody leaks that database! You can bet your bottom dollar a shit-storm a 100% times the size would ensue. It might even threaten the agency's continued existence.
Third, the database could be hacked by a foreign governments. This in itself is a giant risk that dwarfs the one outlined in the second paragraph. China getting access to wiretaps on US businesses? Does no-one in the security community see what a giant hole they're making in the West's security?
This leads nicely to my fourth and final point. I do get the impression from the Snowden leaks that the competency of these organisations is being called in to question. It's clear they don't know what Snowden took; they don't know what he knows and what he doesn't. This is why he's catching them at so many lies. They make one statement, he leaks another document that shows them they're full of shit.
This final point is perhaps the most damning. They've built a giant system they can't audit! If they don't know what he took when he's just a fairly junior contractor, we have to assume other nation states have thoroughly penetrated the system and already stolen Western secrets!
They're clearly not competent enough to run such a system and it should be shut down on grounds of national security.
Sorry, 15 yard penalty, bullshit on the field. We elected Obama because the right ran Thurston Howell the Third and Lovey and just like on the show they couldn't help but keep opening their mouths and showing the world what rich spoiled clueless dumbasses look like.
Which was YOUR favorite "See I'm rich, he heh" gaffe? I'd say the "47%" gaffe wouldn't even make the top 5, my personal favorites were from him "I had to drive an ugly car in High School!" Oh poor baby, didn't like the BRAND NEW LUXURY CAR that daddy gave you for your 16th BDay Mitt? And from her "We were so poor in college we had to live on our stock dividends!"...yeah, you are breaking my heart, it must have been soooo hard to live in that mansion daddy gave you and have to live on the piles of cash you were getting from the shitload of stock you and Mittens had before you had even graduated college. BTW want to know how many mansions daddy had given them before they graduated? FIVE, Mittens was stupid enough to brag about it at one of the fund raisers,just like he marveled about how them Chinese would practically kill each other to work for nothing. Smooth move rich retard.
So I'm sorry but the reason the right lost in 2008 and 2012 is the same reason they'll lose in 2016 and 2020, because they keep running candidates so fucking out of touch it hurts. You went from McSame, singing "Bomb Iran" while our troops are deployed in harm's way like its a fucking joke, to Thurston Howell the Third, and you watch in 2016, while the economy is in the crapper no less, they'll run....drumroll for dramatic effect.....Bobby "Fuck them poor bastards!" Jindal, guaranteed to let any dem just waltz right on in there.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Hillary will win easily if she runs in the Democratic primaries. The Democrats won't attack her like they did to Romney in the primary last year.
What are you talking about? Romney was the general election opponent, running on the Republican ticket. He was never in the Democratic primaries.
And I'm not at all sure that Hillary's path to the 2016 nomination is assured. Hillary represents establishment neoliberalism, and much of the Democratic Party base has had enough of that. Remember, primary elections tend to attract an electorate that is a lot more partisan than that of general elections. If Elizabeth Warren runs, she could give Hillary a hard time, since her positions are closer to those of the Democratic Party base.
(At least the article didn't quote her saying more, but maybe she did ...)
She's not asking, 'is this spying worth the loss of liberty and should we continue?', she's just saying we should take steps to make people more comfortable with it.
The serious conversation needs to be about the trade-off: People lose privacy, and eventually someone, even if not Obama or Hillary Clinton, will abuse the power to suppress political opposition and for other selfish purposes. Are the security gains worth all that harm? One consideration is that governments maintained security for thousands of years before they could spy so easily on everyone.
Security is important and I think we need to find a balance, not simplistic, all or nothing conclusions.
Why are you saying sorry and then repeating what I said?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
For the first 36 years of my life I lived in the USSR. It was un-free country, but many of us valued freedom and learned to love it more than the state religion - "Communism" that the government preached. When Bush started his war in Iraq as a retaliation to the 9/11, I noticed that with Patriot Act, "security" in the airports this country started to grow more and more similar to the failed state - Soviet Union. Some features that I believed to be unique trademarks of the totalitarian states sneaked in the everyday life of Americans. There was a government slogan in the USSR - "to catch up with and pass the USA", but now it seems that the USA is trying to catch up with the KGB-ish nature of the USSR. It is sad for me to see that many born-Americans believe that Freedom is given to them by God, by their brave predecessors or just by the Land they are born on. Freedom has to be fought for by every generation all over again, citizens have to prove they deserve it.
I would never vote for Republicans - for me they share much more with Soviets than just the red color, but when Obama (whom I voted for) calls Snowden a "traitor" (instead of a hero), I'm thinking that Putin in his place would do exactly the same. Putin, who's main enemies are Russian citizens.
Dude,
The state department doesn't order the NSA around. It doesn't order the CIA around. It feeds the CIA intel, partly in the form of reports from State Department staff and partly in the form of reports from the governments they're working with; and uses Intel and tools from both, but it doesn't have any control over FISA.
Is it just me, or is "sensible adult conversation" rather condescending? Why is it that when a whistle blower identifies where the law has been violated, rather than a immediate and far reaching criminal investigation to identify and punish those responsible for breaking the law we see excuses and calls for "sensible adult conversation". There is no need for a negotiation. If I were to spy in this manner there would be no discussion; I would be prosecuted, imprisoned and possibly killed.
National Security is a weak cover for the abuse of power and gross violations of the highest law of the land. How can senior people get away with lying to Congress and not get thrown in jail for life? What does it say when people can lie like this, break the highest law, and face no consequences? No. Instead the whistle blowers are facing life in prison.
I didn't believe all the campaign promises of Obama, but to actually be worse than Bush takes some doing. The US is stuffed. Your 'democracy' was sacrificed many years ago; welcome to the Police State. What other country has tortured people for more than ten years - and now can only keep people alive - people who have not been charged much less given a trial - through forced feeding. The US is a grotesque parody of what it once stood for.
Sorry to have to say that. But the UK are a Constitutional Monarchy. She didnt frequented the Geopolitical classes?
Apparently all you learned about government you learned from computer games.
As long as actual political power is held by elected officials, and basic freedoms are respected, the country is considered a democracy. Constitutional Monarchies are almost always Democracies, because if the Constitution isn't Democratic the Monarch is almost always in charge. Republics are iffy, because all a "Republic" is a country with no hereditary head of state. That could be Hitler, or it could be Obama.
Next time try to pay attention.
Because it was pretty obvious Obama was going to be awful, all you had to do was read the full story instead of just the headline each time.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
The only sensible talk about illegal and unconstitutional surveillance: a conversation that admits that it's wrong and demands it stop.
Speak for yourself. I and many others pointed out his lack of anything during the first campaign here and elsewhere. If the best you can do is claim those who did not win would have been worse, you're conceding your argument is void.
You misunderstand. She may have started low, but she floated to the top. Like the scum that she is.
HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
No, we elected a black (well, sort of) president because the republicans couldn't mount a response better than either an old white guy with his batshit insane girlfriend or another old white guy who can't think his way out of a paper bag.
If the republicans keep coming up with total losers, then the democrats, with only partial losers are going to win.
Remember, the votes necessary to win are the swing voters, the ones that really don't like anybody.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
of course it needs to be an adult conversation. Children shouldn't be exposed to language strong enough to properly convey just how deeply th NSA and co. have betrayed the public trust.
Now, since it isn't sensible to talk to the frightened children in the government as if they are adults, here goes: "Calm down now, there are no terrorists under the bed. See? I know there are scary bad people out there but there aren't nearly as many as the news wants us to think there are. The fact is the people on this street are just regular people like us. No more watching the neighbors with the binoculars. We can leave the nightlight on if you like, but it's time to go to sleep like a big girl.
There.
Yes, them jews have been blowing up shit all over the US. We need to watch them close.
I would've moderated this funny 3 months ago, but I recently found out there's a very violent (as in, yes, "blowing up shit") Jewish extremist group in the US. The name escapes me. They weren't the only group I'd never heard of.
Domestic terror groups are our dirty little secret, apparently - at least the ones who aren't skinheads or ultralibertarian gun nuts.
Please help metamoderate.
She will soon be interpreted by her base of drones as wanting to do away with all intelligence services and this will get her the support of the far left. Of course even if she IS a candidate in 3 years - 4 years completely out of government - it's a lie and she'll pull an Obama not do any of those things she was perceived to promise and laugh her way through her first term.
I hate it but I have to agree with you. You've summed up the Republican party amazingly well. I can always pick who's going to win the primaries by looking to see which one I hate the most. Last time it was Romney. The only good thing about that was the 20 dollar bet I won on how he'd be the nominee. The other guy said "they wouldn't dare nominate that dickhead!" Little did he know. Ah well. I keep hoping for a third party to rise up. Maybe the Moderate party. Or the checkbook balance party. Moms that manage to run a household of 5 on 50 grand a year would do a lot better than the morons in charge now.
I was never aware that the term Jew was an insult. I know I have heard Jewish people refer to themselves as "Jew" many times. Don't the Jews run Israel? It always seems that way.
Who said "suitable" was part of the definition of frontrunner? Fucking Dubya was the frontrunner for years.
Hillary is the prohibitive favorite to win the Democratic primary. Given the GOP's inability to appeal to anyone who isn;t white and above the age of 50 this makes her the prohibitive favorite to win the White House.
EXACTAMUNDO.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
Come back if/when you are elected.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Hypocritical, yes. But not silly. I'm not current, but in the near recent past their neighbors had the avowed policy of eradicating Israel.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
This from the same person who decried "the unconscionable profits of drug companies"...which have saved hundreds of millions of lives over the past 80 years.
It's almost as if...as if...as if she's a politician pandering to concerns of the moment to boost her power outlook.
Wait. WAIT! I DON'T THINK SHE'S THE ONLY ONE WHO DOES THIS!!!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It's not the "60's hippie notions" that are the problem. It's that she's just using the rhetoric as camoflage.
P.S.: Many of the "60's hippie notions" aren't particularly useful, but just about none of them are in the same league as the danger of authoritarian worship/manifestation that she engages in.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Clinton, who is seen as a frontrunner for the 2016 US presidential election, said at Chatham House in London: "This is a very important question. On the intelligence issue, we are democracies thank goodness, both the US and the UK.
Huh, a democracy, eh? Mind showing me the public vote where consent to the spying program was established? Oh there isn't one? You professional liars just love to trot out "we're a democracy" to shift the blame. Fuck you. It's a Republic. A Democratic Republic. Anyone who's held office while this shit has been going on let it happen. We need to fire congress -- They let the NSA lie to them, knowing full well that shit was a lie. The secret courts even ruled the NSA actions as a violation of the constitution. That means the Armed forces should be storming the NSA server rooms and shutting them down because they swore to protect the Constitution. Game over. We can't trust you. If a you found out a spy was a double agent you wouldn't let them go right back to working for you. Get the fuck out of our government. We're Americans. We can and have fought off forces greater than ours who wished to snuff us out. We didn't need an Orwellian spying agency to do it either. Now we're one of the greatest countries around, and you're saying we have to "Talk Sensibly About Spying"?! Yeah! We do! The sensible thing is to route that shit out. The Flu kills more folks in a year than multiple 9/11's. I'm more scared of my bathtub than a damn terrorist. Cars kill hundreds times more folks every year than 9/11. The sensible thing to do would be to stop wasting our money on shit we don't want, if this were "democracy". Fucking moronic liars. What she means is: "We need to engage full damage control, STAT!" Bite me bitch, you're fired.
Seriously - you must not. The abuses we've seen (which are, I should point out, minor in the grand scheme of 7 billion people going about their daily lives) are a known flaw in an imperfect system of multiple tribes of people sharing the same country/continent/planet. The conditions have existed since there were humans to fight one another.
I would ask that you propose an alternate system which provides a similar level of intelligence and allows proactive resolution to potential conflicts *before* suggesting we scrap the system entirely. Because to go without a system would be the ultimate in foolishness.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The best everyone can do is simply ignore anything she has to say; keep her out of any political discourse. I've had my fill of Hillary. The Nation dodged a bullet when it was becoming uncomfortably clear she might become president in 2008. Now I get to relive the horror a second time.
I am not sure the Nation can take so many, repeated leadership blows. We are on the ropes as it is.
-- Posted from my parent's basement
It was perfectly apparent. Don't believe everything you hear on television; do a bit of research yourself.
Again, voting for evil is never advisable, even if the opposition is even more evil.
Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
By adult I assume that she means to demean all those who are calling for the rational elimination of this abomination along with the criminal prosicution of every one of the evil doers in this situation.
This is ripe coming from a woman who spends at least half of every day figuring out how to control all information relating to her family and misplaced hope of being the next president.
You think YOU hate it? They call me "the /. resident hippie" but I was actually a Goldwater/Buckley conservative, one that thought you fix the problems NOT by fucking the poor, which any economist will tell you is economic suicide because the poor spend every dime they get and keep the economy running while uber rich like Mittens hoard, but instead to quit blowing billions like we were fighting the USSR next Tuesday and instead invest all the money into our own economy.
Well sadly we were kicked out of the party in the 80s, replaced by neo-cons with dreams of empire and bible thumpers that think we have to constantly get involved in the ME or "Jebus won't come back, come back jebus!"....sigh. I just LOVE how many on the right treat Raygun as a right wing god, the same guy who said "deficits don't matter" and spent like a drunken sailor on vegas leave as THAT is what we have now, we have the "spend on the rich and fuck the poor" right wing and the "spend on everybody" left wing, notice how NEITHER has the word save anywhere?
While I am in 100% agreement you can't save your way out of a depression, that is what was tried during FDR and it failed, you can't fix it by spending on dumb shit and BOTH parties seem to be great at that. BTW notice we no longer even HAVE a left party any more? You got fascist loving jack booted bullshit from BOTH sides, the only diff is one wants to go brownshirt while the other prefers the "big mommy loves you citizen" track, but again both are for the same shit, its just different spins. What i wouldn't give for a REAL third party but sadly all we get are Ayn Rand wannabes and those that are left of Lenin so we have zero fucking prayer of getting shit going here.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
"There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."
-- Commander William Adama - Battlestar Galactica
"It was a promise to sit you down like a school child and tell you what the rules are."
And for the 7 foot school child to tell her her 'rules' are irrelevant. Then grabs her by her throat and terminates her on the spot. Although the length of death should reflect the damage caused while she was alive. That should be price for abdicating responsibility and backstabbing the public to protect herself. Just because you think you are an adult doesn't mean you are or have any authority to speak as one. In the end its the one who kills the other that permanently wins the current fight.
He was critical of Bush's surveillance as a candidate in 2008, then as president he greatly expanded it. Now I wish I could believe Hilary will restore accountability. But as yet she hasn't said she would and even if she did say that how can we believe her or anybody else?
Hillary Clinton is as dirty and corrupt as they come. I used to work for the Clintons, so I assert that with more inside-baseball knowledge than the average bear. Want an example? Bill Clinton is now in bed with the guy who started and funded the Vince Foster witchhunt against them. See, most humans with any scruples would not choose to do that. But gold rules.
Hillary will say whatever she needs to say to get enough sucke...er, voters, to vote for her. Then if successful she'll turn right around and dish out more of the same 'ole, same 'ole on Americans. Electing her to President is no solution at all.
Stop pretending it is.
The only solution seems to now be, given that neither the judiciary nor the legislative branches have put a stop to it, to have everyday Americans converge on DC and burn the place to the ground. Also, the Hamptons, and Newport, and Westchester, and every other gated community where DC's true masters sequester themselves.
Then we can all sit down at a new Constitutional Convention and figure out America 2.0 where crap like this can't happen again.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
" Maybe the Moderate party."
Better chances at getting a good leader with a violent revolution than with our current process and yes it sucks.
Ah...that's me!
"Remember, the votes necessary to win are the swing voters, the ones that really don't like anybody."
Here's the problem with that. If you are so lacking in logic that your conclusion is that my "argument" (which isn't an argument at all BTW) is void, then you are hardly the kind of ignoramus to whom I should listen in the first place, now, are you?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Option A) Don't vote for less Evil guy; more Evil guy has an increased chance of winning
Option B) Vote for less Evil guy; more Evil guy has less chance of winning.
You see. That's the problem. Everyone who has piped up and said it was obvious that Obama was a turd sandwich is the same sort that lacks the minimal cognitive capabilities to figure the above out, for example.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Yes, you are correct. And the NSA acronym also has the same source. Maybe the correct formula is
DHS+NSA == KGB
But honestly - I'm afraid that NSA has much superior capabilities against the citizens of the country than the KGB had. With the brand new facility some 15 miles from my home in Utah.
Not now, dear. The big game is on TV.
Have gnu, will travel.
...or go home.
We have a surveillance program for the Brits. One if by land, two if by sea.
Yes, and it was compromised long ago. Of course there were implementation issues too.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Option A) Don't vote for less Evil guy; more Evil guy has an increased chance of winning
This also has the effect of sending a message and actually sending us on a path towards change rather than just maintaining the status quo. Not taking option A just ensures with near absolute certainty that nothing ever changes.
So while in the short term, the "more evil" (and really, the two candidates are only slightly different) guy has a better chance of winning, option A is actually superior.
Everyone who has piped up and said it was obvious that Obama was a turd sandwich is the same sort that lacks the minimal cognitive capabilities to figure the above out
That's false. People have heard this same defeatist argument a million times, so there's no way they don't know about it.
Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
I thought that Ms Clinton was being fatuous, but after reading the 229 comments (so far) on this thread (almost entirely about irrelevant political BS, Obama, McCain, Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi!!!, etc.), I now see she was correct, so here goes.
There is always a tension between safety and security, but in the cold war (and before) spying was mostly a matter of spying on the Russian (or Chinese, or Nazi, or...) military / government, and there is a pretty clean distinction between most US citizens, and the military / government of foreign powers. In 1973 or 1983, there was an expectation that, if you didn't mess with such things, you wouldn't be of any interest. (Yes, I know about chaos and cointelpro, etc., but those were seen as clear abuses.) The line was clear, and seemed to be fairly well supported on all sides.
Now, the safety / security tension is much worse, as the perceived threat is not governmental, but some vague amorphous Islamic menace, and no one is inherently safe, so the system has gone into a "snarf down everything and sort it out later" mode which is incredibly dangerous and has to be stopped. How to do that, and still maintain adequate security is the issue, and yes, indeed, we do need an adult conversation about it.
By starting off with "sensible adult conversation" that frumpy power hag has both ridiculed and marginalized every other conversation.
Really, the attitude of that corrupt female is arrogance defined, and for the record "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands".
I don't see the word democracy in there any where.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Warren would also split the women's vote, allowing a third person to thread the nedle and grab the nomination from both of them.
But who would fund Warren's run? I don't think there are any big money people who would sign up for her brand of populist thinking.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
It was absolutely apparent that Obama was a turd sandwich, all the way back in 2006 when he supported immunity for telcos that allowed warrantless wiretapping. YOU just didn't listen. May I say "I told you so."?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
When "more evil guy" is only negligibly more evil, that's a risk worth taking. One figurehead of the corporate autocracy isn't going to be significantly more evil than another figurehead of the corporate autoracy. What we all need to do is vote against the corporate autocracy by voting third party. It doesn't matter which one.
You know you're being played by the old "good cop, bad cop" routine, right? Or do you not have the minimal cognitive capabilities needed to figure that out?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
"Sensible adult conversation" = "If you don't accept my argument, you're just being a child".
The Department of Transportation is an executive office too, can they tell the NSA what to do? How about the Department of Agriculture? No? It's almost like there are multiple departments in the Executive branch, each responsible for different things! I know, crazy right??
Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
There are enough Americans that never bother to vote for there to be enough room for a third party to win by a landslide if they could find some way to motivate them to get off their arses.
If the republicans keep coming up with total losers...
Think about that for a second. What better way to scare people out of voting for a real alternative? Sounds quite intentional to me, seeing that republicans and democrats are on the same team.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
The UK is a representative democracy, with a monarch as a figurehead.
Everything else anyone says about the technicalities, the history, or anything else.... that's what actually matters.
The upper house (with all the lords etc) has some power in law, and technically can veto the lower house's decisions temporarily, but the lower house (the representative democracy bit) can just push through what they like. This has happened many quite a few times already.
I'll say it again, the UK is a representative democracy, with a monarch as a figurehead. It's not a monarchy
Wake up and learn somthing...There is NO SUCH THING as reverse discrimination. There is ONLY DISCRIMINATION, whether race, color, religion, or sex.
Let me guess, your next tirade will be about de-evolution...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
You can talk about that idealism all you want, but the fact is that most people don't know a god damn thing about who they are actually voting for. Talk to a crowd of 100 people, and I'll bet you that 70 of them voted for whoever they did because their friends voted for him, because they like his appearance, or because he seems "refreshing". Having a political stance has nothing to do with it other than if you can find confirmation bias. E.g. ask a question like "Do you think killing kittens is immoral? Well then you voted for the right man."
Both parties are guilty of the above, only it tends to be that democrats think their candidate of choice is the only one who wants to, for example, feed the homeless, whereas the republicans think their candidate is the only one who is anti-spying. (Either of which can be either completely true or completely false - what I'm getting at is that they vote for their perception of the party rather than the person.)
My statements above are based on how many times I've literally heard people say that it's about time we had a black president.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
Since you allegedly graduated from an American law school, you should recognize the following text:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
What the NSA is doing is not merely a crime, it is a usurpation of powers explicitly prohibited to the government in the document that is the ENTIRE legal basis for the government's existence. If you expect the American people to put up with it, then with all due respect, fuck you with a red-hot poker, you power-grubbing geriatric cunt.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I don't think that's what she meant. I read no promise to do better in that statement at all.
I think you need to listen to her carefully.... she .. did not ...have relations with that agency... the NSA.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Neo-cons, Bible thumpers - both rather totalitarian, actually. Sad.
Back then, when y'all got squeezed out like so much toe-jam through a dirty sock, the Republicans favored the shopkeeper and the Democrats favored the factory-worker, but neither at the expense of the other - there was basic respect for those that built the things and the businesses that we all used. Despite all the fine words this today is not the case; increasingly elitist bahstids, the lot of them.
You're on a roll, man.
But by-the-by, when has anyone ever called you a hippie?
We have always known that the NSA has been spying us as well as everyone else. Everything was just fine until the NSA started sharing this data with the domestic agencies. THAT is where the line was crossed. It is fine if the NSA watches me jacking off to ultraporn. It is NOT okay if the FBI does so.
In other words, in the name of National Defense, I am cool with whatever spying goes on. It is when that data is used to catch mobsters, drug dealers, and other normal typical crime that it becomes a problem.
If you want to catch a State actor planting a nuclear device in New York city, fine. If you want to catch a pedophile or murderer, fuck off. I would rather a thousand people die from random murder than to give up the fourth and fifth amendments.
Now that YOU have pushed it to this level, fuck it, I am not okay with ANY domestic spying at all for ANY reason. You lost the trust. You have abused it and you WILL abuse it. Fuck off.
You should have only shared national security shit with the domestic agencies.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
The USA is spying on the UN and European Union
The USA is spying on peaceful countries like Brazil, Belgium and the Netherlands
The USA is spying on Brazilian oil companies
The USA is spying on Airbus partners
What we see is 2 things:
1. The USA does not trust peaceful sovereign countries
2. The USA has economic motives for spying
To return to a situation of trust amongst friendly countries, this has to stop immediately and completely.
1. international sensible conversation with resulting international agreements. It is not only an US problem.
2. an immunity to E.Snowden so that he can return home and participate in the conversation.
And especially why we should do it to any kind of organization, entity, agency or any other kind of group that you put into place as an "oversight committee". The point is, as a former president put so eloquently, "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ... umm...", well, you know how it's supposed to end.
You fooled us once. Trust is something easily lost and very hard regained. Give us a reason to trust you. So far, I do not see any.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Why I should trust a site that has no merit whatsoever I don't see. You could get the definitions from Wikipedia and still be a billion times more credible...
I also find it hilarious how people from the US never cease to point out that their country is a Republic, not a Democracy, while citing some kind of difference that has nothing to do with it.
But just out of interest, is it a testament to your education system or one to your blind chauvinism? Or is the former blessed with the latter?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Let me introduce you to the Overton Window. Less Evil Vs More Evil party work together as a tag team (sometimes so obvious as alternating their positions on the same policy, depending on whether they are in power or not) to slide the window to the extreme territory. The only way out of the trap is to vote third party, regardless of how futile mass media may say that is.
You can talk about that idealism all you want, but the fact is that most people don't know a god damn thing about who they are actually voting for.
For instance, Obama supporters don't even know what party he is with. (And a whole bunch of other fun things, too.)
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
I often get called a hippie on this and other sites by the libertarian wing, of course they are so far right they make the tea party look like flower children, funny that if their dream world came to be? They would find out quickly that in a case of survival of the fittest their fat overfed asses aren't very fit at all.
But if you were to bring back Goldwater and Buckley? They'd be disgusted at what has become of the right, the "Let 'em die!" greed and tea party garbage, because they actually understood economics and gave a shit about the country. They would point out its the spending by the poor and middle class that keep the economic engine running and the more the top hoard the less the engine runs. They were for the free market but they also stressed giving those at the top reasons to invest back into the country. Hell you want to see some of the most scathing articles from national Review go back to the Raygun era because Buckley was always saying "We CAN do better" and he too hated the pandering to the neocon and bible thumper wings.
But now? call a spade a spade, what we have on BOTH sides is good old fashioned fascism, pure and simple. The right dreams of brown shirts and a handful of elite putting the boots to the poor via the stormtroopers and the left dreams of "Big Mommy Loves You Citizen!" big bro control, its the same coin, just different styles. The social left, the fiscal conservative? we no longer have a voice, pushed out by the fascists who dream of power for themselves.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I recognize the words "sensible" and "adult conversation: from being a kid. The first line of that conversation is "well you need to understand how this all works" in a condescending tone. The adult then explains why something the kid doesn't like (and has a legitimate reason to dislike) is necessary, and part of being an adult is dealing with necessary things you don't like. The implication being that continued belief in it being ridiculous is childish.
She's going to say "Look guys we know you don't like us spying, but we have to for the greater good, and you just need to accept that. We're not doing it because we don't like you...it's because we care about you SO much."
... we need to address the blasphemy of secret courts. This is the greater stain on the legacy of the Founding Fathers.
The Presidency I mean. Obama even won a Nobel just promising stuff he never did and one could almost see he would never do.
It resulted in the 4th Amendment.
Every rule has more than one consequence.
Anytime a politician says that, they really mean, "You guys talk till you are blue in the face. I'll pretend to care. Why, you ask? FYTW!"
If Sarah Palin was a liberal, and said the same statements you wish to demonize here with now, you would be extolling her virtues
If she was a liberal, she wouldn't have made most of the statements that she made.
Liberals have their crazies too, Al Sharpton isn't too well respected, even in liberal circles.
It was perfectly apparent. Don't believe everything you hear on television; do a bit of research yourself.
Again, voting for evil is never advisable, even if the opposition is even more evil.
Unfortunately when the other side throws around a huge amount of bullshit ("born in Kenya!" "his friends are terrorists!" "ACORN conducted massive voter fraud!") digging down and finding out the real story while discarding right-wing BS and left-wing BS can be a difficult and frustrating experience.
It's difficult to actually find non-partisan, non-nonsense political sites. I guess that sort of thing doesn't sell as well. It certainly doesn't whip people into a frenzy as easily.
One of my biggest regrets over the last election I would love to have been able to say we elected "President Mittens." What a great name.
Sure, this was all a fantasy, and in that fantasy he wasn't killing kittens and seniors and jobs and such. I know it wouldn't have worked out well, but still, it was a cute fantasy.
But again, what was the alternative?
So you voted for worse, then?
"But again, what was the alternative?" Bob Barr.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
I have no idea what your reference is supposed to mean.
Unless it's just some way you imagined is a valid way to invalidate the question.
But then that's all in your own head, at this point, sorry to say.
No, it's a straightforward answer. The alternatives included Bob Barr and Ralph Nader. I voted for Barr but if we had preference voting I probably would have had Nader second.
The problem isnt that there are no alternatives. The problem is that people tend to believe the propaganda machine that tells them there are no alternatives.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
I understand you now. And you are absolutely right.
FWIW in my opinion the 'propaganda machine' you speak of within the context of your reply is in large (but not whole, obviously) part due to what happened here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Women_Voters#Debates
Hopefully some day control of the national debates can be wrested back from the corporate parties and returned to the people. Whether it's the LOWV or otherwise.
We elected the current turd sandwich because at the time it wasn't apparent that he was a turd sandwich
Is it finally apparent that any candidate put forth by either the demoblicans or republicrats cannot be anything but a turd sandwich?
Option A) Don't vote for less Evil guy; more Evil guy has an increased chance of winning
Option B) Vote for less Evil guy; more Evil guy has less chance of winning.
Option C) Vote for non-Evil guy.
Because the differences between the "less Evil" and "more Evil" guys are mostly cosmetic (or otherwise immaterial), and the false dichotomy exists only to perpetuate the rule of evil.
the reason the right lost in 2008 and 2012
Wait, I thought the right won.
Oh, I see, you mean the other right...
Oh, she will.
Politicians will swear anything on anything if it gets them elected.
Then they will either silently ignore their promises or find excuses to justify reneging.
Dear USA government. The ONLY sensible thing to do is to say you're sorry, and stop doing it. All else is just playing hard and fast with words and nobody believes you anyway. None of you. Liars.
Back about '01 I stayed with a friend next state over from the old days so's to attend a reunion; he mentioned that he was a Libertarian. I asked a bit about it, then when I got home spent some time reading up on it at their website and so on. While there were what I saw as some problem areas much of their overall position aligned well with where my head was at, some of it long-standing view. When I visited again in '08 for the next-last reunion of the same group of us, I asked him how the L stuff was going and got the equivalent of 'no comment.' Now, I hadn't kept good track of the L's so did some more reading, and understood why; it was my sense that they'd been co-opted. Not 'changed with the times' but flat-out hi-jacked.
Being so proud of my perspicacity, it took awhile for things to sink in, for me to twig to just how that change fit with other things. It wasn't until I noticed in the MSM how parts of recent history - the past twenty years or so, and some going back to just after WWII - were being re-written on the fly. At least, that's what it looked like to me. Then there was the whole schmeer of what was selected as news compared to other, wider sources.
Anyway, by my usual round-about stupid (asleep, unaware) way of bumbling into things, it finally dawned how wonderful it was that all the usual mess of effective totalitarianism has been avoided owing to nifty new tech and concentration of media - including news presentation, and that presentation allows for easy donning of comfortable blinders.
Back during Vietnam war there was the grunts' version of the pacification push, "Grab 'em by the balls and their hearts and minds will follow." Here and now no ball-grabbing has been necessary. Posit changes in tax breaks or availability of food stamps and all fall in line quite nicely.
It's a comfortable life, Citizen - yes, we've had a rough patch lately, but don't worry, things will get better - and we are looking out for you, never fear.
My head hurts, my heart is broken, and my soul crawled into a hole somewhere and isn't speaking. Other than that, things are just fine. Shit. Yes, well, cheers, and how are you today?