Slashdot Mirror
New Bill Would Repeal Patriot Act
schwit1 points out a new piece of bipartisan legislation that aims to repeal the Patriot Act and the FISA Amendments Act, which the NSA has used to justify broad domestic surveillance. House Representatives Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Mark Pocan (D-WI) introduced the bill yesterday, calling it the Surveillance State Repeal Act (PDF). Pocan said, "This isn't just tinkering around the edges. This is a meaningful overhaul of the system, getting rid of essentially all parameters of the Patriot Act." The bill also attempts to dramatically strengthen whistleblower protections, so situations like Edward Snowden's and Thomas Drake's don't happen in the future. This legislation is not expected to get the support of Congressional leaders, but supporters hope it will at least inspire some debate about several provisions of the Patriot Act coming up for renewal in June.
Seriously, the same panicky style used when it's bad news about proposed changes in law. Which are merely proposed.
This will never pass. You can't repeal the PATRIOT Act... That would be unpatriotic. The FISA Amendments Act won't be repealed either. This is merely for show and we all know it.
I would vote for people who supported this bill.
Another stunt in the world of make-believe that the NSA has us living in
14 years late if you ask me.
No. This should be titled "No chance in hell".
The people who currently control congress are the same people who created the Patriot Act.
House Representatives Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Mark Pocan (D-WI) caught up in gay sex scandal according to anonymous government sources.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
If you want the surveillance state rolled back, do what you can to support this - take a couple of minutes and e-mail your U.S. House Representative:
http://www.house.gov/represent...
The more public support it appears this gains, the more likely it is that we can get some push back on our road to total surveillance. Much better than just saying it's got no chance and not doing anything.
Which is pathetic, because this seems to be a genuine attempt to rein in an out of control spying apparatus.
But, apparently far too many people are still thinking "well, I don't care what they have to do as long as we're safe" -- in fact, I've been told that by people.
Unfortunately, these people just think that this crap is actually keeping them safe, and utterly fail to understand the ways in which it undermines their rights.
I find it worrying that a lot of people are willing to give carte blanche to something they haven't stopped to consider what it actually means.
The world seems to be filled with too much stupid to realize what we've done, and why it needs to be undone.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
That's the best proposal for law that I've seen in many years. After many years, we see some excellent leaders, rather than weak people who pretend to be leading.
I suspect that for most people it is not even a matter of 'I don't care as long a I am safe', but of 'if I do not vote to keep my representative in place, one from the OTHER side might get the seat!', so most just get reelected over and over no matter what they do.
Let your congress critter know you want them to support this bill. If you don't know who is yours you can find them here and from their page send them an e-mail or get the number to call their DC or local office. I have already sent an e-mail to my worthless war hawk nuclear football carrying congress critter but I suspect that it will fall on deaf ears. I also contacted my senators but don't expect much from either of them as one avoids controversy like the plague and the other has been hanging low for a while.
Time to offend someone
Not really.
While people on slashdot might agree with this proposal, politically it is no different than all those other 'stunt' bills that have no chance of passing. The people proposing it get to stand up and say 'look what I did!', while being safe from any negative publicity from effects of their actions if it did pass. This IS pretending to lead.
No. This should be titled "No chance in hell".
The people who currently control congress are the same people who created the Patriot Act.
Considering the Democrats who controlled both parties failed to do anything but renew it, the Republicans may be our best shot - particularly while they don't control the executive branch.
There are some (on both sides) that thought the bill was a good idea at the time but now realize how awful it really is. Additionally, a very large portion of the Republicans in Congress today were not in Congress when the first bill passed.
Republicans may be our best shot
Stop, I'll get a heart attack from laughing so hard.
The horrible evil and completely corrupt people who currently control congress are the same people who created the Patriot Act.
FTFY
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It will certainly make clear the intentions of those that vote against it. Even if this doesn't pass, it'll be a clearly identifiable mark of shame on those opposed. If all else fails, let's hope that's motivation enough.
I think you'll find it's called the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act,, "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism".
the Patriot act is affected through the Homeland Security Act, which in turn uses wings of the FBI and CIA to implement various measures but most importantly it uses the Department of Homeland Security. with a quarter of a million people employed and a sixty billion dollar budget, many southern senators and politicians would likely find the bill, or any bill that touches DHS for that matter, toxic. customs and border protection agents, largely composed of veterans who would otherwise find themselves unemployed, make up the bulk of nearly 60,000 employed by the agency. Expect Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico senators to turn a blind eye to this legislation as no one wants to face an election with the fact they voted to axe these jobs, however pointless and destructive.
expect the administration --any administration for that matter-- to object to strengthening whistleblower protection. The laundry list of whistleblowers in federal government whos actions have directly led to their chronic unemployment and ostracization from society is evidence enough that we as a society care more about the idea of american patriotism than the actual functional implementation and repercussions of it.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I would in principle support reigning in on the patriot act, and possibly this bill. However, something tells me "This bill might be a trap", an item with no chance of passing; but either they want to figure out who will support the bill, so they can start investigating these people, or they will bury some Trojan horses in the bill itself in order to kill.
A congressperson votes for the bill, then they will be immediately under investigation as 'an enemy of the state' and attempts by the executive in response to undermine that person's support.
Will folks be shipped off to Guantanamo, for petitioning their representative in support?
Now this is the best piece of news I've heard all day long. This is what our elected officials are supposed to be doing for us - protecting our rights and freedoms from encroachment by the executive branch.
How are you going to take the flask away from those drunk on power? They'll just want more. The idea of restraint is not in our mindset. From consumption to polution, there is not much restraint. I don't see us changing the way we live any time soon. As long as we continue to live an unsustainable lifestyle, we will continue to be governed this way. Only when it is too late will notion of restraint and introspection occur, for a moment. The Patriot Act occurred because our foreign policies went amok while most of us were too distracted to care. A massive paradigm shift needs to occur where we hold ourselves and our government accountable for what we do. Until then, we're just under the thumbs of intoxicated power mongers who make sure we have our bread and ciruses.
With Jeb Bush about to become the nominated leader of the party? Good luck with that.
When it comes to stuff like homeland security and defense appropriations, the parties don't matter. It's neo-cons all the way down.
Did you know that Jeb Bush has asked Howard Baker to become his senior advisor?
It's gonna take a much bigger shift in government than just a one party or the other taking over to get rid of the Patriot Act.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Stop, I'll get a heart attack from laughing so hard.
So, can you make an actually decent argument? Or are you just going to keep chanting "THE OTHER SIDE IS EVIL!!11!" like all the other brainless morons who keep voting for the same people over and over again, and expecting change? No matter which party you support (democrat, republican, libertarian, etc.), it's always a good idea to see if the other guys can maybe do something good. In this particular example, democrats have failed to do anything about mass spying (and yes I know it was a republican administration that set it all in motion), so perhaps give the republicans a chance?
Your immediate dismissal of an entire party as being your enemy is a shining example of your closed-mindedness. It is people like you who keep change from happening, and who are too dumb to see it.
Maybe, just maybe, it might be a good idea for you to choose the people you support INDIVIDUALLY, rather than simply picking a party and sticking with it.
Will folks be shipped off to Guantanamo, for petitioning their representative in support?
I doubt it, because there is a lot of people who support reining the in patriot act. That would be a lot of people to get rid of. And the public outcry that would result from such an act would only serve to make the cause stronger.
CAPTCHA: languish
It's not about whether or not the bill would pass, but about speaking up.
Also, Google is gathering signatures for surveillance reform here:
https://takeaction.withgoogle....
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
The Republicans have already voted to renew it, so while I applaud this effort, and support them, it's highly unlikely that this will be able to gain any real traction unless there's a groundswell of support and this isn't about gays or guns so there's little likelihood. Cons will say it's "libtards being soft on terrorists" libs will say it's "redumbakins just doing it for politics" Our problem isn't our politicians, it's us, America as a country really needs to do some introspection about what we want America to mean.
You have to have faith that things will work out in the end.
The businesses that own those congressmen are being negatively impacted by the surveillance state. The US can no longer be taken seriously for security products globally because the NSA has to have a finger in every pie, and a plethora of vulnerabilities in every product.
We have the best government many can buy. It just takes time for that money to get in the hands of the large multinational corporations who can be trusted to take the most profitable path. Once the laws start to directly conflict with the ability of those companies to make a profit, and the lucrative government contracts dry up so it's no longer profitable to support the surveillance state, those companies will fight to repeal those laws, unless a third, more profitable option appears. The government would be in a real bad position now if they couldn't just arbitrarily print unlimited sums of money to keep that contract option going.
Of course, this is probably why a lot of people feel it necessary to prepare for the collapse of western civilization.
I would in principle support reigning in on the patriot act, and possibly this bill.
However, something tells me "This bill might be a trap", an item with no chance of passing; but either they want to figure out who will support the bill, so they can start investigating these people, or they will bury some Trojan horses in the bill itself in order to kill.
A congressperson votes for the bill, then they will be immediately under investigation as 'an enemy of the state' and attempts by the executive in response to undermine that person's support.
Will folks be shipped off to Guantanamo, for petitioning their representative in support?
We live in paranoid times, it's true. And a lot of things that people didn't want to believe about the US Government have been demonstrated to be fact.
But I don't think we're quite that far gone yet. I'd rather take the risk. Besides, how many people can Cuba hold?
Finally, the legislators are working FOR the people!
Of everyone in congress who sabotages this and execute them for treason. We're about to find out for sure who the real enemies are.
is one not-so-catastrophic terrorist event to happen and all this talk about oversight, rights, freedom, privacy and The Constitution will go right out the fucking window and everyone knows it.
One Event
Think of the children. Hell, think of the shareholders...
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
No we have people like you to blame. People who aren't even willing to try and make things better.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Whether or not the Patriot Act is repealed, things won't change where it really matters. Just as politically correct speech codes only serve to drive non-PC speech further underground and yield fetish groups that rally around things like racial purity, a total "victory" in Congress to repeal PATRIOT will just drive the secret courts into more secretive practices.
Because the US government is no longer run by elected officials. I don't mean to sound conspiratorial, it's just that representatives come and go while an army of bureaucrats are led by people with decades-long careers. Those people are not elected, nor are they responsive to political winds. As far as Congress using the power of the purse, the feds have a printing press and they aren't afraid to use it.
Jeb is a long way from being nominated. The funny thing is that one of the bigger obstacles in the way is that another neo-con, Lindsey Graham, being on the fence about running is preventing Jeb from consolidating some crucial support from past Bush advisers. At any rate, this nomination contest is going to determine a lot about the future direction and viability of the Republican Party, and it's not looking very promising for freedom-lovers everywhere.
I have a lot of Internet facing applications and it's becoming more and more apparent that certain nations, China for one, are constantly scanning or trying to break into systems. We've been leveraging mod_geoip/geoip2 etc. for awhile but that's at my point of presence. When are we going to start filtering IP addresses or subnets from nations where this kind of activity is permitted? It's a matter of national security but I don't see much in the way that the Patriot act or any act is really protecting intellectual property and websites from these kinds of coordinated efforts not just spying on citizens? I would much rather see a substantial amount of NSA resources focused on that problem rather than worrying of about who I send e-mails to.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Okay. What is the bill number to reference to our representatives? In the past when calling my representative has always asked "what's the bill number" so they can find it and examine in more detail. Talking around it is fine, but it's like saying "there is a this new product on Amazon which lets you connect computers" versus linking to the exact patch cable/etc webpage.
I took a look at the article and the linked PDF but don't see it. Anybody know how to reference this thing so our representatives can find it?
It's ridiculous that we would ship them off to gitmo. What will be done is the two affairs they have had, the business deal under the table last year, his son being gay, the fact that his family has employed illegal immigrants, and the fact he did cocane in college will all be released to the public if he votes the wrong way. Further if he speaks out on this he is revealing state secrets and will be tried in a secret court by secret judges and sentenced to 'pound me in the ass penitentiary' in the most pedestrian sense.
10 years ago I would have called this tin foil hat material, now I'm not so sure.
Did you know that Jeb Bush has asked Howard Baker to become his senior advisor?
Howard Baker? That means yet another war to add to the list. We're going to have to invade Panama to get the canal back so Baker can give it away again.
Darn, I'm getting old.
Did we not already establish these bills are just smoke and mirrors?
Geeks around the world will be tied up with reading and voting on this shit all the time.
Worse, the institutions these laws apply to are in obvious disregard for whatever they are held accountable for.
Expect the outcome to be a logarithmic of what we currently have for spying.
This is because our government is run by the political class, who believe the government exists for their personal use.
Their cronies run the government, and the politicians represent them ONLY.
It is not apathy.
it is because our government does not represent the people, it represents the politicians and their cronies ONLY.
I have to admit to being surprised at how many posts suggest that contacting your Congresscritter will actually work. Those days are long gone for several reasons.
1) The Supreme Court ruling that basically allows virtually limitless campaign contributions means that reps and senators no longer have to depend on the public for financing, meaning that they can do whatever they want and if Big Money likes it, they'll get re-election money. I don't see this as anything Big Money cares about.
2) There's a possibility that the majority of Americans may actually be in favor of the Patriot Act. I know that it's common for American Slashdotters to believer that the entire nation agrees with them politically, but I believe that in fact the majority of Americans are not troubled at all by the things that drive American Slashdotters mad.
3) Voters have proven for decades that they don't pay attention to issues at all, they have short memories, and they merely vote on party lines every time. Incumbents have little incentive to listen to the voters when they can literally do anything short of breaking the law and handily get re-elected. And polls have laughingly shown that year after year the US electorate wants to "throw everybody out, except my representative/senator" and they fail to grasp that when the entire country insists that their rep/senator isn't the problem but yours is, nothing will ever change.
Eh, it's called a ratchet effect for a reason. lacking some unprecedented crisis, I don't see either establishment party ceding this power, regardless of who controls what.
The only people that ever try to turn back the rarchet are wingers, who control little, and aren't the ones left with the blame at the next inevitable embassy attack or whatever.
Any legislator who decides that they will vote against a proposed law without having listened to the arguments given in debate and weighing up the pros and cons, should be forced to resign and banned from ever standing for election again.
No. This should be titled "No chance in hell".
The people who currently control congress are the same people who created the Patriot Act.
Considering the Democrats who controlled both parties failed to do anything but renew it, the Republicans may be our best shot - particularly while they don't control the executive branch.
There are some (on both sides) that thought the bill was a good idea at the time but now realize how awful it really is. Additionally, a very large portion of the Republicans in Congress today were not in Congress when the first bill passed.
That's like saying "We failed to find snow in hell so our best chance now is to find it on the surface of the sun"
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
I know it's a worn-out analogy, but look at the fight to decriminalize cannabis. One activist told a reporter in an interview that years ago, one could not even discuss the issue in polite company, and now it's been taken to its logical conclusion in a handful of states. If these people had just given up and said "no chance in hell", we would still have the status quo from years ago.
Therefore, I'm glad that *someone* in the halls of power is standing up for the little man, even if things look extremely bleak for his cause today.
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
Jeb is a long way from being nominated. The funny thing is that one of the bigger obstacles in the way is that another neo-con, Lindsey Graham
Besides matters of defense, I don't think many people see either one of those people as neo cons
Despite media claims (mostly left wing media at that) about the crowning of Jeb, he has not been nominated and is actually very unlikely to get the final nod. While he's a good leader many conservatives recognize that the left and middle will be very hesitant about yet another Bush, and we ourselves are leery of a Dynasty.
I doubt he'll get the Nomination.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
It doesn't work that way. A congressman cannot be investigated for doing his job as a legislator.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
You have no idea what I've tried and haven't tried. If you were an honest person you'd admit to that instead of kicking someone in the crotch for being honest about the scope of the corruption of the standing power structure.
Not really.
While people on slashdot might agree with this proposal, politically it is no different than all those other 'stunt' bills that have no chance of passing. The people proposing it get to stand up and say 'look what I did!', while being safe from any negative publicity from effects of their actions if it did pass. This IS pretending to lead.
You're right. Fuck it. Let's just give up.
At any rate, this nomination contest is going to determine a lot about the future direction and viability of the Republican Party, and it's not looking very promising for freedom-lovers everywhere.
What does it matter who gets the Republican nomination? The press has already coronated Hilary Queen of America. The Republican nominee has as much of a chance to become president as Lyndon LaRouche.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
The PATRIOT act is not a law at all, it is an act of usurpation. Statutes passed by the congress can't trump the constitution, and the PATRIOT act obviously violates the fourth and fifth amendments.
While I'm happy that Rep. Massie is trying to do the things he promised when I supported his campaign, the only solution to the FBI/CIA/NSA fiasco is to abolish all three agencies, prosecute every person involved with the crimes that Snowden made us aware of, and prohibit all the rest of them from ever being employed by the taxpayers again, since they failed to turn in the criminals around them.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Why do we need a new bill to squash the patriot act when we have the constitution and bill of rights? The patriot act was not legit anyway since the constitution's 4th and 5th amendment were never amended. The suspension of your rights is out right bullshit. The government works and represents us the people not the other way around otherwise this government is no longer legit and nothing more than a feudal system(ruled by the oligarchy).
This is as if you are saying to somebody who stands still: he does not move the right leg, so the best way to move forward is to hope he moves his left leg.
Most likely nothing will happen or he just turn round and round.
In a few years you can say the same and just revers the parties. Several years of politics has learned us that hoping for the other party to do the right thing does not work.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
That's so funny! Thanks, I needed that.
However, something tells me "This bill might be a trap"
Same feeling, but I think it's more of a case of tearing down the scaffolding once the building is finished. All the goodies the feds wanted are now cemented through other legislation, and now there's an opportunity to be seen getting rid of an unpopular bill.
I think of neocons as those who followed George W Bush as military hawks who paid lip service to social and fiscal conservatives.
See page 4:
"upon the request of the applicant, any person or entity shall furnish the applicant forthwith all information, facilities, or technical assistance necessary to accomplish the electronic surveillance in such a manner as will protect its secrecy and produce a minimum of interference with the services that such carrier, landlord, custodian, or other person is providing that target of electronic surveillance"
How is this better than the patriot act?
but...but I was going to use this story to bash the evil republicans!!
Like they coronated her in 2008? Every cycle there's a frontrunner for president who fails to get a nomination. There is a very good chance that one of the eventual nominees is someone who hasn't gotten mainstream press yet.
The people of WWII Germany had the same opinion in terms of "I don't care as long as I am safe", look where it got them. In 1954 the US began playing with the same things that Hitler did, what you are seeing now are the side effects and obvious brain damage. Soviets played with the same thing and look where they are now. One cannot put the genie back in the bottle but the many could make that conscious choice, but the greed and lust for power will ultimately bring a biblical style ending to it before things will get better.
Somewhere in this thread the question was asked about how to reference this bill when contacting your reps. It took some digging but I found the H.R. Number.
"Surveillance State Repeal Act (H.R. 1466)"
Have fun.
The DHS has quietly become the KGB, with all that this implies.
There's a reason that the current Russian dictator comes directly from the old KGB. There's a reason that one of our recent former presidents came directly from the CIA.
For this reason, I'll make a big bet, that no matter what kind of election carnival is held, Jeb Bush gets elected as the next president. As the former CIA director's son, he's on their team. He's already vetted. No candidate, at this point, has a chance of winning unless they're security service friendly.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing the Required Tools for Intercepting and Obstructing Terrorism.
It's a hi' falootin' acronym, so it need to be capitalized. (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ56/pdf/PLAW-107publ56.pdf)
I was just reading about Lindsey Graham and he is not casting himself as someone who pays lip service to social and fiscal conservatives. He's claiming he wants to break it to these people, gently, that their crazy. Not the swift kick in the ass that most of them deserve, but a start.
Cheap storage VM.
And you have implied that you won't do anything on this so whats your point. I'll stand by my original statement.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Nope, they just freeze in place and piss themselves.
I doubt it, largely because of who is sponsoring this. Specifically, Mark Pocan, who is my representative and who has been a prominent state representative for many years. From what I've seen of his record (and from actually running into him and talking to him at the liquor store), he would be one of the least likely people to perform this kind of trap. .
Now, if others take this as an opportunity to see who might be a good candidate for a "re-education" camp, that's a whole other story...
I disagree based on this: Show me the Libertarian branch of the Democratic party. They don't exist. But in the Republican party there are the Ron Pauls of the world. Of course, if Jeb gets the nomination I'd rather Ron Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate - Just to send a message to the establishment Repubs.
Google McCarthy.
Are you now or have you ever been a Communist?
I'm torn about Jeb Bush. I don't hate him. I think he is competent as the Governor of Florida has gone down hill since he left, which is a rare bird. That being said, I may also not agree with everything Hilary wants, but I also think she is one of the more competent politicians. With that in mind, I don't know if I want them to run against each other. A lot of politicians decide to not run again for the top office if they lose once, so with that in mind, I don't want them to run against each other, but switch off after they can't hold office any more. On the other hand, if they both ran, then no matter which "side" won the race, there would be a decent leader in the Oval Office.
I lack faith in any new nominees that may pop up in later races.
Career-wise he has paid lip service to those factions until the past few years when they have become more extreme. I live in his home state and not far from his original House district, so I remember him as a House freshman elected under Gingrich's Contract with America in '94, and I remember him pushing the Defense of Marriage Act in '97.
The spying apparatus isn't out of control. Its out of your control.
Write to your congress-critters! I have. If enough people write, there could be a chance.
http://www.house.gov/represent...
https://www.opencongress.org/p...
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/US-...
http://www.contactingthecongre...
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
Sorry, but when it lies to Congress about what it's doing ... it's really out of control.
When it spies on the people who oversee it to influence the oversight, it's out of control.
When it formalizes a mechanism of perjury by law enforcement, it's out of control.
When it hides how it uses technologies to perform warrantless wiretaps, it's out of control.
I see no evidence that any has control over these clowns. And if anybody does, nobody knows who that is to have control over them.
So, to you I say, bullshit. The spying apparatus does whatever the fuck it wants, arbitrarily decides when/if the law applies, and keeps doing what they want no matter what they're told.
These people are now quite dangerous to our freedoms and our societies.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The Patriot Act is already unconstitutional, as it is in direct conflict with the 4th Amendment and the 6th Amendment. Lower laws do not trump higher laws, so it is invalid from the moment of conception.
mod up.
Great idea. Too bad no terrified conservative will ever let this pass. They're far more worried about catching the dreaded "terrorists!" than their fellow american's civil liberties.
No. This should be titled "No chance in hell".
The people who currently control congress are the same people who created the Patriot Act.
And the people who WERE in control of Congress did nothing about it for 6 years - even when the "other side" (who IS now in control) had no ability to do anything to stop them. It isn't about which party is "in control" - the whole mess is out of control.
FTFY.
Thanks, I am interested to hear more about the real Lindsey Graham, if he becomes a strong contender. Cruz is a joke, he's the only one who doesn't get it. Jeb is basically Sisyphus, there's no way I could vote for him.
Cheap storage VM.
When it was proposed, the Patriot act worried civil liberty watch dogs.
They were shouted down. As soon as it passed, there were cops looking for ways to use "terror" to tap local drug dealers.
It has been abused for purposes beyond its intension from the beginning.
I needs to be repealed and rethought.
It was never under the control of Congress. That was just how it was sold to the public.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
I'd say repeal that pathetic bill. It has done nothing except hand over extreme levels of power over people and their affairs to the gov...which tells me the puppets who put it together are afraid of something - and it is not "terrorism". If I want someone in my undie drawer I'll UPS it to them. Otherwise, I say that all federal employees should have all their public / private affairs put on the web to level the playing field.
Graham's bread and butter is military. He's been in the reserves for a long time. In the 90s he was a pretty typical conservative all around. He's gotten a reputation for working across the aisle over the past decade, notably on immigration, and that's gotten him into trouble in Republican primaries here. His recent comments that he'd use the military against Congress to get things done if he were president has him in my dog house, so I won't be voting for him in any presidential race. Most residents here don't want him to run for president, but his potential candidacy has much of the political class tied up who would otherwise be endorsing Bush or others.
Excellent observation - never considered that before!
I cannot argue against the pressures of power and greed to which you allude. I can see them plain as day, and they do not lightly relinquish the power they lust for.
That said, setting aside the pros and cons of the current president, in the last election the powers of greed tried to elect someone who was neither conservative nor liberal but really a direct representative of the 1%. They spent 3 to 4 times as much money, made people stand in 4 hour lines to vote, maximally gerrymandered every district they could...
And they LOST.
They can influence an election with money, but they failed to buy it outright. I think it's still rational to have hope that the many will take this system back without bloodshed.
True, but remember they're talking real mail letters, not email. In general: it takes 10 emails to have the same impact as one letter, ten letters to have as much impact as one phone call, ten phone calls to have the impact of 1 in-person talk, and 10 in-person-talks to have as much impact as a $10 donation. From there it just scales up with the donation amount.
I don't honestly see Jeb as having that much a chance, at least not if it were done today.
That Bush name is a serious impediment....and there are some other candidates that many like better than him.
I also think there are a lot of folks in the US that just do not want another dynasty name in there, no more Clintons or Bushes.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Hmm..so, what's so extreme about that?
PLENTY of people still agree with that one. I don't think the majority of the US is that much gay friendly at this point in time.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I didn't say he was extreme.
Republicans are evil. I mean when they depict them on the Simpsons, they have a dracula at their headquarters. A freaking dracula, I mean come on!
and I remember him pushing the Defense of Marriage Act in '97.
So did Clinton as well as 118 Democrats on the hill and 32 senators.
Not the best example to give.
That said, I have an extreme dislike for Graham and wish he would just leave politics altogether so we can get another Cruz/Walker type person in office.
So, typical GOP nightmare...
Sounds like in any other group he'd look like a raging lunatic, but in the current GOP he sounds like a moderate.
Cheap storage VM.
Quote me or STFU.
You've got it.
Um, didn't she get her clock cleaned by the junior senator from Illinois last time around? Plus, she is a serial liar. Her work as a senator and SOS were not really very remarkable. Then there is the fact that fellow Ds are selling her out with the e-mail scandal. She is toast.
If ever there was a time for the Americans here to write to their congressman and ask that they support a particular bill, this is the time. I may not be American or know a whole lot about American politics but even I know that this is probably one of the most important bills proposed in Congress in at least a decade.
Face it, people love spying.
Go read up on how former spouses installed spy equipment on people as close as the next pillow over. People applaud these spouse for spying on someone that is legally bound to each other. You will not see less spying. I see no end; spying will be a routine matter.
Funny, I wouldn't think there would be many people who would be in both groups:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1...
It has after all been 13 years.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
They are owned long before they make it to the ballot, no matter which party. The corporate principle of controlling both sides does apply. And very much so within the arms length separation of church and state policy, what was in safe hands pre 1947 definitely fell into the wrong ones.
...it did pass both houses, Obama would of course veto it. He has been more overzealous in his use of the surveillance apparatus than Dubya was.
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
I wont vote for any of the main stream actors, but if one of them supported this bill and it passed, I would look past my hatred of them and give them my vote.
The Patriot Act was an attempt to handle a new type of warfare. It came down to deciding how to classify and handle foreign based militants, both individuals and groups. Are they criminals subject to the civilian justice system or can they be classified as military POW's? Treating them as a civil law enforcement matter makes the chances of ever bringing these people to court is nil. If treated as POW's they can be legally detained until the hostilities cease. In an insurgent war the hostilities are always ongoing. POW status would also bring them under the Geneva conventions which allow summary executions on the battlefield if they are not wearing identifying insignia of an international recognized state or entity. They should not renew the PA. It has caused to much controversy and provided no real benefits. At the same time they can strap parachutes on the remaining detainees at Guantanamo and air drop them where they were apprehended and close the place. This would also remove the chum from the water and silence all the people upset about all the innocent little angels being held at Guantanamo. The NSA should ramp up it's foreign operations and programs without apology unless all the other foreign intelligence agencies in the world also close their doors. The other bugaboo is the FISA warrants. They have been around since the mid 70's. FISA warrants are basically warrants used to facilitate gathering enough information to apply for a regular warrant. Any information collected under a FISA warrant is inadmissible in court. And keep in mind that there has been one attempt to use a couple PA provisions to prosecute someone in a US court and the PA provisions were ruled unconstitutional and the charges were dropped. A lot of people do not understand how US laws are actually implemented. The Legislative and Executive branches can propose or sponsor new laws or changes to existing laws. During this process both branches rely on in-house legal teams to review the legality of the new or changed law. The real test of legality does not take place until the law in question is actually enforced. Once the law is applied to someone the defendant can argue the legality of the law in the local, state, and federal court system with the Supreme court getting the final word.
Like they coronated her in 2008?
No, in 2008, the coronated Obama. It was so bad that SNL did a sketch on it.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Ron Paul is 79. He may be in good health, but he doesn't look physically robust. I don't think he's up for the effort.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
There is no person is either house of Congress, nor the Supreme Court, nor department heads, who is not continuously under investigation by the Obama administration. The result is extortion ( Justice Robert's vote on Obamacare ) or publicity (refer to the Petraeus case.).
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
So you are the one, the only, "Anonymous Coward". I can use any quote under that heading against you. Too easy.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
He's winning the money primary, which is the only one that really matters.
Well, there's the problem, isn't it? It just doesn't matter that folks in the US think when it comes to US elections. The decisions are always made for us long before election day.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The public is moving inexorably toward acceptance of gay marriage.
Check the historical data:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/117...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Amen. Surely more of a 'State of Emergency' than some sorry-ass hurricane. Oh yeah, and see about finding a President who'd veto this kind of shit, maybe roll back some of those perpetual declared emergencies too. Oops, that was Ron Paul. Better luck next time.
We should also give thought to those presently employed in these industries to ensure there is a safety net of retraining and placement. With a basic course in Constitutional Law and Civics. Those who do not score well might take advantage of the porous national borders, seek their fortunes in El Salvador or Mexico.
___
Things have got to change, But first, you gotta get mad!
NSA and the Desolation of Smaug
I am Sam. Uncle Sam I am.
I really hated Men In Black
Am I the first to suggest... BLACKMAIL??
Sherlock Holmes: training wheels for NSA surveillance
Stick a fork in the Republic, it's done. HR4681/309 [failed submission]
The backbone, then [1980s] and now
Whatever happened to the 'old' NSA? Directive 18?
Last Wish (aka The Pact)
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
McCarthy investigated mostly people outside congress, and a law (I don't recall the act name) was passed in response to his witch hunt. Congress critters cannot be prosecuted for performing normal legislative actions. i.e. proposing bills to repeal other bills.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
THAT is why is should have read:
Patriot act to be repealed?
That was a quick path to Godwin's Law. Congrats.
"Being alive is a crock of shit." --Kilgore Trout
... in the last election the powers of greed tried to elect someone who was neither conservative nor liberal but really a direct representative of the 1%. They spent 3 to 4 times as much money, made people stand in 4 hour lines to vote, maximally gerrymandered every district they could...
While your underlying perception is largely correct, your supporting argiments are not. You need to understand the system more if you want to be convincing,
Of particular note is bringing up gerrymandering. In virtually all the states the electoral college votes are chosen in a statewide, popular-vote, winner-take-all contest. Gerrymandering doesn't affect this at all. (Which is good for the Republicans, as the Democrats have been far more effective at it.)
As for spending: With the support of labor unions and the media empires, the Democrats get massive, uncounted, campaign subsidies, while the Republicans mostly have to pay for their own propaganda directly..
The big exception to that is Fox News: But IMHO they, and the party establishment, are what lost for the Rs the last time around. Fox was blatantly pure Neocon (the faction of Romney, the R establishment, and the 1%ers,) The primaries are where the parties' candidates are chosen. Fox's hilariously biased reporting and the R establishments massive (and often violent) cheating, alienated the supporters of Ron Paul, to the point that they would not support him - virtually to a man - and also alienated many Rs who observed this circus. Romney lost five states by margins smaller than the number of people who voted for Paul in primaries and caucuses. Had they not done this, Romney might still have won the nomination honestly, and received eJ.nough votes to swing those states.
So, yes, their money didn't buy them the election. But IMHO what really lost it was intra-party behavior so corrupt that major factions of the party's voters decided they could not be allowed to have control of the government's levers of power - even if the alternative was an exceptionally effective, avowedly-Communist, Chicago-Machine politician
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
People can see the real danger that terrorist pose. However, they fail to see the real threat that a fully surveilled society poses. The 'control' that the nazi occupation had on it's society will pale in comparison. I'm not trying to be an alarmist by saying that, I'm not saying the control over the population will be used the same way, I'm saying that the control will be much stronger and harder to fight if it were ever needed.
People say that they have nothing to fear because they aren't doing anything wrong. While they may not be doing something wrong by today's measures, that may not always be the case. If you keep giving and giving controls to elites, it will in all likely hood, one day be illegal to speak negatively about the elites. After all they don't want anything threatening their power. If after something like that does occur, and things aren't where they want them, why not take care of anyone who's ever spoken out against someone in power in the past.
People like to think this is far fetched, but we are already taking steps to get there. Right now, you say anything threatening about them or you'll find yourself in a heap of trouble. Even if it's obviously light hearted and not at all serious. Gradually the definition of what is 'threatening' is changing. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see that one day it could be threatening to say anything negative at all about the people in control.
To preserve freedom, there has to be an avenue for decent. Just because 'I have nothing to hide' doesn't mean that I want the avenues for decent to be closed. That's the scariest part to me. When there is no possibility of decent, there is no end to the possibilities of human abuse on the largest scales ever known to mankind. Our world is full, there will be no where to run, there would be no way to get there if there was a place. If there were such a place, they would be able to quickly find you. There would be no chance of a large enough group to get together to help put things back in balance.
I watched the original Red Dawn a few months ago, and while I was watching it, I thought to myself, the resistance that the young guys put up would not be possible with today's technology. Simply with drones and infrared cameras it would have been game over. Add into that the lockheed martin laser that was up on slashdot a few weeks ago that could zap a truck engine from a mile away...
I'm not saying that the powers that be will ever force these kinds of control over the masses, but why wouldn't they... if there was nothing to stop them? They've proven their scrupulousness time and time again. I just don't have that much faith in them to say 'go head and spy on me, I've got nothing to hide'.
The patriot act, like so much else, doesn't need to be repealed. It comes up for annual vote like sho many other things. âoeDo we keep it?", âoeDo we fund it?"... If they wanted to get rid of it, all they need to do is say no when this happens. They don't do this.
I see you couldn't own up you fucking bitch. You're an asshole.
Jeb is a long way from being nominated.
Well, who do they have so far?
Ted Cruz? He's a male Palin.
Lindsey Graham? I'd be surprised if he ran, but that might shake things up in an interesting way.
Rand Paul? Too extreme; I'm pretty sure I'd never be able to follow a devotee of Ayn Rand.
Chris Christie? Maybe. Not exactly a uniter, is he?
Donald Trump? Great great fodder for late-night comedians, a joke all around.
Rick Perry? I kindof like the guy, but he had his chance in 2012 and blew it in the debates. Then again, Nixon had his chance and blew it against Kennedy, so maybe there could be life here yet.
Scott Walker? He plays well in ultra-conservative states because he busts unions. No appeal outside of that. What a mistake the Republican Party would make to nominate that guy.
Carly Fiorina? Completely failed as a CEO, couldn't get elected as a senator in her home state. A presidential campaign would be a real hail mary. I don't see the upside here.
Marco Rubio? Maaaaaybe.
Mike Pence? Not after the month he's had.
Rick Santorum? Never in a million years.
There -are- a number of folks that few people have heard of before, it remains to be seen if any of them get any traction.
Like they coronated her in 2008?
Point taken, but there's no Barack Obama waiting in the wings. He burst onto the scene with the very well regarded keynote in 2004, and I haven't seen any Democratic candidate create that sort of a splash. Maybe Elizabeth Warren, but she's formally declined to run.
Look who has declared so far for the Democratic Party: Jeff Boss (conspiracy theorist), Vermin Supreme (performance artist), and Robby Wells (former football coach). Wow.
I think Biden has little chance. Bernie Sanders, maybe. Jim Webb, perhaps.