Slashdot Mirror
Jeb Bush Comes Out Against Encryption
An anonymous reader writes: Presidential candidate Jeb Bush has called on tech companies to form a more "cooperative" arrangement with intelligence agencies. During a speech in South Carolina, Bush made clear his opinion on encryption: "If you create encryption, it makes it harder for the American government to do its job — while protecting civil liberties — to make sure that evildoers aren't in our midst." He also indicated he felt the recent scaling back of the Patriot Act went too far. Bush says he hasn't seen any indication the bulk collection of phone metadata violated anyone's civil liberties.
Jebby is a a RINO a best and most likely a New World Order statist.
I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire...
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
The right wing is severely splintered. There's the establishment side and there's the libertarian side.
Not really. The only "libertarian" candidate is Rand Paul, and he is polling around 4%. His dad peaked at 10% eight years ago, so support for the authoritarians has actually gone up.
The only "libertarian" candidate is Rand Paul
http://time.com/3759378/rand-paul-defense-spending/
His amendment would add $76.5 billion to the defense budget
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/09/3381381/rand-paul-gas-exports/
"I would immediately get every obstacle out of the way for our export of oil and gas, and I would begin drilling in every possible conceivable place within our territories in order to have production we can supply Europe with if it’s interrupted from Ukraine."
Here is a "libertarian" suggesting government involvement in the market on a scale never before attempted. He's the exact opposite of a "libertarian"
“As someone who voted against the Patriot Act and opposed its reauthorization, I have long been concerned about out-of-control intelligence agencies.
“At a time when the American people are outraged by government attacks on our constitutional rights, the president’s proposal is a step forward. We must, however, go further. Ending the bulk collection of phone records of virtually all Americans – 99.999 percent of whom have nothing to do with terrorism – is important. The president should end that program now, not 90 days from now. We also must also make sure that the government isn’t harvesting records on our emails and other Internet activity except in instances where there are specific reasons to suspect wrongdoing.
“Our intelligence and law enforcement agencies must be given the tools they need to protect us, but that can be done in a way that does not sacrifice our constitutional rights. If we allow the government to see all of what we read, what we watch and what we hear, then we cannot be called a free society.”
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/...
Hmm...let's see...Obama, Feinstein, Napolitano, Holder...a lot of them, actually.
We could do worse than Trump... But.... We could do a LOT better too. I sure hope Trump get's tired of spending his money on this side show pretty soon...
The summary nature of voting on legislature (yea, nay, abstain) puts an upper bound on the amount of damage a bad congressman can do.
Essentially, there are a finite number of times any congressman can vote on an issue. If they vote against the interests of the people every time, they've reached maximum damage.
The same can be said of presidents (pass, veto, pocket-veto, &c.).
Few issues are black-and-white: most laws are some percent good for the people and some percent bad. The two issues I can find that are closest to 100% bad for the people are H1B Visas and the Patriot and USA Freedom acts.
H1B visas take jobs away from Americans and allow corporations to impose misery on the imported workers, and the Patriot act and related violates our rights and makes us less safe (by diverting resources away from effective strategies like intelligence gathering).
The relevant votes are shown below. The government doesn't care about our rights, and it doesn't care whether we have jobs. It has reached maximum damage.
Trump might be the worst president we've ever had, but at this point in time, he's not *guaranteed* to be the worst.
USA Freedom Act (Senate)
YEAs: 67 (D = 43, R = 23, I = 1)
NAYs: 32 (D = 1, R = 30, I = 1)
Not voting: 1 (R)
USA Freedom Act (House)
https://www.govtrack.us/congre...
YEAs: 67 (D = 124, R = 179, I = 1)
NAYs: 32 (D = 70, R = 51, I = 1)
Not voting: 2 (R) 5(D)
Increase H1B Visas (Senate)
https://www.govtrack.us/congre...
YEAs: 67 (D = 52, R = 14, I = 2)
NAYs: 32 (D = 0, R = 32, I = 0)
Actually, they weren't trying to eliminate encryption - just limit its strength. Yes, they were trying to implement restrictions as per the ITAR on strong encryption. They were up in arms over PGP being outside of their control. They were trying to force the Clipper encryption chip and Skipjack down our throats. And, Gore was the guy who was pushing these things for the administration with the urging of the 3 letter acronym organization.
Encryption, in the US, would have remained. Clipper, embedded into everything would have allowed law enforcement to decrypt communications using, supposedly, a warrant to obtain the "Law Enforcement Access Field (LEAF)" that would then have allowed the recovery of the encryption key. It probably should have been called the "Law Enforcement Access Key" (wait..that spells LEAK...can't have that). A vulnerability was discovered that enabled a hacker to encrypt communications while bypassing the generation of the LEAF key. That derailed the entire project and Clipper died in 1996.
Yes, I still have my "Sink Clipper" tee shirt from the RSA Data Security conference from back when they were actually trusted.