Marco Rubio: We Need To Add To US Surveillance Programs (dailydot.com)
Patrick O'Neill writes: The debate over surveillance hit the 2016 race for the White House again on Sunday when Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio said he wants to add to American surveillance programs, many of which were created after 9/11. He invoked a recent shooting of a Philadelphia police officer by a man who allegedly pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. "This the kind of threat we now face in this country," Rubio said. "We need additional tools for intelligence." Rubio also addressed the NSA leaks that led to this debate: "Edward Snowden is a traitor. He took our intelligence information and gave it to the Chinese and gave it to the Russians. We cannot afford to have a commander-in-chief who thinks people like Edward Snowden are doing a good public service."
People like like Marco Rubio, who think that any and every threat of violence is an excuse to make nearly omniscient government through every and any possible means of government, be president. He talks a game about reducing government. If/When the government attains the power he is talking about, then what's to stop it from using the power for other "unintended" purposes. He's a politician, he should know all about power creep. And he calls himself a conservative. I am tired of these people who claim to be conservative, complaining about big government, and then turning out to be power-hungry hypocrites.
captcha:tactics
Coming out strong in favor of surveillance is a bad idea. It's true that recent polls have shown the majority of Americans favor surveillance of 'suspicious people,' but among the people I've talked to, most are indifferent, some are ok with it, and a sizeable minority vehemently oppose it (this is something that I've found on both the conservative and liberal side. Whether you think "Bush is Hitler" or "Obama is trampling the constitution," spying is something you can appreciate as bad). Of the people who absolutely favor surveillance, even those understand that abusing it can be bad.
So he's coming out with something that few people are strongly in favor of, but a sizeable minority strongly opposes. Something like that is a political loser.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Advocating the need for more tools while making yourself sound like a tool--it's an interesting strategy. Let's see how it works out for him ...
Remember how Hitler was able to suspend civil liberties in Germany? On February 27, 1933 Reichstag building was burned, which found to be an arson. This led Hitler to accuse communists of the terrorism, and he got Hinderburg to pass an emergency decree to suspend civil liberties. Of course, Germany was in shock and most of the smart educated Germans really thought that this action would protect them from the terrorist threat of communists and anarchists.
That's how Hitler was able to come to power. He came on the power of the fear of the masses, willing to suspend their civil liberties in return for security.
Trump - blowhard asshole
Cruz - scary blowhard asshole
Rubio - no concept of privacy
Clinton - unindicted felon
Bush - aww hell no
Christie - not considered corrupt only by comparison to New Jersey
Fiorina - Enriches herself by firing people
Sanders is the only one out there who makes any sense, and he's an unabashed Socialist!
> And he calls himself a conservative. I am tired of these people who claim to be conservative, complaining about big government, and then turning out to be power-hungry hypocrites.
I've made that point calling conservative talk radio, and I called and said that to my House representative when he visited the local radio station. I hope you and others do the same.
I don't see much choice for you unless you plan to vote for Gary Johnson in the general. Hilliary's words and deeds have made it painful clear she is in about the same place on this issue. Sanders will not get the nomination and won't run as an independent.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Do these people actually go out there and actually talk to real people.
Yes. Thousands of them. At least 100 million Americans, maybe more, agree with Rubio on this. Those people don't post on any of the same web forums that you or I do, but they exist and they vote.
Why does he has to be Republican? Or Democrat? Have you not understood after all these elections that that does not matter?
They are all the same party, basically.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Um, no we don't.
I've always wondered how conservatives can justify to themselves their vigorous defense of the rights granted under the Second Amendment, but seem far less concerned with those granted under the First and Fourth.
Sanders will not get the nomination
Why are you so sure? The polls in Iowa and NH show him even with Clinton (within the margin of error).
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Obama wiping his ass with The Second Amendment sure shows what he thinks of the civil rights of US citizens.
You're the confused one. Obama has been the best gun salesman ever. Every time he says the word 'gun', thousands fly off shelves. You think this isn't part of a well coordinated plan? How do you think Obama plans to support his retirement? Social Security? Remember, he's pretty young yet. His presidential pardon is just pocket change.
I bet that he is heavily invested in Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger....
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Lobbyists. You really want to ensure no bullshit is happening, track every single registered lobbyist.
Those guys are doing FAR more to undermine your government by ensuring that corporate interests take precedence over everything else.
The ones writing checks are also writing policy.
The Copyright cartel (which is mostly multinational corporations) practically write laws and trade agreements for the US government these days, and the government is largely on the payroll of corporate interests.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Even moreso for those who say "We need our guns to protect against the government" while also saying "We need more government surveillance to protect against the terrorists." You're making the exact government you're claiming to need guns to protect against!
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
What is it with US politics. Do these people actually go out there and actually talk to real people.
Not really, no. And many of the ones they do talk to are fairly hysterical, racist, fearful and dumb. The republican base in the last few years seems to be particularly panicky and nuts. Used to be that the republicans were pragmatic economically and had a wing of the party where the kooks hung out that could be safely ignored. Now the tail is waging the dog and the religious nuts and the tea party loonies have gained enough power that they can't be ignored anymore. Combined with gerrymandered voting districts we've had both parties (but especially the republicans) getting more extreme for the last 10-15 years. If a politician isn't "pure" enough for their party they never make it out of the primary election.
Is the fear mongering that effective that people are actually wanting this?
Short answer? Sadly, yes.
Long answer? We've got a lot of dumb, fearful people who are religious bigots and racists. They'll vote for anything that gives them a way to act on these us vs them tribal fears and the mechanisms to keep the politicians from responding to these idiots are broken or badly damaged.
All this talk of spending more in surveillance and military makes me sick. Education is where money needs to be spent. Local infrastructure, innovation...
I couldn't not agree more. Education, infrastructure, research, clean energy, etc are badly needed. A larger military and surveillance state is not. We're borrowing to pay for a military that is way larger than we need and an inefficient and badly designed health care system.
Progressives don't want HillaryClinton. They want Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
hile Trump would randomize everything
Trump is Pandora's box, please leave it closed, please.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Why? It's cool to insult him, but better to give reasons. Insults without reasons are a waste of a post.
Point taken.
Hey, Rubio! I am not, even the least little bit, so scared of "teh terrorists" that I am willing to let you and the rest of our government take away my right to privacy. No. Shut up and listen. I am not scared. If I am, the terrorists win. If you assume I am, the terrorists win. If you're just using the terrorists as an excuse to grab power for your corporate masters, the corporations win. In no case is this good for me, so start acting like the elected official you claim that you want to be and represent the interests of the people or get the fuck off the stage.