Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Patriot Act author ‘extremely troubled’ by NSA phone tracking
Senator Rand Paul: NSA phone spying an ‘astounding assault on Constitution’
Senators: NSA phone sweeping has been going on since 2007
Senator Graham 'glad' NSA is collecting phone records
Sometimes I've supported the whole "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." analogy, but in this case I have to disagree with Graham.
Now because of the specific time frame involved with when they are screening the calls, it's rather obvious that there's something specific the NSA and FBI are looking for, so there is a legitimate reason for why they are monitoring the calls, but I don't feel that's a tool they should be allowed to have in their arsenal unless they have a specific number they want to collect information on, as opposed to "all calls"
Perhaps we'll finally stop this "Democrats are saints and Republicans are card carrying dog rapists" and acknowledge that ALL politicians don't give a shit about the rights of the people.
This Gestapo crap really needs to meet a swift and decisive end.
EDIT: When Chick-Fil-A's founder had the gall to say he didn't agree with the homosexual lifestyle, everyone was quick to "boycott".
I wonder if people will find the outrage at this clear stretching, if not outright exceeding, of government rights to boycott Verizon or heavily petition the government.
edited 6th Jun '13 10:57:49 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor
"not all polticians give a shit" or "no politicians give a shit"?
Also, I don't know, only a few here are all "democrats can do no harm" and stuff. They only lie half as much, though; that's a fact.
Either way, don't fall into the fallacy of grey "We're all gray, And so are you!" There's such a thing as nuance.
edited 6th Jun '13 11:00:14 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.To be fair, it may be a court order to Verizon, they might not have a choice.
Now I'm not saying that if they HAD the choice, they wouldn't play ball. I'm sure Verizon was like "Ok, sure, whatever. We'll do it." But being the high level order that it is and with the Patriot Act invoked, I'm not sure that they have that option. It's almost like some sort of weird subpoena-in-advance.
Politicians aren't some disconnected subspecies separate from the human race. They're just a group of people self-selected for traits like ideological motivation, personal/familial wealth, contacts, fundraising ability and public speaking ability. If we look at them and see the lot of them as selfish assholes, well... look in the mirror.
The idea that all politicians are evil is rooted in the beast-starving strategy wherein all government cuts are good because, surely, anyone who doesn't work in government must be a bloody saint compared to the average politician or bureaucrat. And yet as we see in our business landscape, that idea does not play out well in practice.
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.re: Verizon - I don't suggest boycotting them to punish Verizon, but causing a big financial hit to a company, would cause cell companies and politicians to reconsider their plans.
re: Nuance - Some of politicians are good people, yes. Some care about the people, yes. ALL of them care first about being reelected and staying in office. The crusaders who don't care and care only about making a difference, usually don't stay in office long.
I can't really argue with that.
edited 6th Jun '13 11:12:18 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorI think the part that most of us should be unhappy with is that DC is so caught up in the games of fund-raising and "How many elected people do we have versus them" that they don't actually focus on doing their jobs in any meaningful way. What should be their primary job(governing our country) has became secondary to their own little secondary version of "The Game of Thrones" going on in the Rotunda. It's become about shoring up their influence and lessening the other sides, and their elected positions are just the medium that they do it from, which means they aren't doing their jobs effectively and are completely missing the point.
It's kind of like how a few decades ago, military contracting for gear and technology was about making other people compete to give the military a great deal on good gear, which is why we have so many awesome things that were built around the 60's that we still use. Now instead of giving an emphasis on the deal and how it works for us, it's become a game of "How much money can we shove down the throats of Boeing, Lockheed, Grumman, Raytheon, and Halliburton, in exchange for the least amount of work that they have to spend money on in the front end?" The original point of the entire endeavor has been completely lost.
That Yes Minister clip was disturbingly hilarious.
Wildcard hits the nail on the head. There's a Babylon Five quote from Captain/President John Sheridan I find highly relevant to this, "If more of our so-called leaders would walk the same streets as the people who voted them in, live in the same buildings, eat the same food instead of hiding behind glass and steel and bodyguards maybe we would get better leadership and a little more concern for the future."
edited 6th Jun '13 11:35:49 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor@Barkey: I agree with all that, but at the same time, I don't think it's a problem by itself so much as it is a very visible symptom of a much bigger problem.
When you look at the economy as a whole, you see the largest and most powerful companies making a profit in the most efficient short term way possible. If you hurt your customers or your employees (the business equivalent of constituents), who cares? In politics, it's simply the same. It's not about doing your job well, it's about making money and insuring your immediate continued superiority in the next tax quarter/political term.
This is a society-wide problem that I believe largely is from us idolizing financial success and the notion of self-determination, and turning a blind eye to the problems that accompany them, and this requires society-wide solutions to fix. You cannot fix the government without fixing the people who vote for it. Even if you manage a quick fix through legislation, if the voters are still stupid or selfish, they'll just vote in more stupid or selfish politicians next time and undo all that hard work.
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.^
I'm the opposite, I'd probably end up voting for a Republican Party that moved towards the center a bit more and stopped letting the jesus-freaks hijack it.
Be at least neutral on abortion and gay marriage, stay pro-gun, and simmer down a bit on letting corporations bend us over as much, and I'd vote for em.
The problem Midget is that it seems everyone's definition of less evil varies. Less evil, to me, seems to mean "they support my pet causes, hence they're more right."
I mean it's great that Obama is all gung-ho for gay rights and Joe Biden does "It Gets Better" videos.
But here they are overseeing gross civil liberties violations. I'm not sure how "less evil" that really is.
It was an honor

I have no problem with specific warrants for a person's phone records. But this seems like it is going a little far.
Also, there is another side to the story: Verizon is able to comply with the order. I would rather have some sort of government oversight of that sort of personal data than it just sitting in a Company's databanks with no real limit on what they do with it. Though that is not what is happening here.
In other words, I'm glad the info was leaked and want to hear the "why" before I make any judgements. Though I'm not so happy about the timing... Obama doesn't need another distraction right now. Who wants to bet that the media/conservatives will let a couple of "current issues that should not really be issues" fade for a while and focus on this?
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!