I guess they voted on some new revision to this thing yesterday. I believe this new revision would have allowed the spying that the current administration has been doing on citizens for the last 8 years of so OK (warrantless wiretapping and such I believe.)
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]And the Demo controlled Congress just can’t grok why their approval rating just hit single digit status - 9%.[/quote]Bunk. Still a shitty approval rating, but bunk nonetheless.
Swallow your tongue, go comatose, commune with the Old Ones, and try to grok again.
I just wish I knew what was going on. Nothing makes sense to me anymore. We’re up to our eyeballs in incompetence, duplicity, fecklessness and stupidity and nobody knows why or how it’s ever going to end.
I pointed out to Fred Smith a few weeks back on this topic, that comparing the rights of other countries to America is also worth doing (most are far worse). Apparently back in England, we are the most under surveillance, anywhere in the world. The more technology develops, the easier it is to follow what people are doing. The potential for abuse must be huge.
I also fully agree with failure from the top is the most disappointing, whether it is awarding China the Olympics and promises are made and broken, what kind of example does this set? Corrupt, money grabbing politicians, breaking every rule to get elected, watching our environment deteriorate in exchange for party funds from the businesses paying for protection from laws that would require them to clean their act up, for example.
Edit/ Also, while we should not expect anything magical to come out of The Pirate Bay, they recently said [ The Pirate Bay Wants To Encrypt The Entire Internet] . Hard disk encrytion is now becoming more popular (not just password protected), with many laptop companies building this in as a feature. If theoretically its possible to encrypt all internet activities, as the Pirate Bay suggest, and they have a long track record of playing these legal games and are on the cutting edge of the technology, there may be hope yet.
New polling suggests that approval ratings for Washington lawmakers have hit rock bottom. This poll of 1,000 likely voters reveals that only 9% give Congress a good or excellent rating. This is the first time that we can recall when Congress’ approval ratings have dipped into single digits.[/url]
[quote=“Jaboney”]Swallow your tongue, go comatose, commune with the Old Ones, and try to grok again.[/quote]LOL…witty…in a hockey puck addled kind of way.
Yeah I think the secret’s out (if it ever was a secret) that we don’t really have a two-party legislature on all but a few issues like abortion which in the end are of no consequence to the fortitude of our system of government. Health care is perhaps a solid exception due to the fact that old people are a crucial voting block and this is the ticket to their vote. What we do have is a rubber stamping mechanism for policies generated almost wholly in the interest of corporate entities.
"Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) noted that, “We’re considering granting immunity when roughly 70 members of the Senate still have not been briefed on the president’s wiretapping program. The vast majority of this body still does not even know what we’re being asked to grant immunity for.”
That’s absolutely disgusting.
In any case our only hope is that the judicial system strikes this nonsense down as unconstitutional. Which I guess would just force the cronies on Capital Hill to amend the constitution. Maybe those words would be enough to get the American people’s attention?
Obama has proven himself to be anything but an instrument of change, which is sad. I want my $50 back.
[quote=“spook”]Congress has such low approval ratings because:
A. It’s not caving into President Bush and his agenda enough?
B. It’s rolling over and playing dead for one of the most unpopular presidents in the nation’s history?
Go ahead, TC, take your best shot.[/quote]Spook -
Shot at what?
You make a wildly specious claim.
Followed by another hysterical allegation.
Then You post a graph that has nothing to do with the comments.
There is already a Bush-bashing thread…go there.
edit added:
Back on topic…
Bush signs bill overhauling eavesdropping rules “WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush signed a bill Thursday that overhauls rules about government eavesdropping and grants immunity to telecommunications companies that helped the U.S. spy on Americans in suspected terrorism cases.”
“Its passage was a major victory for Bush, an unpopular lame-duck president who nevertheless has been able to prevail over Congress on most issues of national security and intelligence disputes.”
[quote=“TainanCowboy”][quote=“spook”]Congress has such low approval ratings because:
A. It’s not caving into President Bush and his agenda enough?
B. It’s rolling over and playing dead for one of the most unpopular presidents in the nation’s history?
Go ahead, TC, take your best shot.[/quote]Spook -
Shot at what?
You make a wildly specious claim.
Followed by another hysterical allegation.
Then You post a graph that has nothing to do with the comments.
There is already a Bush-bashing thread…go there.[/quote]
Go ahead. Deny the obvious. The only one you’re fooling though is yourself.
[quote=“spook”][quote=“TainanCowboy”][quote=“spook”]Congress has such low approval ratings because:
A. It’s not caving into President Bush and his agenda enough?
B. It’s rolling over and playing dead for one of the most unpopular presidents in the nation’s history?
Go ahead, TC, take your best shot.[/quote]Spook -
Shot at what?
You make a wildly specious claim.
Followed by another hysterical allegation.
Then You post a graph that has nothing to do with the comments.
There is already a Bush-bashing thread…go there.[/quote]
Go ahead. Deny the obvious. The only one you’re fooling though is yourself.[/quote]
what puzzles me is that peoples seem to think that if the law isn’t voted then privacy will be maintained…what? like the agencies doing wiretapping WILL de facto ask for permission before eavesdropping?
don’t kid yourselves, if the power that be WANTS to listen or find out anything about you they will
all monitoring ever starts without warrant, an application for that will be made only if said monitoring reveals there is something valuable,so as to make the evidence acceptable in courts.
[quote=“dablindfrog”]what puzzles me is that peoples seem to think that if the law isn’t voted then privacy will be maintained…what? like the agencies doing wiretapping WILL de facto ask for permission before eavesdropping?
don’t kid yourselves, if the power that be WANTS to listen or find out anything about you they will
all monitoring ever starts without warrant, an application for that will be made only if said monitoring reveals there is something valuable,so as to make the evidence acceptable in courts.[/quote]
Wow, you sound even more cynical about government behavior than I am, DBF.
Would you say, then, that the whole mechanism of having search warrants is basically a waste of time?
depends from which perspective,i’m sure there are a lot of souls within the law enforcement who would say yes, but naturally the answer should be no.
search warrants are a good way of keeping a tight leash on over zealous agents, but in the case discussed hereby, it seems we are talking of telephone and internet eavesdropping, which is pretty much impossible to detect from the user point of view.
search warrants can protect citizens because house/car searches are physical,whereas electronic type isn’t,hence doesn’t require such documentation
[quote=“dablindfrog”]depends from which perspective,I’m sure there are a lot of souls within the law enforcement who would say yes, but naturally the answer should be no.
search warrants are a good way of keeping a tight leash on over zealous agents, but in the case discussed hereby, it seems we are talking of telephone and internet eavesdropping, which is pretty much impossible to detect from the user point of view.
search warrants can protect citizens because house/car searches are physical,whereas electronic type isn’t,hence doesn’t require such documentation[/quote]
Interesting. I think I see where you are going there. If I understand you, it sounds like the physical/electronic distinction is important not so much in and of itself, but as a proxy for the “easy to detect/hard to detect” distinction. So, for example, a physical search of a home or car could also be done without a warrant, so long as the police did it when the owner wasn’t around, carefully put everything back where they found it, and otherwise ensured that they weren’t discovered, right?
