I was worried about it being used "against you"
This was my attempt to move away from partisanship, yet it seems to always yo-yo back to Trump/Obama. Oh well, I tried.
Not you. Others in the post.
If you are not worried that is OK, I've got your back.
Surveillence is your specialty
The most common response I get when bemoaning NSA surveillance is, "if you don't commit a crime you have nothing to worry about". I think that is a dangerously naive or apathetic attitude. The collection and retention of this data represents a seismic shift in power - away from citizens and into the hands of government.
Remember, our Constitution demands that government be transparent and accountable to the people, not the other way around. History has shown that powerful, secret surveillance tools will almost certainly be abused for political ends.
something else we agree on
How would you even know?
to the point.
I'm all for a degree of privacy but our world is constantly changing with all the technology impacting our daily lives.
We may claim we don't want surveillance conducted on us, but who is the worst offender of our privacy? Everyone with a smart phone and a love of posting what they capture to the internet.
What are those on the left cheering about the most lately? The private conversation Trump had in a locker room. You can't have it both ways. Those who say they demand an expectation of privacy are some of the loudest in condoning reveling information about those they don't like.
Then there are all the security cameras, by both government and private sectors. Do we cheer when a robbery suspect at a 7-11 is captured on video and later arrested, but condemn the security foot of a rioter as invasion of privacy? Where should the line be drawn?
I see both sides and have mixed feelings.
Lol, this is hilarious
1. This wasn't a super private conversation in a locker room like you inaccurately portray; it was on a set of a TV show amongst other people where he KNEW mics would be around and near by because.... it's a TV show set.
Sure, it's a private conversation but quite different than the Gov't watching my moves as I walk around the street expecting my own privacy and not consenting to be on any camera or mic.
Also when it's a conversation where the president supports a crime (sexual assault, shouldn't the country have the right to know?:)
I guess you don't have any daughters. I can't imagine a guy talking about groping/grabbing mine. (It seems as though Conservatives would have no problems with this through, strangely...)
2. If you're talking about video of a robbery suspect, then chances are you mean the camera is of private use... taken on private property in a store.....
Again, quite different than the Gov't using tax payer money to able to watch possibly any move I make.
Nice try though, try again? :)
We all know that if Obama was the president in this, the Conservatives would be screaming at the top of their longs about gov't interference and the big brother tracking us.
Plus... throw in a bit about Obama being Muslim and Kenyan born and there, I also have you guys in a nutshell.
Killed two birds with one stone in this :)
Are you really surprised by the Conservative hypocrisy?
Imagine if Obama tAlked about women and how you can "grab em' by the pus**"
They'd want him impeached and charged ASAP!
Are you really this simple minded?
All governments represent their citizens, or at least enough to enforce the policies on the rest. If it were not so, they would refuse to support the regime. It is enough to stand in the streets and shout, as has happened in several countries in recent years. If the officials seem corrupt, it is because they correctly represent a corrupt electorate.
I agree. No citizen wishes to have their private conversations or public ones, listened in on.
Doesnt there have to be probable cause and a warrent for that. That was always the law in the padt
Given the environment right after 9/11 it's not surprising that something like the Patriot Act would be enacted. The problem is that we are still tolerating it.
The government should not be allowed to collect mass communications data on many of it's citizens without a warrant.
This is my biggest problem with the Obama administration. He did a total 180 on mass surveillance.
Not surprisingly those people see no problem with the current administration support of Russia
Good relations? Not a problem. Condoning hacking of our political system? Not so good. Supporting a regime that probably fixed elections in Crimea? Pretty bad. Getting cozy with a country that warned us not to set up safe zones in Syria? I think not.
If we want good relationship with Russia we need to hold them accountable for hacking DNC and DCCC. We need to make it clear that our efforts to support humanitarian efforts in the middle east is not up for debate.
The US sucks. Doesn't me we should ignore others who suck too.
The truth, at its core, is that nobody can trust anyone else. The likelihood of someone betraying you is astronomically high compared to the opposite because they will get more out of it. Therefore, the more somebody else (no matter who) knows about you, the more information is in the hands of an enemy. You need to be able to protect yourself and that sure as hell extends to threats you are not even aware of.
On the other hand, the N.S.A. has my complete and utter support. Just not to these ends.