Egocentric Bastards...

[dman11235]

Me?  I'm arguing that the invasion of privacy is wrong, whether it comes from a corporation or the government.  I'm also stating that my opinion is that I have a bigger problem with corporations doing it than the government, but the government is still wrong.  I'm also arguing that everyone yelling at the government for doing it needs to be yelling at corporations more because corporations are doing more in depth (and thus worse) privacy invasions.  And finally, I'm making sure that what people are yelling at the government for is something the government is actually doing, and making sure that the anger is directed at the responsible parties, not those just tangentially involved.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

It is important to note that what the NSA is doing is NOT tapping your calls or communications.  They are tracking the metadata.  No content is being looked at.

In USA citizen to In USA citizen , they still officially need a warrant.
Unofficially  they have the info, they dump it into those
MetaData centers.  Then yes they keep the metadata , and they
"discard" the primary data.  (singsong voice --- no they don't)

In USA citizen to Out-of-country USA citizen = they got your stuff.
In USA citizen to In USA non-citizen = they got your stuff.
Out-of-USA non-citizen to Out-of-USA non-citizen and routed via
standard internet packet protocalls via USA = surprise they got your stuff.

Now, you can still argue this is wrong, but (and I shudder that I'm actually saying this) Michele Bachman was right, use the facts, not an exaggeration to debate the issue.

  ... yeah a Stopped But Ringing Alarm Clock is right once (or twice) a day. 
Still oh so annoying.  At least she might get busted for something else soon.

[Amechra]

In the cold light of... the afternoon, I'll have to say this:

I'm just rememberin' seeing somewhere that there is a soft cap on how many people a given person can give a shit about.

And that is why we can't have good government/corporations. Because the people running them subconsciously don't think of us as people, just like we don't think they are people.

I now wonder how different it would be if you found that your good friend Eve was watching your calls.

[bhu]

@bhu: my point was that the government's primary goal is not the same as a corporations, so it is unfair to treat a government as a corporation.  I was ignoring corruption that you're speaking of because that just moves the goalposts.  If a government is actually doing what it's supposed to do (which I do believe a good bit of the US government is doing, most of this on a more local level than federal) then it's not screwing people over but helping the citizens.  A corporation, even one whose stated goal is helping people, is primarily focused on making money and will screw people over even if they are helping them.  Because that's how capitalism works.

Both governments and corps have the goal of making money, the corps are just more open about it.  In theory a corp is about making money for it's investors, but in practice a lot of the time it's there to make money for some small group of frauds and extortionists.  Or it's bought by an investor who plans to make money off it's destruction or being carved up and sold.  The governments stated goals are obviously different, but in practice problems never get solved, things just get rearranged to line the pockets of whoever is in power at the time. Stated goals have no meaning, actions taken do.  For example lets say I wish to all but ban abortion in Texas, and my stated position is that abortion is immoral.  I'm taking action to fulfill my promises and stated goals.  But if it's later revealed that one of my family members is a lobbyist in the medical field and stands to make millions off the deal, was I really fulfilling a stated goal, or was I cynically pretending to while lining my families pockets? 

The US government isn't about governance it's about control.  Two squabbling tribal factions vying for control of power and purse strings while letting the country burn, because they're rich enough to leave and start over once nothing is left.

[Jackinthegreen]

I dearly wish we could get rid of the First Past The Post system, but two-party politics is so deeply ingrained in the US profile that I don't expect it'll ever come to pass.

[dman11235]

Both governments and corps have the goal of making money, the corps are just more open about it.  In theory a corp is about making money for it's investors, but in practice a lot of the time it's there to make money for some small group of frauds and extortionists.

Right, what you just described are the investors.

The governments stated goals are obviously different, but in practice problems never get solved, things just get rearranged to line the pockets of whoever is in power at the time. Stated goals have no meaning, actions taken do.  For example lets say I wish to all but ban abortion in Texas, and my stated position is that abortion is immoral.  I'm taking action to fulfill my promises and stated goals.  But if it's later revealed that one of my family members is a lobbyist in the medical field and stands to make millions off the deal, was I really fulfilling a stated goal, or was I cynically pretending to while lining my families pockets? 

The US government isn't about governance it's about control.  Two squabbling tribal factions vying for control of power and purse strings while letting the country burn, because they're rich enough to leave and start over once nothing is left.

Maybe I'm a bit too optimistic, but I disagree.  I believe that there are parts of the US government still dedicated towards what a government is supposed to do: protect and serve its people.  At its core a government that does not have its people's best interests in mind is a government that will not and can not last.

[bhu]

Governments don't last.  Nothing is forever, and eventually corruption always takes enough hold that a country goes into decline.  Usually it's conquered by someone else, or it fades slowly to being a shadow of it's former self.  Given that war isn't likely given our nuclear arsenal I'm betting more on fading into a localized power, but there's always the chance we'll elect a suicidal fanatic.  If we want a government that protects and serves it's people we'd have to remove everyone currently in office along withe the voters who put them there along with barring anyone who's previously held that office.  There's no way that can currently be done without it inevitably ending in obscene amounts of death, and people really don't have the will to see that through anymore.

[CaptRory]

You're missing the possibility of Civil War. The longer a civil war lasts, the further and further a country falls. And if at the end, another George Washington isn't holding the reigns, that's the end of America as the world knows it.

[Solo]

It is important to note that what the NSA is doing is NOT tapping your calls or communications.  They are tracking the metadata.  No content is being looked at.  Now, you can still argue this is wrong, but (and I shudder that I'm actually saying this) Michele Bachman was right, use the facts, not an exaggeration to debate the issue.  Unless something has come out that I'm not aware of.  And for the record, I still think it's at least borderline wrong, but it's not as bad as people are claiming.

Joe Biden from 2006 felt differently.

[CaptRory]

Everyone feels differently until they have the power. =/

[dman11235]

It is important to note that what the NSA is doing is NOT tapping your calls or communications.  They are tracking the metadata.  No content is being looked at.  Now, you can still argue this is wrong, but (and I shudder that I'm actually saying this) Michele Bachman was right, use the facts, not an exaggeration to debate the issue.  Unless something has come out that I'm not aware of.  And for the record, I still think it's at least borderline wrong, but it's not as bad as people are claiming.

Joe Biden from 2006 felt differently.

That was Biden saying the same thing I am....he was saying that even though they weren't listening to the calls, but just looking at where the calls were going, it's wrong....so I'm not sure what your point is...

[X-Codes]

Everyone feels differently until they have the power. =/

Joe Biden doesn't actually have much power.  The VP has some political influence, but doesn't have much leverage.  Also, Joe Biden has been kept on a pretty tight leash since getting elected.

[bhu]

You're missing the possibility of Civil War. The longer a civil war lasts, the further and further a country falls. And if at the end, another George Washington isn't holding the reigns, that's the end of America as the world knows it.

I'm not missing it I just don't think it's likely due to nukes.  If one or both sides are fanatic enough they'll come into play, which means even some forces who disagree will put aside differences momentarily to head that off.  Let's say texas and a few states secede.  They still have property of the US government, including nuclear weapons.   Washington won't let that fly, even if it means bombing them into non existence.  Thats one reason drones are becoming so popular.  It's easier to put down an armed resistance if you have a few people who are fanatic pulling a trigger, rather than relying on an army to obey orders to shoot civilians.

[bhu]

Everyone feels differently until they have the power. =/

Joe Biden doesn't actually have much power.  The VP has some political influence, but doesn't have much leverage.  Also, Joe Biden has been kept on a pretty tight leash since getting elected.

No one wants a repeat of Cheney.  And Biden is kind of a boob at times...

[Jackinthegreen]

His political reputation has probably worsened a bit since the story of a guy who used a shotgun to scare people off his property has come out.  The guy pleaded not guilty, and claimed he did it because Joe Biden had said shooting a shotgun off was a great way to scare people.

[bhu]

Biden has a political rep for something other than boobery? 

[CaptRory]

You're missing the possibility of Civil War. The longer a civil war lasts, the further and further a country falls. And if at the end, another George Washington isn't holding the reigns, that's the end of America as the world knows it.

I'm not missing it I just don't think it's likely due to nukes.  If one or both sides are fanatic enough they'll come into play, which means even some forces who disagree will put aside differences momentarily to head that off.  Let's say texas and a few states secede.  They still have property of the US government, including nuclear weapons.   Washington won't let that fly, even if it means bombing them into non existence.  Thats one reason drones are becoming so popular.  It's easier to put down an armed resistance if you have a few people who are fanatic pulling a trigger, rather than relying on an army to obey orders to shoot civilians.

I don't think the use of Nukes is likely, since MAD is just as applicable inside our borders as it is against foreign powers. A civil war, I think, is more likely to be fought between citizen militias and 3/4s of the professional military on the side of the rebels and the remaining military and government agents and federal police forces on the other side such as the Department of Homeland Security.

This assumes a full blown civil war erupts you understand.  There's still time to turn everything around.

[bhu]

It's not mutually assured destruction though.  The states won't have the launch codes they need, Washington will.  It's a one sided fight. 

[Solo]

That was Biden saying the same thing I am....he was saying that even though they weren't listening to the calls, but just looking at where the calls were going, it's wrong....so I'm not sure what your point is...

Biden's saying it's a lot wrong, as opposed to borderline wrong.

[X-Codes]

Everyone feels differently until they have the power. =/

Joe Biden doesn't actually have much power.  The VP has some political influence, but doesn't have much leverage.  Also, Joe Biden has been kept on a pretty tight leash since getting elected.

No one wants a repeat of Cheney.  And Biden is kind of a boob at times...

You can't get a Cheney without a Bush, and Obama is no Bush.  Also, being a boob isn't a strictly negative trait for a politican.  90+% of the time he's pretty smart about what he does, which is a lot more than what you can say about a lot of other politicians.