Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Andiron on May 30, 2015, 09:51:48 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/30/paul-vows-to-return-to-capitol-hill-on-sunday-to-block-bill-end-nsa-spying/
Color me impressed.
We'll see in 26 hours.
-
I hope he succeeds. The so-called "Patriot Act" was and is an affront to the Constitution.
-
I'm backing him up!
-
I read elsewhere that he failed, and we still have a patriot act.
-
Most of it expired last night, especially the meta data collection provision.
-
Yep.
Unfortunately, most of it will likely be restored in short order.
-
I hear no mention of Ted Cruz with all this. Not sure if he is staying out of it or the media is ignoring him.
Paul's moves infuriated fellow Republicans and they exited the chamber en masse when he stood up to speak after the Senate's vote on the House bill.
I would be curious to see a list of those that walked out.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/01/senate-returns-to-vote-on-extending-us-surveillance-programs-with-deadline-near/
-
I would be curious to see a list of those that walked out.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/01/senate-returns-to-vote-on-extending-us-surveillance-programs-with-deadline-near/
Me too. I can guess who the instigators of it were (I'm looking at you McCain and King!), but would certainly like to see the full tally of anti-freedom R's.
-
I can't believe how much heat Paul is taking for his stand. I've been totally disgusted with most of the Fox News and Fox Business coverage on it today. It's mostly a Paul hatefest alternating with "OMG we're all gonna die by the hands of terrorists!"
-
While I have some disagreements with Paul as I do with most anyone. Who agrees 100% on anything. Constitutionally he is right on this.
Besides if he is pissing off McCain and Obama it makes me happy. :)
-
While I have some disagreements with Paul as I do with most anyone. Who agrees 100% on anything. Constitutionally he is right on this.
Besides if he is pissing off McCain and Obama it makes me happy. :)
I honestly thought at least 50% of the population agreed with him on this particular issue, if nothing else. I was really shocked to see so much negative press on it.
-
I honestly thought at least 50% of the population agreed with him on this particular issue, if nothing else. I was really shocked to see so much negative press on it.
Me too. Too many authoritarians on both sides of the aisle I guess. That I suppose shouldn't be that big of a surprise. Disappointing though.
-
I honestly thought at least 50% of the population agreed with him on this particular issue, if nothing else. I was really shocked to see so much negative press on it.
1. Rand might be off in some areas (IMO), but he is right on this. Just say NO to the surveillance state.
2. Fox and the other MSM are members of the ruling elite. They might deviate here & there to capture the majority of Americans not cool with the ruling class's policy preferences, but they will fall in line on the issues most important to the ruling class. (See immigration.)
3. In this case, what is important to the ruling class is keeping the surveillance state's eyes on regular Americans of European extraction. Can not do that without open-ended and sweeping powers. Because the regular American is a greater threat to them than any damned terrorist from Goathumpistan.
-
3. In this case, what is important to the ruling class is keeping the surveillance state's eyes on regular Americans of European extraction. Can not do that without open-ended and sweeping powers. Because the regular American is a greater threat to them than any damned terrorist from Goathumpistan.
What's cracking me up (and I use that term euphemistically - I'm not finding it funny), is that revision 2 is being called the "Freedom Act".
Also, Paul has stated that he actually wants more surveillance. He just wants it directed at Islamic terrorists and those groups known to lean in that direction (so essentially profiling). That seems to be getting discounted by the MSM, while at the same time (and I've only heard this, I don't have a verified source), various Senators are stating that in classified briefings, the security folks said they have yet to get a good lead from the "spy on everyone" program.
-
I honestly thought at least 50% of the population agreed with him on this particular issue, if nothing else. I was really shocked to see so much negative press on it.
The poll, conducted by a bipartisan team of polling firms and released on Monday, found that 60 percent of Americans believe the Patriot Act should be reformed “to limit government surveillance and protect Americans’ privacy.” Conversely, 34 percent would like to preserve it in its current form, agreeing that “it has been effective in keeping America safe from terrorists and other threats to national security like ISIS or Al Qaeda.”
http://www.newsweek.com/poll-majority-americans-want-patriot-act-reformed-332991
-
What's cracking me up (and I use that term euphemistically - I'm not finding it funny), is that revision 2 is being called the "Freedom Act".
Also, Paul has stated that he actually wants more surveillance. He just wants it directed at Islamic terrorists and those groups known to lean in that direction (so essentially profiling). That seems to be getting discounted by the MSM, while at the same time (and I've only heard this, I don't have a verified source), various Senators are stating that in classified briefings, the security folks said they have yet to get a good lead from the "spy on everyone" program.
That is the silly part. These people keep saying this stuff will keep us safe, but it hasn't proven to be so. The last couple of incidents show the same failure as 911. We had the information already, but decided not to act on it for some reason. Data gathering has never really been the problem.
-
More "bread and circuses". Move along.
-
What's cracking me up (and I use that term euphemistically - I'm not finding it funny), is that revision 2 is being called the "Freedom Act".
Also, Paul has stated that he actually wants more surveillance. He just wants it directed at Islamic terrorists and those groups known to lean in that direction (so essentially profiling). That seems to be getting discounted by the MSM, while at the same time (and I've only heard this, I don't have a verified source), various Senators are stating that in classified briefings, the security folks said they have yet to get a good lead from the "spy on everyone" program.
Near-perfect Orwellian doublespeak. I would like our intelligence establishment to have tools to protect us from terrorists, but only a) when that's its sole mission and b) when it is disconnected from the people who can monitor/freeze my banking activity, track my movements and communications, or knock down my door at 0 Dark Thirty.
-
Good job for Paul.
-
Local radio guy said he was watching Paul speak about this on CSPAN. They panned the camera onto Lindsey Graham and he was apparently rolling his eyes a lot.
-
I thought fox was apposed to spying on Rosen? [tinfoil]
-
Local radio guy said he was watching Paul speak about this on CSPAN. They panned the camera onto Lindsey Graham and he was apparently rolling his eyes a lot.
Was he also pouting and teasing his hair? Maybe McCain can get him a a tissue.
-
Well, as expected, the "Feedom Act" has passed.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/02/legislation-to-resume-overhaul-nsa-surveillance-clears-key-senate-hurdle/
And then Peter King said this, I would assume while drunk:
http://twitchy.com/2015/06/02/are-you-drunk-lunatic-rep-peter-king-strikes-low-blow-at-rand-paul/
-
Well, as expected, the "Feedom Act" has passed.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/02/legislation-to-resume-overhaul-nsa-surveillance-clears-key-senate-hurdle/
And then Peter King said this, I would assume while drunk with power:
http://twitchy.com/2015/06/02/are-you-drunk-lunatic-rep-peter-king-strikes-low-blow-at-rand-paul/
FTFY.
-
That is the silly part. These people keep saying this stuff will keep us safe, but it hasn't proven to be so. The last couple of incidents show the same failure as 911. We had the information already, but decided not to act on it for some reason. Data gathering has never really been the problem.
The problem is one of data analysis and false positives. We can gather the data - that's automated. The problem is processing the data.
Then, the thing is, at the indicator levels you get for a terrorist, there's a LOT of false positives. We've seen it here when the government publishes some 'indicators that somebody might be a militia member' and we trip half to three-quarters of them.
Investigating a 'trip' is expensive, and we're spending so much money just collecting all this data that we can't afford to follow up all of them, knowing full well that the vast majority will be false-positives. So we have terrorists slip through.
-
Well, as expected, the "Feedom Act" has passed.
Freedom is slavery.
War is peace.
etc.
And then Peter King said this, I would assume while drunk:
Since this is the Armed Polite Society, I will not comment on Rep. King's tweet.
-
Since this is the Armed Polite Society, I will not comment on Rep. King's tweet.
I let Londo Molari do my talking for me re: Peter King:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoRlLbqLm-c
-
Considering that King was basically a bagman for the IRA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#Support_for_the_IRA), I find it hilarious how strident he is about other kinds of terrorists...
-
John Oliver:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfRk1VEcKog
:rofl: