If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   It's okay that the NSA spies on us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust them to do the right thing   (dailykos.com) divider line 137
    More: Unlikely, Democrat Party, NSA, due process clause, collective action, Louis Brandeis, public inquiry, Freudian slip, spy  
•       •       •

1799 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jul 2013 at 9:22 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-14 07:39:09 AM
Did  Subbyand I read the same article?
 
2013-07-14 07:45:02 AM
I disagree.  It is not okay that the NSA spies on us because there is a Democrat in office.  We cannot trust them to do the right thing.  I think it is only okay if the NSA spies on us when there is a Republican in office.  We know we can always trust them to do the right thing.
 
2013-07-14 08:02:52 AM

ginandbacon: Did Subbyand I read the same article?


Skip ahead to this bit, I guess:

"A vibrant and capable national government does not require an erosion of our liberty and privacy rights as we commonly understand the terms. Our liberty right does not mean we are free from taxation. To the contrary, a vibrant government is essential to maintaining those rights. Is restricting gun rights a restriction on our liberty? I think so. But on balance, I think it is the correct policy and consistent with the Constitution."

The writer is farking high if he thinks we've had a vibrant and capable national government at any time in the post-Vietnam era, or even earlier. Churchill was right about us doing the right thing only after we've farked things up nine ways from Sunday - a farking-up process that is far from over, thanks to the two-party monopoly.
 
2013-07-14 08:03:59 AM

Mike_LowELL: I disagree.  It is not okay that the NSA spies on us because there is a Democrat in office.  We cannot trust them to do the right thing.  I think it is only okay if the NSA spies on us when there is a Republican in office.  We know we can always trust them to do the right thing.


Would have been better if you said "once we get a Libertarian in office" but that's just my opinion, man.
 
2013-07-14 08:25:38 AM
Daily Kos is still a thing?
 
2013-07-14 08:32:31 AM

Gulper Eel: The writer is farking high if he thinks we've had a vibrant and capable national government at any time in the post-Vietnam era, or even earlier.


I don't think the author is saying that we have a vibrant and capable national government but that he/she wants a vibrant and capable national government, and that having one doesn't require us to give up our freedoms.
 
2013-07-14 09:26:21 AM
Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.
 
2013-07-14 09:27:47 AM
It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.
 
2013-07-14 09:31:02 AM
the NSA has been spying on us since the NSA came into existence. if you think otherwise, you're deluded.
 
2013-07-14 09:32:39 AM

LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.


Exactly.
 
2013-07-14 09:33:53 AM
Don't worry, eventually, there will be a Republican president again, and all the Republicans will go back to loving the NSA, especially if they spy on OWS and Negroes.
 
2013-07-14 09:33:56 AM
I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.
 
2013-07-14 09:35:04 AM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: Daily Kos is still a thing?


FOX news is still a thing? Newsmax is still a thing?


/At least KOS is factually accurate, as opposed to just making shiat up.
 
2013-07-14 09:46:08 AM
The Democratic Party is pretty much a party of criminals and perverts at this stage.
 
2013-07-14 09:46:27 AM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.


You know who else lied? Benghazi.
 
2013-07-14 09:48:37 AM
Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many
 
2013-07-14 09:49:29 AM

Pichu0102: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.

You know who else lied? Benghazi.


OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?
 
2013-07-14 09:50:03 AM
u mean there's no robotic ants with video cameras when a Republican is in often?  WHY THE HELL NOT!!
 
2013-07-14 09:50:36 AM

ghare: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Daily Kos is still a thing?

FOX news is still a thing? Newsmax is still a thing?


/At least KOS is factually accurate, as opposed to just making shiat up.


LOL,  Holy shiat that is funny.
 
2013-07-14 09:50:56 AM
It's ok. Reading is hard, Submittroll. Congratulations on your "Democrat Party" tag.
 
2013-07-14 09:52:36 AM

AtlanticCoast63: Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many


*shrugs* more than that have died in car crashes
 
2013-07-14 09:52:37 AM
Daily KOS?  No clicks for the Brietfart of the left wing, thanks.
 
2013-07-14 09:55:59 AM

AdamK: AtlanticCoast63: Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many

*shrugs* more than that have died in car crashes


The US averages about 30,000 firearm deaths per year  and is generally below the number from car accidents.  That number includes suicide, accidents, etc.
 
2013-07-14 09:57:46 AM

ghare: Don't worry, eventually, there will be a Republican president again, and all the Republicans will go back to loving the NSA, especially if they spy on OWS and Negroes.


I see the 'Smart' and 'Funny' buttons ...whar 'Stupid' button, whar
 
2013-07-14 09:59:42 AM

ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?


We all know how those liberals are the first to implement draconian fascist methods
 
2013-07-14 10:00:10 AM
Mmmmmmno, I don't think so. But anyone who paid attention to Obama's voting record should have known he was no fan of civil liberties.

/Sadly, he was still better than the opposition
 
2013-07-14 10:00:42 AM
OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

As for the KOS article, the author never really formed a case for his viewpoint. Just stated outright what he *thought* was right. Well, he's wrong. Next?
 
2013-07-14 10:06:43 AM

AtlanticCoast63: Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many

api.ning.com
The 30K / year for a decade gun deaths number is correct.  This includes about 11K homicides, and 19K suicides annually.  Car crashes are higher, but only marginally, at 34K per year in the US.
 
2013-07-14 10:07:23 AM

LeoffDaGrate: Pichu0102: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.

You know who else lied? Benghazi.

OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?


He's the delivery guy for the felafel shop the White House calls on nights where they have to work late, but he's always "forgetting" to include the extra tzatziki sauce
 
2013-07-14 10:10:34 AM

jim32rr: ghare: Don't worry, eventually, there will be a Republican president again, and all the Republicans will go back to loving the NSA, especially if they spy on OWS and Negroes.

I see the 'Smart' and 'Funny' buttons ...whar 'Stupid' button, whar


The only thing stupid about it is that the Obama administration has worked hand in hand with the big banks to spy on Occupy protesters. Not like a Republican would be any better though.
 
2013-07-14 10:15:02 AM

Pichu0102: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.

You know who else lied? Benghazi.


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

You... called?
 
2013-07-14 10:16:12 AM

mark12A: OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

As for the KOS article, the author never really formed a case for his viewpoint. Just stated outright what he *thought* was right. Well, he's wrong. Next?


You do realize that there were considerably more attacks on embassies, and more embassy personnel killed, under the Bush administration, right? Thirteen attacks, not counting the ones in Iraq.
 
2013-07-14 10:16:41 AM

LectertheChef: jim32rr: ghare: Don't worry, eventually, there will be a Republican president again, and all the Republicans will go back to loving the NSA, especially if they spy on OWS and Negroes.

I see the 'Smart' and 'Funny' buttons ...whar 'Stupid' button, whar

The only thing stupid about it is that the Obama administration has worked hand in hand with the big banks to spy on Occupy protesters. Not like a Republican would be any better though.


http://www.law360.com/articles/453071/chevron-wins-access-to-email-i nf o-in-ecuador-pollution-row

The state of your privacy is much worse than you think. Even post-Obama, the courts are basically ruling that companies are super-people... they get privacy... but such wonderful things are not guaranteed to mere citizens.
 
2013-07-14 10:19:33 AM

AtlanticCoast63: Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many


It is pretty basic math, we get about 32k gun deaths a year, and 9/11/01 was more than ten years ago.

/the statistic is a bit... unfair though, I mean if two homicidal guys both have guns and a drug deal goes bad and one shoots the other, it's not necessarily fair to say he died because of the gun.
 
2013-07-14 10:33:10 AM
No its not.
 
2013-07-14 10:42:37 AM
I might care more about the commentary of a single blog poster on this issue if not for the fact that there's a collection of seven years of pundits, politicians AND blog posters that said exactly that about republicans without any hint of sarcasm or irony....

Regardless, whether you like it or not it's legal. The court itself has existed since the late 70s, the authorization to perform this type of surveillance stems from the early Bush era, and the rules changes that made it legal occurred in the late Bush era and Obama has been making it clear since his time in the Senate that he was at least grudgingly okay with this type of thing through his actual votes, regardless of whatever tripe he spouted on the campaign trail at the time. This has been public for years and it's been debated and voted on multiple times. Suddenly everybody gives a shiat just because it actually has a name?

If you really cared about this maybe you should have said something when objection might have still mattered? The horses didn't exactly flee the barn on this one as soon as the doors opened up, they just kind of sauntered out, milled around for awhile and then finally decided to take off. You didn't think maybe it would have been good idea to put them back when you still had a chance?
 
2013-07-14 10:45:32 AM

jim32rr: ghare: Don't worry, eventually, there will be a Republican president again, and all the Republicans will go back to loving the NSA, especially if they spy on OWS and Negroes.

I see the 'Smart' and 'Funny' buttons ...whar 'Stupid' button, whar


Hate it when people bring attention to what you're really like, don't you?
 
2013-07-14 10:53:21 AM

firefly212: AtlanticCoast63: Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many

It is pretty basic math, we get about 32k gun deaths a year, and 9/11/01 was more than ten years ago.

/the statistic is a bit... unfair though, I mean if two homicidal guys both have guns and a drug deal goes bad and one shoots the other, it's not necessarily fair to say he died because of the gun.


One guy shoots up a school with a gun, and we don't change anything.

One guy fails to blow up a plane via shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport.

'Mercia. Home of the scared.
 
2013-07-14 10:58:34 AM

LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.


This.  I haven't heard a single person say that this spying is acceptable regardless of the administration.

I can't hear the voices in Subby's head, so they don't count.
 
2013-07-14 11:01:15 AM

skozlaw: Regardless, whether you like it or not it's legal. The court itself has existed since the late 70s, the authorization to perform this type of surveillance stems from the early Bush era, and the rules changes that made it legal occurred in the late Bush era and Obama has been making it clear since his time in the Senate that he was at least grudgingly okay with this type of thing through his actual votes, regardless of whatever tripe he spouted on the campaign trail at the time. This has been public for years and it's been debated and voted on multiple times. Suddenly everybody gives a shiat just because it actually has a name?


And remember, as little oversight as the FISC provides, it's still a damn sight better than the situation before enactment of FISA. In fact, that's why FISA was enacted - because before enactment, there was absolutely no judicial oversight and government abuse was rampant. In its scathing report on outrageous excesses on the part of the "intelligence community," the Church Committee advised passage of the FISA and establishment of the FISC to protect Americans' rights from completely unrestrained invasion of privacy, and Congress followed those recommendations.
 
2013-07-14 11:03:21 AM

LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.


Indeed.  Most average Fark Democrats' position that since they heroically protested Bush's spying and were met with heaps of scorn, death threats and abuse, that therefore the average Fark Republican shoud not attack Obama for spying.

Basically a gussied-up version of "both sides are bad, so vote Democrat."
 
2013-07-14 11:06:53 AM

LeoffDaGrate: Pichu0102: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.

You know who else lied? Benghazi.

OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?


Not sure.
 
2013-07-14 11:07:43 AM
Oh, and here's some interesting trivia from the Wiki piece on the Church Committee:

"The Church Committee learned that beginning in the 1950s, the CIA and Federal Bureau of Investigation intercepted, opened and photographed more than 215,000 pieces of mail by the time the program called 'HTLINGUAL' was shut down in 1973. This program was all done under the "mail covers" program. A mail cover is when the government records without a warrant or notification all information on the outside of an envelope or package, including the name of the sender and the recipient. The Church report found that the CIA was zealous about keeping the United States Postal Service from learning that mail was being opened by government agents. CIA agents moved mail to a private room to open the mail or in some cases opened envelopes at night after stuffing them in briefcases or coat pockets to deceive postal officials."
 
2013-07-14 11:08:31 AM

mark12A: OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

As for the KOS article, the author never really formed a case for his viewpoint. Just stated outright what he *thought* was right. Well, he's wrong. Next?


gkrouse.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-14 11:09:00 AM

Noam Chimpsky: The Democratic Party is pretty much a party of criminals and perverts at this stage.


Yeah... but think about it this way.... its the party that still knows how to party. When you reject all standards of personal ethics and morality the only thing left is state power. Hence Democrats are ok with a police state as it relieves them of any need for self regulation. You dont need privacy if you are not in charge of your own mind. As long as they have drugs of pleasure and consequence free sex... Democrats will support a police state.
 
2013-07-14 11:10:24 AM

mark12A: OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

As for the KOS article, the author never really formed a case for his viewpoint. Just stated outright what he *thought* was right. Well, he's wrong. Next?


Of course, you know a rescue team was sent in (and contributed a casualty or two), right? And of course you realize that, by the time anything larger was mobilized and in Benghazi, it was far too late for them to do anything, right? Obama doesn't have a "Teleport soldiers" button, or an 'Instantly prepare transportation' button.
 
2013-07-14 11:11:34 AM

mark12A: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.


Zug zug
 
2013-07-14 11:12:49 AM

AtlanticCoast63: Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.


Google: In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings.

It's probably not far off from the truth when you look at the figured for (death + firearm) as opposed to slicing and dicing the stats because "X doesn't count because Y".
 
2013-07-14 11:14:36 AM

part of the problem: Noam Chimpsky: The Democratic Party is pretty much a party of criminals and perverts at this stage.

Yeah... but think about it this way.... its the party that still knows how to party. When you reject all standards of personal ethics and morality the only thing left is state power. Hence Democrats are ok with a police state as it relieves them of any need for self regulation. You dont need privacy if you are not in charge of your own mind. As long as they have drugs of pleasure and consequence free sex... Democrats will support a police state.


The party of Oliver North, Alan West, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan calls Democrats 'The party of criminals'?
The party of Newt Gingrich, Mark Sanford, Larry Craig and Mark Foley calls Democrats "the party of perverts"?
 
2013-07-14 11:19:04 AM
Bit early for troll bait this morning isn't it?
 
2013-07-14 11:22:14 AM

AtlanticCoast63: Honestly not trolling, but saw this:

Since that day(Sept 11, 2001- AC63), over 300,000 Americans have died from guns.

Now, we have lost - according to the Department of Defense - a bit over 6000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines since that day in the GWOT.  This guy is actually saying that here in the states, FIFTY TIMES that have been killed by guns?  Citation needed, please.

/ONE unnecessary death by guns is too many



Automobiles have killed close to that, I call BS.
 
2013-07-14 11:22:49 AM

ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?


Subby saw "Kos" and "NSA" and filled in the rest from his imagination.
 
2013-07-14 11:26:31 AM

StoPPeRmobile: Automobiles have killed close to that, I call BS.


On the "killed by guns" figure? It's pretty close to the actual figure when you count the total number of deaths where a firearm is involved. Now a lot of people like to distinguish between suicide, homicide, accident, etc and there are grounds for doing that but in terms of death by firearm regardless of motive, the 300K figure is pretty spot on.
 
2013-07-14 11:27:22 AM
Actually the poll I read said Democrats feel about the same way as they did about it when Bush was in office (actually a little more negative) however Republicans now have totally shifted and now think it's bad because a Democrat is office while it's happening.
 
2013-07-14 11:30:16 AM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: StoPPeRmobile: Automobiles have killed close to that, I call BS.

On the "killed by guns" figure? It's pretty close to the actual figure when you count the total number of deaths where a firearm is involved. Now a lot of people like to distinguish between suicide, homicide, accident, etc and there are grounds for doing that but in terms of death by firearm regardless of motive, the 300K figure is pretty spot on.




I wonder how many suicides are lumped into the automobile fatality rate. I wonder if we will ever find out. People sure love their cars.
 
2013-07-14 11:31:30 AM

Corvus: Actually the poll I read said Democrats feel about the same way as they did about it when Bush was in office (actually a little more negative) however Republicans now have totally shifted and now think it's bad because a Democrat is office while it's happening.


Just in casual discussion with friends, that's been my impression as well. The Libertarians and Democrats have largely been against domestic spying regardless of the administration. Where I start getting the defensiveness is when spying under Obama is equated to spying under Bush. That's where my Republican friends start bringing up terrorism and national security.
 
2013-07-14 11:32:15 AM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: StoPPeRmobile: Automobiles have killed close to that, I call BS.

On the "killed by guns" figure? It's pretty close to the actual figure when you count the total number of deaths where a firearm is involved. Now a lot of people like to distinguish between suicide, homicide, accident, etc and there are grounds for doing that but in terms of death by firearm regardless of motive, the 300K figure is pretty spot on.


Not sure why suicides don't count. Many of those suicides would have probably not happened if it wasn't so easy for the victim to kill them selves by using a gun. They are the number 1 cause of suicides for a reason. Because they are easy and quick for people to use.
 
2013-07-14 11:34:50 AM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Corvus: Actually the poll I read said Democrats feel about the same way as they did about it when Bush was in office (actually a little more negative) however Republicans now have totally shifted and now think it's bad because a Democrat is office while it's happening.

Just in casual discussion with friends, that's been my impression as well. The Libertarians and Democrats have largely been against domestic spying regardless of the administration. Where I start getting the defensiveness is when spying under Obama is equated to spying under Bush. That's where my Republican friends start bringing up terrorism and national security.


Or they do that "Well now I can see it's wrong."  Just like deficit spending they only notice is wrong with a Democrat in office. It's just partisan bullshiat.

Ask them then if they want laws like the patriot act repealed? It shows to me their hypocrisy that they will all attack Obama for it but seem to actually not to care if the actual law was to change.
 
2013-07-14 11:36:26 AM

FlashHarry: the NSA has been spying on us since the NSA came into existence. if you think otherwise, you're deluded.


Actually, that's not necessarily true.  Here's why:  Prior to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, it's true that yes, the NSA did target some Americans, but they were limited technologically:  No one had cell phones or computers, and opening the mail was not something the NSA did (they are a signals intelligence organization).

Basically, they *COULD* listen to your phone calls, *IF* they went through some major exchange.  They just didn't have the resources to suck up all phone calls.  If you used a CB or a ham radio, there is a chance you might have been listened to (hell, I did that as part of my training as a Morse interceptor), but in all likelyhood there wouldn't have been any record of it because it just wouldn't have been of interest, and remember that storage technology back then was in it's relative infancy.

Then, revelations about certain groups and individuals being targeted for monitoring during the 1960s led to hearings in Congress, and eventually to FISA.   FISA is one of the few really, really unalloyed good things Congress has ever done:  It limited the legal ability of the NSA to monitor "United States Persons".  And it was taken seriously:  In the 1980's, when I was actually monitoring communications as a ditty bopper in the Army, and whose work product when straight to the NSA, it was impressed upon us in no uncertain terms that monitoring "United States Persons" was very bad ju-ju, and that we could potentially go to jail for it if there wasn't a valid warrant from the FISA court.

That all changed after 9/11.  For the worse.

The law is essentially unchanged, but technology made it much, much harder to know if particular communications were from "United States Persons".  Back in the old days, you pretty much knew:  Every phone other than payphones had a person responsible for paying the bill at a location, and the phone company knew who they were, and unless you had an unlisted number, it was a matter of public record anyway.

By the time 9/11 rolls around, you've got anonymous pre-paid cellphones, and anonymous e-mail accounts.   Now, you can't necessarily tell if a particular phone number is associated with a "United States Person".  You can't tell whether p­hl­e­gmball­[nospam-﹫-backwards]pu­tik­cah­*com belongs to Joe Snuffy, or Hous bin Pharteen.

Back during the original "Warrantless Wiretapping" kerfluffle, I was able to surmise that they had changed the assumption about anonymous communications originating or ending in the United States, with at least one end of the communication outside the US.

I actually don't have a problem with that.  You can make a "border exception" analogy for those sorts of communications, and if they apply for the FISA warrant once it becomes known a "United States Person" is involved, then the law works as it should.

The problem is that it has gone farther.  They are actually collecting the metadata for *ALL* communications, including those of "United States Persons", and storing it.  While they *CLAIM* that they can only access the data when they get a FISA warrant, we really have no way to independently verify if that is indeed true or not, because you need a top secret security clearance in order to have access to that knowledge, and anyone who has that clearance and reports on violations of that policy will be charged criminally for disclosing classified information, and they *WILL* be prosecuted, as Edward Snowden would be if they could get their hands on him.

Why should we care about the metadata?  Because it's enough to build up such an accurate profile of you that it's farking *SCARY*.  Even when you aren't actively talking on your cellphone, it's periodically reporting your location, and that metadata is being stored.  They know where you were, who you talked to, for how long, and where the other person was.  The only thing they *DON'T* know is *WHAT* you talked about, but that can often be inferred by just looking at the data.

If you carry a cellphone with you habitually, and I have access to just the metadata without actually listening to your calls, I'll know where you work, what and who you like to do when you're not at work, along with all your relatives, friends, business associates, etc.  I can tell when you paid your bills.  I can tell when you get in trouble with the law.  In some instances, I could tell when you take a dump*.

It's literally having a tracking device on you all your waking moments, reporting your location to the government.  It doesn't matter if it's a phone you pre-paid with cash for, either.  If it's on, it's reporting your location, and unless you're homeless, the address where you live is going to be obvious within the first couple days of you owning that phone.

This is one of the reasons why I won't own a cell phone, or carry one except in very limited circumstances.  I use radios instead.   I get better coverage than any cell phone company can possibly provide, and until I transmit, there is no way to know my location, and even when I *DO* transmit, you need very specialized equipment within range in more than one location at the time I transmit:  It's not stored like the metadata for cell phones are.

I find it hilariously ironic that while older technology like radio is more vulnerable to casual eavesdropping, it's much more difficult for the government to monitor on a systematic basis.


*Sound far fetched?  If you carry your cellphone with you to, say an outdoor concert or a county fair or the like, the location reported by the cellphone is likely accurate enough for me to tell when you went over to the area where the porta-potties are, and to differentiate that from you walking around the fair or your normal location at the concert, event, etc.
 
2013-07-14 11:37:07 AM

propasaurus: ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?

Subby saw "Kos" and "NSA" and filled in the rest from his imagination.


Apparently. Sheesh.
 
2013-07-14 11:40:13 AM

AnonAmbientLight: Mercia. Home of the scared.


Yeah, well, those Northumbrians could be real assholes.
 
2013-07-14 11:40:40 AM

Corvus: Monkeyhouse Zendo: StoPPeRmobile: Automobiles have killed close to that, I call BS.

On the "killed by guns" figure? It's pretty close to the actual figure when you count the total number of deaths where a firearm is involved. Now a lot of people like to distinguish between suicide, homicide, accident, etc and there are grounds for doing that but in terms of death by firearm regardless of motive, the 300K figure is pretty spot on.

Not sure why suicides don't count. Many of those suicides would have probably not happened if it wasn't so easy for the victim to kill them selves by using a gun. They are the number 1 cause of suicides for a reason. Because they are easy and quick for people to use.




Yep, no one offed themselves before the semiautomatic hangun was invented.

Besides, they can just ram their car ito something and their family gets the insurance. Problem solved!
 
2013-07-14 11:40:51 AM

Corvus: Not sure why suicides don't count. Many of those suicides would have probably not happened if it wasn't so easy for the victim to kill them selves by using a gun. They are the number 1 cause of suicides for a reason. Because they are easy and quick for people to use.


I wasn't saying they shouldn't be counted, just that I've noticed that people who don't like numbers like 300000/decade or 31000/year want to start trimming that figure by exempting some deaths based on motive. It's undeniable the suicide by firearm is the most effective and final of methods.

Anyway, no need to turn this into a gun thread. I'm sure we can all find something to argue about with respect to the NSA and domestic spying.
 
2013-07-14 11:42:58 AM

Rhino_man: mark12A: OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

As for the KOS article, the author never really formed a case for his viewpoint. Just stated outright what he *thought* was right. Well, he's wrong. Next?

[gkrouse.files.wordpress.com image 850x452]


Out of idle curiosity, I Googled the first on the list, January 22nd 2002: US Consulate at Kolkata, 5 killed:

Heavily-armed gunmen have attacked the US Government's information centre near the American consulate in Calcutta, killing five policemen.
...
Four of the dead officers were killed on the spot. They were all from the Calcutta police or a private security agency, Group Four.

BBC News
 
2013-07-14 11:48:19 AM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Corvus: Not sure why suicides don't count. Many of those suicides would have probably not happened if it wasn't so easy for the victim to kill them selves by using a gun. They are the number 1 cause of suicides for a reason. Because they are easy and quick for people to use.

I wasn't saying they shouldn't be counted, just that I've noticed that people who don't like numbers like 300000/decade or 31000/year want to start trimming that figure by exempting some deaths based on motive. It's undeniable the suicide by firearm is the most effective and final of methods.

Anyway, no need to turn this into a gun thread. I'm sure we can all find something to argue about with respect to the NSA and domestic spying.




It's hard to toss aside all the crap you were told as a child. Commies are evil. They put up walls. They spy on their populace.

So how many people are suiciding themselves on our nation's highways, harming children?
 
2013-07-14 11:49:32 AM

dittybopper: Why should we care about the metadata?  Because it's enough to build up such an accurate profile of you that it's farking *SCARY*.


This is something I always found interesting. Simple analysis of just the metadata of a person's purchasing habits is sufficient to build a personal profile so accurate that you have to be careful when using it for targeted advertisement. The targeted ads are so so accurate that it freaks out the individual being marketed to.

Most people live and move in very predictable tracks. Given information like a phones gps records, given a day and time you can predict their physical location within a few hundred yards with about 90% accuracy. People mostly work in the same place. They mostly engage in social activities in the same places at roughly the same times. They have favorite restaurants and movie theaters and go to them on a relatively predictable schedule.
 
2013-07-14 11:57:05 AM

Corvus: Not sure why suicides don't count. Many of those suicides would have probably not happened if it wasn't so easy for the victim to kill them selves by using a gun. They are the number 1 cause of suicides for a reason. Because they are easy and quick for people to use.


In the United States.

Other countries with similar, or even higher, suicide rates have far fewer guns per capita and similar or higher suicide rates.

In terms of the number of guns per capita among industrialized nations, the US is undoubtedly number 1 (I shouldn't even have to provide a source for that).

Meanwhile, South Korea, Japan, Belgium, Finland, Poland, Taiwan, France, Austria, and the Czech Republic all have higher suicide rates.

A perfect example of how guns really don't matter is the US and the UK, which have nearly *IDENTICAL* suicide rates:  The US rate is 12 per 100,000.  The UK rate is 11.8 per 100,000.

All guns are strictly controlled in the UK, and handguns are completely banned.

In the US, about 61% of suicides are by firearm.  In the UK, it's only 3.5%.  The overwhelming majority of suicides in the UK were by hanging (55%)

So, if they have essentially an identical suicide rate (differing by less than 2%), yet their rate of firearms suicide is only 6% that of the US because of strict laws, what makes you think that suicides in the US would go down if we further restricted firearm access?
 
2013-07-14 11:58:50 AM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: dittybopper: Why should we care about the metadata?  Because it's enough to build up such an accurate profile of you that it's farking *SCARY*.

This is something I always found interesting. Simple analysis of just the metadata of a person's purchasing habits is sufficient to build a personal profile so accurate that you have to be careful when using it for targeted advertisement. The targeted ads are so so accurate that it freaks out the individual being marketed to.

Most people live and move in very predictable tracks. Given information like a phones gps records, given a day and time you can predict their physical location within a few hundred yards with about 90% accuracy. People mostly work in the same place. They mostly engage in social activities in the same places at roughly the same times. They have favorite restaurants and movie theaters and go to them on a relatively predictable schedule.



C'mon dude, people suck at math.

rchsbowman.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-14 11:59:42 AM

ghare: /At least KOS is factually accurate, as opposed to just making shiat up.


This article may have been a lot of things, but "factually accurate" it ain't.
 
2013-07-14 12:04:54 PM

Pichu0102: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.

You know who else lied? Benghazi.


I rented a house to Ben Ghazi one time and he painted it like spongbob sqaurepants. farking asshole
 
2013-07-14 12:05:29 PM

StoPPeRmobile: It's hard to toss aside all the crap you were told as a child. Commies are evil. They put up walls. They spy on their populace.


They did put up walls to keep people from *LEAVING*, and they did spy on their populace.

They machine-gunned people who tried to leave.

People built friggin' hot air balloons from scratch in order to leave the Warsaw Pact nations.  They risked being shot, or blown up by land mines, or being found and imprisoned for nothing more than wanting to be elsewhere.

Individuals living under those regimes may or may not have been evil themselves, but a whole system that had such a callous indifference to life that they would kill people who just wanted to *LEAVE* is, pretty much by definition, evil.
 
2013-07-14 12:10:54 PM

ghare: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Daily Kos is still a thing?

FOX news is still a thing? Newsmax is still a thing?


/At least KOS is factually accurate, as opposed to just making shiat up.


If Newsmax will stop telling lies about Democrats, maybe Daily Kos will stop telling the truth about Republicans.
 
2013-07-14 12:11:25 PM

dittybopper: StoPPeRmobile: It's hard to toss aside all the crap you were told as a child. Commies are evil. They put up walls. They spy on their populace.

They did put up walls to keep people from *LEAVING*, and they did spy on their populace.

They machine-gunned people who tried to leave.

People built friggin' hot air balloons from scratch in order to leave the Warsaw Pact nations.  They risked being shot, or blown up by land mines, or being found and imprisoned for nothing more than wanting to be elsewhere.

Individuals living under those regimes may or may not have been evil themselves, but a whole system that had such a callous indifference to life that they would kill people who just wanted to *LEAVE* is, pretty much by definition, evil.


I always loved that bit of film of the East German Guard, walking along, guarding the Berlin Wall and--HEY, GOTTA GO!  Tosses his rifle aside and makes a run for it.  Yeah, when even the guys with guns are making a run for it, you've got a shiatty regime.
 
2013-07-14 12:13:45 PM

dittybopper: Corvus: Not sure why suicides don't count. Many of those suicides would have probably not happened if it wasn't so easy for the victim to kill them selves by using a gun. They are the number 1 cause of suicides for a reason. Because they are easy and quick for people to use.

In the United States.

Other countries with similar, or even higher, suicide rates have far fewer guns per capita and similar or higher suicide rates.



That's becuase they don't have God.
 
2013-07-14 12:19:40 PM
As one of the libby lie-beral libtards here, I say fark that noise. I say this with full understanding that I am commenting in a troll thread.
 
2013-07-14 12:30:30 PM

dittybopper: Actually, that's not necessarily true.  Here's why:  Prior to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, it's true that yes, the NSA did target some Americans, but they were limited technologically:  No one had cell phones or computers, and opening the mail was not something the NSA did (they are a signals intelligence organization).


This is technically correct (the best kind of correct), but as I noted upthread, the FBI and the CIA were opening a shiat-ton of Americans' mail in addition to collecting and storing metadata in the form of address information from the exterior of envelopes and packages. It doesn't matter to most people which three initials are attached - the point is, most of us prefer that no government spook read our mail.
 
2013-07-14 12:31:42 PM

theorellior: As one of the libby lie-beral libtards here, I say fark that noise. I say this with full understanding that I am commenting in a troll meta-surveiled thread.



FTFY
 
2013-07-14 12:50:45 PM
As I've said for years.

There are three types of liberals

There's your 'typical' liberal, 'fanatic' liberal, and 'elitist' liberal. The precise definition of what a 'typical' liberal is varies and ends up with a No True Scotsman if you try to define it clearly but generally they espouse things like equal rights and government regulation to create systems that they believe are more fair and they can be distinguished from the 'fanatic' liberal because they still actually care about right and wrong. The fanatic doesn't care about right and wrong, the ends justify the means if you can get away with it, and every form of corruption is perfectly acceptable if it promotes the end the fanatic wants to see happen. The elitist liberal is the person who sees the whole thing as nothing more than a means to an end for themselves and their own ego. They either believe themselves to be "better" than everyone else or just see something they can exploit. You will recognize them as being rich, powerful, and extremely influential people who pay lip service to 'typical liberal' ideas, but don't live that way themselves. They're concerned about the 'environment' from their private limos and mansions, but you don't seriously think they should worry about their carbon footprint do you? They're important so the rules don't apply to them.

In so far as the NSA goes? The typical liberals hate things like that, the fanatic liberals claim to hate things like that but only really get angry if they think the 'wrong' people have it, and the elitists have no problem with the NSA because it might help keep the peons in line.

Elect more 'typical' liberals and this problem will solve itself.
 
2013-07-14 12:54:56 PM
The NSA is going to do what the NSA wants regardless of who is in office.  They were given a directive and they are following through with that directive.  If you do not like what that directive means, then get rid of the NSA.

Is anyone really surprised by the fact that an information gathering agency is gathering information?  If you are, then you are naive and should just restrict yourself to clucking with the grannies in their knitting circle.  It's like people who love to eat steak and are surprised to find out that cows are being butchered.

Is information gathering bad?  No, the world has been doing it since there was information to be gathered.

How the information is being gathered is the issue.  If they were just scrapping the internet, well then, don't put crap on the internet.  For example, this post I know is being gathered and stored someplace.  Additionally, I am sure that they already have a link between my handle and my real identity - Verbal Kint.  If they are truly breaking the law, then the some other agency should file charges and chuck them in prison.  Is that going to happen?  Nope.

Why fuss, when the fussing isn't going to create true action?
 
2013-07-14 12:56:45 PM

randomjsa: As I've said for years.

There are three types of liberals

There's your 'typical' liberal, 'fanatic' liberal, and 'elitist' liberal. The precise definition of what a 'typical' liberal is varies and ends up with a No True Scotsman if you try to define it clearly but generally they espouse things like equal rights and government regulation to create systems that they believe are more fair and they can be distinguished from the 'fanatic' liberal because they still actually care about right and wrong. The fanatic doesn't care about right and wrong, the ends justify the means if you can get away with it, and every form of corruption is perfectly acceptable if it promotes the end the fanatic wants to see happen. The elitist liberal is the person who sees the whole thing as nothing more than a means to an end for themselves and their own ego. They either believe themselves to be "better" than everyone else or just see something they can exploit. You will recognize them as being rich, powerful, and extremely influential people who pay lip service to 'typical liberal' ideas, but don't live that way themselves. They're concerned about the 'environment' from their private limos and mansions, but you don't seriously think they should worry about their carbon footprint do you? They're important so the rules don't apply to them.

In so far as the NSA goes? The typical liberals hate things like that, the fanatic liberals claim to hate things like that but only really get angry if they think the 'wrong' people have it, and the elitists have no problem with the NSA because it might help keep the peons in line.

Elect more 'typical' liberals and this problem will solve itself.




Wrong!

There are two types of people. Those that label and everyone else.
 
2013-07-14 12:58:46 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's OK that subby lies to us since there is a Democrat in the office. We know we can always trust him to fundamentally not understand polysyllabic words presented to him in article format.


In fairness, that article read like a freshman English major's attempt to sound educated. It was borderline incomprehensible.

/Protip, folks: Big words does not make you smart. Confusing the hell out of your readers? Less so.
 
2013-07-14 12:59:12 PM

StoPPeRmobile: I wonder how many suicides are lumped into the automobile fatality rate. I wonder if we will ever find out. People sure love their cars.


If the statistics are too different to be relevant as a comparison why did you bring it up?
 
2013-07-14 01:07:46 PM

StoPPeRmobile: randomjsa: As I've said for years.

There are three types of liberals

There's your 'typical' liberal, 'fanatic' liberal, and 'elitist' liberal. The precise definition of what a 'typical' liberal is varies and ends up with a No True Scotsman if you try to define it clearly but generally they espouse things like equal rights and government regulation to create systems that they believe are more fair and they can be distinguished from the 'fanatic' liberal because they still actually care about right and wrong. The fanatic doesn't care about right and wrong, the ends justify the means if you can get away with it, and every form of corruption is perfectly acceptable if it promotes the end the fanatic wants to see happen. The elitist liberal is the person who sees the whole thing as nothing more than a means to an end for themselves and their own ego. They either believe themselves to be "better" than everyone else or just see something they can exploit. You will recognize them as being rich, powerful, and extremely influential people who pay lip service to 'typical liberal' ideas, but don't live that way themselves. They're concerned about the 'environment' from their private limos and mansions, but you don't seriously think they should worry about their carbon footprint do you? They're important so the rules don't apply to them.

In so far as the NSA goes? The typical liberals hate things like that, the fanatic liberals claim to hate things like that but only really get angry if they think the 'wrong' people have it, and the elitists have no problem with the NSA because it might help keep the peons in line.

Elect more 'typical' liberals and this problem will solve itself.

Wrong!

There are two types of people. Those that label and everyone else.


Pff, there are 10 kinds of people.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

/Shrug
 
2013-07-14 01:16:58 PM

skozlaw: StoPPeRmobile: I wonder how many suicides are lumped into the automobile fatality rate. I wonder if we will ever find out. People sure love their cars.

If the statistics are too different to be relevant as a comparison why did you bring it up?




Actually, I don't think they are different.

rchsbowman.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-14 01:23:18 PM

randomjsa: [MEGO]


1) How about a few examples of "fanatic liberals" and "elitist liberals", or are these just strawmen?

2) Maybe liberals would stop thinking themselves better than conservatives, if conservatives would stop demonstrating, time and again, that they are knuckleheads.
 
2013-07-14 02:10:18 PM

StoPPeRmobile: Wrong!

There are two types of people. Those that label and everyone else.


Incorrect.  There are 10 kinds of people:  Those who know binary, and those who don't.
 
2013-07-14 02:13:06 PM
The only difference between republicans and democrats in this regard is that the democrats will very likely abuse the power, and republicans will definitely abuse it, and will do so to cheat on elections.
 
2013-07-14 02:35:47 PM

dittybopper: StoPPeRmobile: Wrong!

There are two types of people. Those that label and everyone else.

Incorrect.  There are 10 kinds of people:  Those who know binary, and those who don't.



Was that a matrix glitch?
 
2013-07-14 02:50:56 PM

StoPPeRmobile: dittybopper: StoPPeRmobile: Wrong!

There are two types of people. Those that label and everyone else.

Incorrect.  There are 10 kinds of people:  Those who know binary, and those who don't.


Was that a matrix glitch?


Your Majesty is like a dose of the clap.  Before you arrive is pleasure, and after a pain in the dong.

/One of Shaw's.
 
2013-07-14 03:04:26 PM

dittybopper: StoPPeRmobile: dittybopper: StoPPeRmobile: Wrong!

There are two types of people. Those that label and everyone else.

Incorrect.  There are 10 kinds of people:  Those who know binary, and those who don't.


Was that a matrix glitch?

Your Majesty is like a dose of the clap.  Before you arrive is pleasure, and after a pain in the dong.

/One of Shaw's.




You bastards!
 
2013-07-14 03:15:12 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-14 03:54:01 PM

randomjsa: As I've said for years.

There are three types of liberals

There's your 'typical' liberal, 'fanatic' liberal, and 'elitist' liberal. The precise definition of what a 'typical' liberal is varies and ends up with a No True Scotsman if you try to define it clearly but generally they espouse things like equal rights and government regulation to create systems that they believe are more fair and they can be distinguished from the 'fanatic' liberal because they still actually care about right and wrong. The fanatic doesn't care about right and wrong, the ends justify the means if you can get away with it, and every form of corruption is perfectly acceptable if it promotes the end the fanatic wants to see happen. The elitist liberal is the person who sees the whole thing as nothing more than a means to an end for themselves and their own ego. They either believe themselves to be "better" than everyone else or just see something they can exploit. You will recognize them as being rich, powerful, and extremely influential people who pay lip service to 'typical liberal' ideas, but don't live that way themselves. They're concerned about the 'environment' from their private limos and mansions, but you don't seriously think they should worry about their carbon footprint do you? They're important so the rules don't apply to them.

In so far as the NSA goes? The typical liberals hate things like that, the fanatic liberals claim to hate things like that but only really get angry if they think the 'wrong' people have it, and the elitists have no problem with the NSA because it might help keep the peons in line.

Elect more 'typical' liberals and this problem will solve itself.


What's funny is that you believe you've stumbled upon the true essence of liberalism, when you have in fact defined the majority vs. fringe of any political affiliation.  You could take the above paragraph, substitute "Conservative" for "Liberal", and it would read just as true (with the exception of the Carbon Footprint mention.).

In other words, I don't believe for a second you've said that for years.  Probably stole it from someone much more bright than you.
 
2013-07-14 03:59:54 PM

LeoffDaGrate: In other words, I don't believe for a second you've said that for years. Probably stole it from someone much more bright than you.


You talk much more better than I.
 
2013-07-14 04:19:39 PM

ThePastafarian: Pff, there are 10 kinds of people.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.


There are three kinds of people - those who are good with numbers, and those who aren't.
 
2013-07-14 04:23:10 PM

ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?


...Subby's a freeptard who hopes people will see "Daily Kos" and not click the link.
 
2013-07-14 04:24:20 PM

LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.


Because the average smart person understands this has been going on since the history of forever, the average dumb person assumes this means they approve of it and want it to continue unchecked.
 
2013-07-14 04:30:05 PM

OrangeSnapper: The 30K / year for a decade gun deaths number is correct.  This includes about 11K homicides, and 19K suicides annually.  Car crashes are higher, but only marginally, at 34K per year in the US.


The most important distinction for me: Nearly all car deaths are accidental. Nearly all gun deaths are intentional.
 
2013-07-14 04:33:44 PM

Gyrfalcon: LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.

Because the average smart person understands this has been going on since the history of forever, the average dumb person assumes this means they approve of it and want it to continue unchecked.



Yeah but now they have us fighting their wars for them. They used to do that themselves.
 
2013-07-14 04:35:57 PM

IlGreven: OrangeSnapper: The 30K / year for a decade gun deaths number is correct.  This includes about 11K homicides, and 19K suicides annually.  Car crashes are higher, but only marginally, at 34K per year in the US.

The most important distinction for me: Nearly all car deaths are accidental. Nearly all gun deaths are intentional.


Lol.

One we get cameras inside the cars, for our safety, the truth will come out.

Want to off yourself and ensure your loved ones get paid?
 
2013-07-14 05:25:46 PM
Right wingers always portray liberals as thinking and acting exactly like they do, except on the opposite team.  They'll even ignore reality to do so.  This headline is a perfect example.

/When right wingers say "liberals want to do _____ to conservatives", _____ is what they want to do to liberals.
 
2013-07-14 05:26:41 PM

Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.


Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.
 
2013-07-14 05:30:57 PM

BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.




Probably all of them beat the politicians.
 
2013-07-14 06:13:19 PM

StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.

Probably all of them beat the politicians.


I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally? Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents. Now, granted, I've only met one Republican senator, Slade Gorton (and he was the single, solitary exception to the general rule; he was a dick), but the Democrats I've met have all been good people. I still remember meeting Senator Frank Church when I was a teenager, and he took the time to respond to my objections to arms sales to Turkey and explain his position. More recently, I got to sit down over a beer with Rep. Jim McDermott, and the depth of his knowledge on health care reform (this was pre-ACA) was truly impressive.
 
2013-07-14 06:28:24 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.

Probably all of them beat the politicians.

I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally? Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents. Now, granted, I've only met one Republican senator, Slade Gorton (and he was the single, solitary exception to the general rule; he was a dick), but the Democrats I've met have all been good people. I still remember meeting Senator Frank Church when I was a teenager, and he took the time to respond to my objections to arms sales to Turkey and explain his position. More recently, I got to sit down over a beer with Rep. Jim McDermott, and the depth of his knowledge on health care reform (this was pre-ACA) was truly impressive.




lol.

www.cfnews13.com
"A political career that opened nearly a decade ago closes Monday when a federal judge sentences White on bribery and corruption charges. White, 47, a man who battled family demons in an improbable rise to prominence, is almost certainly headed to prison."
 
2013-07-14 06:33:45 PM

StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.

Probably all of them beat the politicians.

I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally? Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents. Now, granted, I've only met one Republican senator, Slade Gorton (and he was the single, solitary exception to the general rule; he was a dick), but the Democrats I've met have all been good people. I still remember meeting Senator Frank Church when I was a teenager, and he took the time to respond to my objections to arms sales to Turkey and explain his position. More recently, I got to sit down over a beer with Rep. Jim McDermott, and the depth of his knowledge on health care reform (this was pre-ACA) was truly impressive.

lol.

[www.cfnews13.com image 676x456]
"A political career that opened nearly a decade ago closes Monday when a federal judge sentences White on bribery and corruption charges. White, 47, a man who battled family demons in an improbable rise to prominence, is almost certainly headed to prison."


Whatever. You could have just said "no, I never have."
 
2013-07-14 06:35:27 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.

Probably all of them beat the politicians.

I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally? Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents. Now, granted, I've only met one Republican senator, Slade Gorton (and he was the single, solitary exception to the general rule; he was a dick), but the Democrats I've met have all been good people. I still remember meeting Senator Frank Church when I was a teenager, and he took the time to respond to my objections to arms sales to Turkey and explain his position. More recently, I got to sit down over a beer with Rep. Jim McDermott, and the depth of his knowledge on health care reform (this was pre-ACA) was truly impressive.

lol.

[www.cfnews13.com image 676x456]
"A political career that opened nearly a decade ago closes Monday when a federal judge sentences White on bribery and corruption charges. White, 47, a man who battled family demons in an improbable rise to prominence, is almost certainly headed to prison."

Whatever. You could have just said "no, I never have."




I've been too involved. That guy was a used car salesman.

Crooked farks down here.
 
2013-07-14 06:39:00 PM

StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.

Probably all of them beat the politicians.

I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally? Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents. Now, granted, I've only met one Republican senator, Slade Gorton (and he was the single, solitary exception to the general rule; he was a dick), but the Democrats I've met have all been good people. I still remember meeting Senator Frank Church when I was a teenager, and he took the time to respond to my objections to arms sales to Turkey and explain his position. More recently, I got to sit down over a beer with Rep. Jim McDermott, and the depth of his knowledge on health care reform (this was pre-ACA) was truly impressive.

lol.

[www.cfnews13.com image 676x456]
"A political career that opened nearly a decade ago closes Monday when a federal judge sentences White on bribery and corruption charges. White, 47, a man who battled family demons in an improbable rise to prominence, is almost certainly headed to prison."

Whatever. You could have just said "no, I never have."

I've been too involved. That guy was a used car salesman.

Crooked farks down here.


Fine - there is no question that there are elected representatives at all levels, from dogcatcher to President of the United States, who have been dishonest, incompetent, or both. The same can be said of doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers, and waitresses. That doesn't mean I'm going to assume that every waitress I meet is trying to rip me off.
 
2013-07-14 06:57:54 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Mentat: I trust a Democrat more than I trust a Republican, but since I don't trust either of them all that much, it's not saying anything.

Kind of like deciding which prison gang at a supermax is more trustworthy.

Probably all of them beat the politicians.

I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally? Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents. Now, granted, I've only met one Republican senator, Slade Gorton (and he was the single, solitary exception to the general rule; he was a dick), but the Democrats I've met have all been good people. I still remember meeting Senator Frank Church when I was a teenager, and he took the time to respond to my objections to arms sales to Turkey and explain his position. More recently, I got to sit down over a beer with Rep. Jim McDermott, and the depth of his knowledge on health care reform (this was pre-ACA) was truly impressive.

lol.

[www.cfnews13.com image 676x456]
"A political career that opened nearly a decade ago closes Monday when a federal judge sentences White on bribery and corruption charges. White, 47, a man who battled family demons in an improbable rise to prominence, is almost certainly headed to prison."

Whatever. You could have just said "no, I never have."

I've been too involved. That guy was a used car salesman.

Crooked farks down here.

Fine - there is no question that there are elected representatives at all levels, from dogcatcher to President of the United States, who have been dishonest, incompetent, or both. The same can be said of doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers, and waitresses. That doesn't mean I'm going to assume that every waitress I meet is trying ...




The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

You have me on engineers. Curses!
 
2013-07-14 07:00:31 PM

StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.


Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.
 
2013-07-14 07:04:48 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.




People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.
 
2013-07-14 07:12:32 PM

StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.

People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.


Like I said, you sound like a very sad, pathetic person. People - all people - are certainly capable of being dishonest, mean, stupid, and so forth, but in my half century on this rock the vast majority of people I've met seem to be able to keep those impulses under control most of the time. In my law career I have had plenty of clients who were shifty bastards, but the majority of them were decent folk who simply made a mistake. Opposing counsel are always infuriating but at the end of the day most of them are actually honest, professional, and competent. In my second job as a tour guide I speak to five or six hundred people a day, and most of them are delightful. My kid's teachers have all been amazing, with only one exception. I like my neighbors. The folks I meet at the grocery store are usually polite. Life is so much more pleasant for me than your life sounds.
 
2013-07-14 07:47:53 PM

MyRandomName: ghare: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Daily Kos is still a thing?

FOX news is still a thing? Newsmax is still a thing?


/At least KOS is factually accurate, as opposed to just making shiat up.

LOL,  Holy shiat that is funny.


Wait.  Someone actually said that?  For serious?

For fark's sake!  Kos is the liberal version of Fox News.  They would never ruin a perfectly good story with something as inconvenient as facts.
 
2013-07-14 07:50:15 PM

Rhino_man: mark12A: OK, I keep hearing about this "Benghazi" guy.  Who is he?  Secretary of the Interior or something?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!! It's just so farking funny how Obama just left Americans to die at the hands of the Islamist horde and didn't lift a finger to even try to save them. Cracks me up EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

As for the KOS article, the author never really formed a case for his viewpoint. Just stated outright what he *thought* was right. Well, he's wrong. Next?

[gkrouse.files.wordpress.com image 850x452]


Because all of those were "bang" it's over.  There was nothing anyone could do.  Unlike Benghazi where it was a sustained attack that went throughout the night.
 
2013-07-14 08:04:09 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.

People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.

Like I said, you sound like a very sad, pathetic person. People - all people - are certainly capable of being dishonest, mean, stupid, and so forth, but in my half century on this rock the vast majority of people I've met seem to be able to keep those impulses under control most of the time. In my law career I have had plenty of clients who were shifty bastards, but the majority of them were decent folk who simply made a mistake. Opposing counsel are always infuriating but at the end of the day most of them are actually honest, professional, and competent. In my second job as a tour guide I speak to five or six hundred people a day, and most of them are delightful. My kid's teachers have all been amazing, with only one exception. I like my neighbors. The folks I meet at the grocery store are usually polite. Life is so much more pleasant for me than your life sounds.




Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.
 
2013-07-14 08:04:12 PM
I think the article was saying we should thank the government for spying on us and then we should turn in our guns.
 
2013-07-14 08:08:55 PM

StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.

People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.

Like I said, you sound like a very sad, pathetic person. People - all people - are certainly capable of being dishonest, mean, stupid, and so forth, but in my half century on this rock the vast majority of people I've met seem to be able to keep those impulses under control most of the time. In my law career I have had plenty of clients who were shifty bastards, but the majority of them were decent folk who simply made a mistake. Opposing counsel are always infuriating but at the end of the day most of them are actually honest, professional, and competent. In my second job as a tour guide I speak to five or six hundred people a day, and most of them are delightful. My kid's teachers have all been amazing, with only one exception. I like my neighbors. The folks I meet at the grocery store are usually polite. Life is so much more pleasant for me than your life sounds.

Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.


Again, whatever. Like I said, some small number of people are exceptions to the rule and are simply jerks. I see now that you're one of them.
 
2013-07-14 08:38:52 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.

People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.

Like I said, you sound like a very sad, pathetic person. People - all people - are certainly capable of being dishonest, mean, stupid, and so forth, but in my half century on this rock the vast majority of people I've met seem to be able to keep those impulses under control most of the time. In my law career I have had plenty of clients who were shifty bastards, but the majority of them were decent folk who simply made a mistake. Opposing counsel are always infuriating but at the end of the day most of them are actually honest, professional, and competent. In my second job as a tour guide I speak to five or six hundred people a day, and most of them are delightful. My kid's teachers have all been amazing, with only one exception. I like my neighbors. The folks I meet at the grocery store are usually polite. Life is so much more pleasant for me than your life sounds.

Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.

Again, whatever. Like I said, some small number of people are exceptions to the rule and are simply jerks. I see now that you're one of them.




I can tell it's "whatever," by the repeated postings.

As if.
 
2013-07-14 08:47:32 PM

StoPPeRmobile: Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.


Bullshiat.
 
2013-07-14 08:56:49 PM

whidbey: StoPPeRmobile: Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.

Bullshiat.




You made me think of Carlin.

Good call, sir.
 
2013-07-14 08:57:19 PM
Where were you when they were doing this 10...20..30...40...50 years ago. I used to be mad about it, now I am too old to give a sh*t if they hear about my TV shows
 
2013-07-14 08:59:24 PM
Now I read all you people's comments and now I realize you all people need Jesus
 
2013-07-14 08:59:59 PM

ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?


Hello GAB!
 
2013-07-14 09:09:33 PM

too-old: Now I read all you people's comments and now I realize you all people need Jesus




NSA guy, please don't narc on me to the HOA.
 
2013-07-14 09:23:53 PM

BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.

People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.

Like I said, you sound like a very sad, pathetic person. People - all people - are certainly capable of being dishonest, mean, stupid, and so forth, but in my half century on this rock the vast majority of people I've met seem to be able to keep those impulses under control most of the time. In my law career I have had plenty of clients who were shifty bastards, but the majority of them were decent folk who simply made a mistake. Opposing counsel are always infuriating but at the end of the day most of them are actually honest, professional, and competent. In my second job as a tour guide I speak to five or six hundred people a day, and most of them are delightful. My kid's teachers have all been amazing, with only one exception. I like my neighbors. The folks I meet at the grocery store are usually polite. Life is so much more pleasant for me than your life sounds.

Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.

Again, whatever. Like I said, some small number of people are exceptions to the rule and are simply jerks. I see now that you're one of them.


He's just a troll who likes to argue. If the thread was about how water is wet, ol' Stopper would be in here explaining how it was really dry just to keep the peristalsis moving down.
 
2013-07-14 09:37:31 PM

Gyrfalcon: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: BMulligan: StoPPeRmobile: The waitress doesn't really like you. She is pretending since here livelihood depends on it. Almost exactly like a politician. Same goes for strippers, unfortunately.

Dogcatcher the other day, allegedly, euthanized a cat in his vehicle after assuring the person that called that they were bringing the cat to the "rescue" center. On the radio the other day, the owner of the 3-legged cat said she has been that way since birth, and had wandered off during fireworks day.

Lawyers? see Zman trial.

Teachers? See any newspaper, any week.

Doctors? See VA.

Damn. I feel so farking sad for you. How awful it must be to always assume the worst about everyone you meet.

People are farks. That's why they need to be watched.

Like I said, you sound like a very sad, pathetic person. People - all people - are certainly capable of being dishonest, mean, stupid, and so forth, but in my half century on this rock the vast majority of people I've met seem to be able to keep those impulses under control most of the time. In my law career I have had plenty of clients who were shifty bastards, but the majority of them were decent folk who simply made a mistake. Opposing counsel are always infuriating but at the end of the day most of them are actually honest, professional, and competent. In my second job as a tour guide I speak to five or six hundred people a day, and most of them are delightful. My kid's teachers have all been amazing, with only one exception. I like my neighbors. The folks I meet at the grocery store are usually polite. Life is so much more pleasant for me than your life sounds.

Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.

Again, whatever. Like I said, some small number of people are exceptions to the rule and are simply jerks. I see now that you're one of them.

He's just a troll who likes to argue. If the thread was about how water is ...


lol
 
2013-07-14 09:41:28 PM
Pretty sure TFA is arguing that it  isn't OK, and the blog post is an attempt to work through her cognitive dissonance when she realized that this was actually consistent with the logic that the second amendment is a defense against tyranny.

I mean, the post is  stupid and her logic boils down to appeal to authority + poor reading comprehension + cherry-picking quotes, but she's not actually saying what subby seems to think she's saying.
 
2013-07-14 09:48:13 PM

ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?


Subby clearly DNRTFA -> automatic green light.
 
2013-07-14 11:24:23 PM

StoPPeRmobile: reven: OrangeSnapper: The 30K / year for a decade gun deaths number is correct.  This includes about 11K homicides, and 19K suicides annually.  Car crashes are higher, but only marginally, at 34K per year in the US.

The most important distinction for me: Nearly all car deaths are accidental. Nearly all gun deaths are intentional.

Lol.

One we get cameras inside the cars, for our safety, the truth will come out.


Yes, I'm sure people will put themselves in mortal danger just to try and kill their passenger.  If they really wanted to kill them, they'd use a weapon with far less danger to themselves, like...say...a knife.
 
2013-07-15 01:17:10 AM

StoPPeRmobile: whidbey: StoPPeRmobile: Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it.

Bullshiat.

You made me think of Carlin.

Good call, sir.


So you are still going to keep talking this shiat, or admit you got a little bit too Nazi in this thread?
 
2013-07-15 06:14:34 AM

whidbey: StoPPeRmobile: whidbey: StoPPeRmobile: Sounds like you don't want our children to be safe. If we can save just one child it's all worth it. Bullshiat. You made me think of Carlin. Good call, sir. So you are still going to keep talking this shiat, or admit you got a little bit too Nazi in this thread?


Oh look, another one that hates children. Why do you want children to die?

Do you risk the lives of children, in a multi-ton, shiny, contraption of death, for a pack of smokes or a sixpack?
 
2013-07-15 09:20:33 AM
The thing about governments is that people have successors. People like Bush and Obama have both been elected before, and will be elected again, and I don't know many people who would trust both Bush and Obama with powers like these (one of them, sometimes, but never both, save for a few who I call cowards). To trust a given administration with power is to trust every administration after it with that power, sight unseen, and that is very, very seldom a sane thing to do.

But then, I consider the "living Constitution" hypothesis to be, from a philosophical standpoint, worse than worthless. So what do I know? I'm just one of those unenlightened rubes that need to be saved from their academically-unfashionable selves.
 
2013-07-15 09:22:46 AM

too-old: ginandbacon: Did  Subbyand I read the same article?

Hello GAB!


Hello TO!
 
2013-07-15 09:47:52 AM

born_yesterday: LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.

This.  I haven't heard a single person say that this spying is acceptable regardless of the administration.

I can't hear the voices in Subby's head, so they don't count.


Its not what Democrats are saying about domestic spying that is noteworthy. Its what they're not saying.
 
2013-07-15 11:36:52 AM
No.
 
2013-07-15 11:41:25 AM

Gyrfalcon: LarryDan43: Projection. Because the average Republican had no problem with what Bush was doing regarding spying, they now don't think the average Democrat has a problem with what Obama is doing.

Because the average smart person understands this has been going on since the history of forever, the average dumb person assumes this means they approve of it and want it to continue unchecked.


You start making sense again on this issue when the "S" word is removed from the equation. Harumph.
 
2013-07-15 12:30:32 PM

StoPPeRmobile: Oh look, another one that hates children.


*plonk*

Bye, troll
 
2013-07-15 07:24:45 PM

BMulligan: I'm curious - have you ever met with your congressman or either of your senators personally?


Yes.  It was depressing to think that basically nothing he can do will lose him his seat.

Have you ever spoken with any of them about your concerns? My guess is that you haven't, which is a shame - I've always found the elected officials I've met to be smart, hard-working, and genuinely concerned about the issues that are important to their constituents.

Sounds like your bullshiat detector is broken.
 
Displayed 137 of 137 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report