2016 Presidential Election

[allegro]

The only thing left to debate is whether the USA FREEDOM Act did enough and debating whether it is better than a complete expiration.

How could the "extended" provisions of the Patriot Act and the provisions a new USA Freedom Act exist at the same time if they contradict each other? That makes zero legal sense, of course.

The sunset clause refers to the new Act, which is linked, here and expires on December 31, 2017. That's not an "extension" of the current Act, it's a sunset clause on the new Act (amending the prior sunset clauses, not extending).

Pretty much all Acts of Congress of these types have sunset clauses. A two-year sunset clause is pretty short, actually.

Anyway, it's a moot point since the new Act failed in the Senate and now everybody has to vote on extending the Patriot Act in full which has passed the last several times.

Look, I wish they'd get rid of the entire fucking Patriot Act but we are living in a military police state and 9/11 took away any hope of freedom of privacy in this country.

[binaryhermit]

Call me cynical, but let's say that the expiring provisions of the orwellian-named Patriot Act were allowed to expire.
What makes you think the intelligence community would stop their overreaching BS?

EDIT: Also, LOL, Mike Crapo

[DigitalChaos]

How could the "extended" provisions of the Patriot Act and the provisions a new USA Freedom Act exist at the same time if they contradict each other? That makes zero legal sense, of course.

The sunset clause refers to the new Act, which is linked, here and expires on December 31, 2017. That's not an "extension" of the current Act, it's a sunset clause on the new Act (amending the prior sunset clauses, not extending).

Pretty much all Acts of Congress of these types have sunset clauses. A two-year sunset clause is pretty short, actually.

Anyway, it's a moot point since the new Act failed in the Senate and now everybody has to vote on extending the Patriot Act in full which has passed the last several times.

Look, I wish they'd get rid of the entire fucking Patriot Act but we are living in a military police state and 9/11 took away any hope of freedom of privacy in this country.

Well, functionally, USA FREEDOM Act just modifies Section 215. It doesn't eliminate it. So we would have gotten another 2.5 years this modified version instead of just completely letting the whole damn thing expire.


It was primarily being sold as eliminating the bulk spying, but it doesn't actually do this now that it was diluted. They intentionally modified the wording to be much more vague. Even the original co-sponsors say so:
"This is not the bill that was reported out of the judiciary bill unanimously," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee who was a co-sponsor of the initial version of the bill. "The result is a bill that will actually not end bulk collection, regrettably."
And there are plenty of other issues with the proposed "reform"


But yea... shit didn't pass (good!) so it doesn't matter. My complaint wasn't even about the bill itself, but in how some of the vocal anti-NSA senators voted. That's why I posted about it in the presidential election thread. NSA spying is an incredibly important topic and I want to closely look at how potential candidates are approaching it.

[DigitalChaos]

Call me cynical, but let's say that the expiring provisions of the orwellian-named Patriot Act were allowed to expire.
What makes you think the intelligence community would stop their overreaching BS?

So, there are other things besides Section 215 that allow this crap... but let's pretend ALL of them are eliminated. Maybe even go as far as also explicitly outlawing domestic spying and dragnet data collection. 1 - They would have a hard time maintaining these programs without funding. 2 - Also, it would be hard to find people willing to do things that are explicitly illegal. Govt employees of all forms do not want to risk their jobs, or in some cases their lives. All of the leadership believes that what they are currently doing is legally supported. It's hard to get away with doing blatantly illegal shit, especially something that would require so many people to operate.

But in terms of what is happening right now... well, if June 1 hits and there is no extension for Section 215.. They would probably start suspending SOME of their spy programs... if something like Section 702 doesn't cover them. The fact that there are actually secret interpretations of laws makes it really fucked up and pretty difficult to know exactly how it would pan out though.

[allegro]

Well, functionally, USA FREEDOM Act just modifies Section 215. It doesn't eliminate it. So we would have gotten another 2.5 years this modified version instead of just completely letting the whole damn thing expire.


It was primarily being sold as eliminating the bulk spying, but it doesn't actually do this now that it was diluted. They intentionally modified the wording to be much more vague. Even the original co-sponsors say so:
"This is not the bill that was reported out of the judiciary bill unanimously," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee who was a co-sponsor of the initial version of the bill. "The result is a bill that will actually not end bulk collection, regrettably."
And there are plenty of other issues with the proposed "reform"


But yea... shit didn't pass (good!) so it doesn't matter. My complaint wasn't even about the bill itself, but in how some of the vocal anti-NSA senators voted. That's why I posted about it in the presidential election thread. NSA spying is an incredibly important topic and I want to closely look at how potential candidates are approaching it.

I doubt those conservative Republicans are going to allow it to expire. And most of Paul's fellow Republican Senators will make sure of that. So the choices aren't "let it expire or new Act," it's probably "Patriot Act extended or that Act that just failed."

Because otherwise ... ISIS.

[DigitalChaos]

I doubt those conservative Republicans are going to allow it to expire. And most of Paul's fellow Republican Senators will make sure of that. So the choices aren't "let it expire or new Act," it's probably "Patriot Act extended or that Act that just failed."

Because otherwise ... ISIS.

Yup. At least we don't have to wait very long to see how it plays out though. I'd love to see the NSA version of a govt shutdown. It's funny how almost none of the supporters of that shutdown want to see it happen to the NSA.

[allegro]

Yup. At least we don't have to wait very long to see how it plays out though. I'd love to see the NSA version of a govt shutdown. It's funny how almost none of the supporters of that shutdown want to see it happen to the NSA.

Ted Cruz was on the anti-NSA list, oddly enough.

[elevenism]

@allegro i thought you were putting this thread on ignore...and unplugging from the internet, for that matter

[allegro]

@allegro i thought you were putting this thread on ignore...and unplugging from the internet, for that matter

Thanks for reminding me ...

[elevenism]

Thanks for reminding me ...

i was really unhappy about you going off the grid anyway.
im really glad you didnt

[DigitalChaos]

Thinking more on "would the NSA *really* shut down?" topic... Another angle is the most believable conspiracy approach: we shut it down for a bit and wait for some terror attack that lets the govt blame the anti-NSA people. And yes, it wouldn't be hard to imagine it being one of the self-manufactured incidents that keep happening.

[DigitalChaos]

Thanks for reminding me ...

god damn it elevenism

[Deepvoid]

Add Rick Santorum to the growing GOP potential candidates.

7 individuals have officially announced their candidacy.
8 others will most likely join that list.

My question, how do you have debates with 15 candidates? It's going to be chaotic!

[GulDukat]

Could Sanders beat Clinton?
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/ca...id=sm_fb_msnbc

[GulDukat]

You know how people say that Bernie Sanders is "too far to the left," a "socialist," etc. Well, look who the American people elected FOUR times. Just listen to what FDR was proposing:

[Khrz]

Man, decades of Red Scare really damaged the US political rethoric... Although Europe isn't really one to judge, since on the other hand we're extremely wary of nationalim and patriotic pride...

[allegro]

Man, decades of Red Scare really damaged the US political rethoric... Although Europe isn't really one to judge, since on the other hand we're extremely wary of nationalim and patriotic pride...

It isn't Red Scare, it's wealth and huge tax cuts on the wealthy that occurred since the 50s and each time anybody mentions bringing the old tax system back, the wealthy scream "SOCIALISM" in order to protect their relatively new low tax rates. "Redistribution of wealth" isn't taken kindly when people are greedy and want to keep every.single.penny for themselves and don't want to pay one cent in taxes. Hell, when Kennedy wanted Medicare (then known as "Kennedy Care") they were calling him a Commie because nobody wanted to pay for it. Americans like getting all kinds of free shit, they just don't like paying for anything. They're too stupid to see that the public school system, transportation, libraries, parks, roads, etc etc etc are all "socialism" in some way or another, and they don't want to pay for any of that shit, either. They don't want to pay for anything.

When they need a handout from the government, they're right there in line; unemployment, disability, social security, food stamps, FEMA, flood insurance, whatever is out there, they'll snap it up, and then bitch about the OTHER people getting it, but never themselves.

See this. (Here's more like the reality.)

Bernie Sanders CALLS HIMSELF a "Democratic Socialist."

[Khrz]

Well socialism is still the scarecrow everyone brandishes to oppose those changes though, even though nobody seems to know what socialism could possibly entail (proof being in the fact that the mere word seems to compel everyone to duck under the table) ? Isn't that related to years of opposition to the USSR in any way ?
Genuine question really, I'm intrigued and ignorant in the matter, from the other end of the atlantic ocean it does looks like that, but from such a distance you only see the very large objects, and none of the significant details...

[allegro]

Well socialism is still the scarecrow everyone brandishes to oppose those changes though, even though nobody seems to know what socialism could possibly entail (proof being in the fact that the mere word seems to compel everyone to duck under the table) ? Isn't that related to years of opposition to the USSR in any way ?
Genuine question really, I'm intrigued and ignorant in the matter, from the other end of the atlantic ocean it does looks like that, but from such a distance you only see the very large objects, and none of the significant details...

Most Americans don't even know the DEFINITION of socialism (or communism). It's a word that's thrown around in an ignorant manner. They don't remember shit about the McCarthy Era or weren't even ALIVE. Honestly, people barely remember the fall of the USSR, barely remember communist Russia or East Germany. We have a LOT of Poles here in Chicago and people around me in Chicago seem surprised that Polish people used to be required to speak Russian. Because they've already forgotten that Poland was part of the Soviet Union. We have short memories.

I used to live in a City called Hamtramck in Detroit that was predominantly Polish and I had a cartoon t-shirt with Lech Walesa in jail holding a little flag that said "Solidarność" Now, I doubt anybody would know who the fuck he is.



Of course, this county's biggest defense against the USSR was ORGANIZED LABOR. Communism didn't stand a chance in this country. It wasn't a "threat" here at all because of strong organized labor unions.

The fear of socialism, here, really, is "sharing the wealth." Americans don't like to share. They like to earn a bunch of money and not share it. Sure, there are a LOT of very generous Americans, but it's sad that we've grown to be a country full of assholes who don't want to pay taxes because it will go to that other guy who doesn't deserve any of our money. Your kid wants to go to college? Pay for it, just like we did. Your kid hungry? Go feed your own fucking kid, not my problem. That's the "fear of socialism" -- it's the fear of "having to give up our money to take care of the other people."

We'd rather have 6 bigscreen HDTVs than contribute toward feeding the hungry. Our money goes toward us. Them's the rules.

Socialism is mostly defined as "making us pay for shit or deducting money from our pay." It is not associated with the USSR, at all; it's associated with the wallet.

Right up until the time we need the money, then we expect a bunch of wallets to be open. We're a hypocritical bunch.

We are given examples like Denmark where they have all these happy shiny highly-educated people and a non-existent homeless rate, but they pay a lot of taxes (socialism). WHAT? THEY PAY A LOT OF TAXES??? FUCK THAT SHIT!!! WE'D RATHER HAVE STUDENT LOANS UNTIL WE DIE, HOMELESS PEOPLE, UNEDUCATED PEOPLE, GHETTOS AND DRUG GANGS!!! FUCK THOSE SOCIALISTS!!

And they have "National Healthcare" which we are told means they have to wait MONTHS to see a doctor. (We forget that we have to wait months to see a specialist in this country, too. And, rural and low-income urban areas don't have any doctors at all.)

Now, on the other hand, it doesn't help that we have a government that isn't very good at spending money. They're good at collecting it, but it's like handing whiskey and car keys to a 14-year-old. I can give you about 1,000 links to real-life true stories of our government spending $10,000 on a toilet in a park, etc. etc. Our government is really good at spending without looking at what they're spending. Which is why Americans don't trust the government to spend, and would rather just spend money on themselves. But Americans tend to spend money like drunk Sailors out on shore leave. Which is why we have so many senior citizens who didn't save money who are relying primarily on Social Security and who need food stamps and food banks for food. This problem isn't expected to get any better, either.

[binaryhermit]

I'm mildly intrigued by Pataki.
But he has no shot.

[littlemonkey613]

Add Rick Santorum to the growing GOP potential candidates.

7 individuals have officially announced their candidacy.
8 others will most likely join that list.

My question, how do you have debates with 15 candidates? It's going to be chaotic!

Its going to be spectacular.

[GulDukat]

Great segments from the Daily Show:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...ushpmg00000024

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/l7...ntial-campaign

[DigitalChaos]

Rand Paul on the daily show, this week, was pretty awesome too. They basically double-teamed on the GOP due to their hypocrisy.

[Deepvoid]

Huckabee won, hands-down, the citation of the week award.

“Now I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in PE,”
“I’m pretty sure that I would have found my feminine side and said, ‘Coach, I think I’d rather shower with the girls today."

Between defending Duggar and wanting to go back in time to channel his inner woman just to shower with girls, one could argue that this guy is a legit perv.

[allegro]

Huckabee won, hands-down, the citation of the week award.

“Now I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in PE,”
“I’m pretty sure that I would have found my feminine side and said, ‘Coach, I think I’d rather shower with the girls today."

Between defending Duggar and wanting to go back in time to channel his inner woman just to shower with girls, one could argue that this guy is a legit perv.

Huckabee is just an ignorant right-wing religious ass.

This is from January of 2014:

"I think it's time for Republicans to no longer accept listening to Democrats talk about a war on women. Because the fact is, the Republicans don't have a war on women. They have a war for women. For them to be empowered; to be something other than victims of their gender. Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have a government provide for them birth control medication. Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything anyone else can do. Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women. That's not a war on them, it's a war for them. And if the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it, let's take that discussion all across America because women are far more than Democrats have made them to be. And women across America have to stand up and say, Enough of that nonsense.

He also said this: “[America has to import so many workers because] for the last 35 years we have aborted more than a million people who would have been in our workforce.”

AND LET US NOT FORGET THIS!

[Deepvoid]

Thank you for those. This guy is truly unbelievable. Still have 17 months to go. There will be many more gems coming from him.

[DigitalChaos]

Cenk Uygur recaps the awesome senate debate from this weekend and ties it into the primaries.

[Dra508]

Add Rick Santorum to the growing GOP potential candidates.

7 individuals have officially announced their candidacy.
8 others will most likely join that list.

My question, how do you have debates with 15 candidates? It's going to be chaotic!

Its going to be spectacular.

I thought I read they were going to limit the number of folks in the debate based on how they are polling. Who's poll? Please don't let it be folks news.

Beyond being comical, the number of people throwing their hat in, it's all about money. All those fucktards are in now, they'll bow out later, so they can brand themselves "former presidential candidate" and start collecting redunklous speaking fees and book contracts.

This one showed up in my newsfeed this morning. I don't think it sounds like Ted Cruz, but I actually haven't listened to the dude talk a lot - honestly.

http://www.thestatelyharold.com/#!Ex...f2312d7962f040

[cynicmuse]

Add Rick Santorum to the growing GOP potential candidates.

7 individuals have officially announced their candidacy.
8 others will most likely join that list.

My question, how do you have debates with 15 candidates? It's going to be chaotic!

For the first debate on Fox News, they'll take the top 10 based upon the previous 5 national polls. However, narrowing the field to 10 people from 15 won't prevent the train wreck.

[Deepvoid]

This guy just announced he's running.