Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

nationaljournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 207 posts

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#161

Post by magicalist »

sb057 wrote: post #52
ikeboy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/paul-repeats-baseless-vacci... http://religiondispatches.org/rand-paul-we-wouldnt-need-laws...

> http://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/paul-repeats-baseless-vacci... That quote is taken out of context. To quote the entire thing: "The point is that I have heard of – I mean who hasn’t ever met a child who has a profound disability and in the parents’ mind they see a connection,” Paul said. “But I didn’t allege there is a connection. I said I heard of people who believe there is a connection. I do think that vaccines…

> Paul, Feb. 2: I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines.

> That quote is taken out of context. To quote the entire thing

That wasn't out of context, that's him later trying to walk back his quote. They link directly to a video of him saying what they quoted[1]

(and even ignoring that, his point that parents should essentially use their instincts for setting a vaccination schedule is irresponsible and would make for incredibly poor public policy)

[1] http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000351424 at 1:53

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#162

Post by maratd »

lubos wrote: post #137
maratd wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was kind of shocked What's so shocking about letting parents decide what medical treatment their children undergo? He has repeatedly said that parents should get their children vaccinated. And they should. Parents who don't are irresponsible, both socially and toward their children. However, should and must are two very different words. When you start talking about mandatory, you're talking about cops breaking do…

Another straw-man argument against mandatory vaccination. Mandatory also means you might be subject to fines or denied access to government social programs.

> Mandatory also means you might be subject to fines

So you write me that ticket and I shove it down my pants, wipe my ass with it, and throw it in your direction. What then?

You want to know what happens when you don't pay the government's fines?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2015/02/09/384968360/jai...

So you're OK with throwing people in jail for not performing a medical procedure on their children? I just want to know where you stand.

Personally, I think we're better off with a public shaming campaign, same as we did with smoking, but apparently I'm soft?

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#163

Post by mehrzad »

donatj wrote: post #160
mehrzad wrote: post #147

Great, the man also wants to destroy public funding of science. I understand that that is his opinion, but well fuck that. I want to be a scientist and need REUs. Science is more important than capitalism. Capitalism has failed the world. edit: that last sentence was a bit much, I'll admit.

Capitalism is the reason you are using the wonderful machine in front of you. Capitalism is the reason you have food. Capitalism is the reason you are not right now waiting in line for toilet paper. Capitalism has far from failed. Very little actual good and a lot of bad science has come from public funding.

>Very little actual good and a lot of bad science has come from public funding.

Many, many private and public universities depend on federal grants to do the important research in every field.

Perhaps what you say about capitalism is correct, but an increasingly automated society can probably do without it. Look up post-scarcity economics.

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#164

Post by zak_mc_kracken »

higherpurpose wrote: post #62
zak_mc_kracken wrote: post #42

All presidential candidates make similar promises when they run, and then, when they get elected, they get exposed to the true reasons why most of these programs exist and they realize the reality is not as simple as it seemed from outside. And then, they perpetuate the status quo. Besides, I just can't stand libertarians who contradict their own positions saying that they want the government out of their lives excep…

On this issue I think Rand Paul has been quite consistent. He was among only a handful of Senators against the FISA Amendments Act renewal from 2012, when he proposed a "4th amendment act" that would require a warrant for all data requests: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIyLlXBcbjo https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/12/why-we-should-all-care... He's been against the Patriot Act as well: http://www.theatlantic.com/p…

None of what you say contradicts anything that I said.

He's not against government, he's against government when it bothers him and in favor of government when it suits him.

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#165

Post by sukilot »

joelrunyon wrote: post #109
lubos wrote: post #30

This is not surprising. Rand Paul, similar to his father Ron Paul, has very libertarian political views which means they prefer no government involvement, not just in the Internet but anywhere. This is not as good as it sounds. For example, he doesn't support FED in controlling money supply. But FED was instrumental in making USD the most stable currency in the last 100 years. He doesn't like energy regulations and b…

He would have authority over the NSA. That's something he could directly end. However, FED / Deregulation, abortion, same-sex marriage & vaccination are not things that can be resolved by an executive order. Every 4 years, people have the same arguments about the same things and they're all generally about things that Congress controls - not the President. And the popular ones (abortion, gun control, etc) haven't rea…

Obama promised to end Guantanamo bay antiterrorism/whatever, which is executive branch.

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#166

Post by sukilot »

natmaster wrote: post #92
morgante wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Rand Paul is a libertarian (I was simply responding to the parent). As for abortion, even if you consider the fetus a "person," I don't see how a libertarian would make a good case for the government to force the mother to continue to sustain and provide for it. > Removing regulation over social issues from government IS a very libertarian philosophy. Delegating to the states is very different from remo…

> I don't see how a libertarian would make a good case for the government to force the mother to continue to sustain and provide for it. So all neglect laws should be removed? > The libertarian thing to do would be to ban such regulation. That requires a constitutional amendment. Those are not easy to get passed.

The fact that mothers give birth to babies,not to fully formed and educated adults, is a major unsolved problem of Libertarian and Objectivist (and part of Conservative) philosophy.

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#167

Post by meepmorp »

donatj wrote: post #160
mehrzad wrote: post #147

Great, the man also wants to destroy public funding of science. I understand that that is his opinion, but well fuck that. I want to be a scientist and need REUs. Science is more important than capitalism. Capitalism has failed the world. edit: that last sentence was a bit much, I'll admit.

Capitalism is the reason you are using the wonderful machine in front of you. Capitalism is the reason you have food. Capitalism is the reason you are not right now waiting in line for toilet paper. Capitalism has far from failed. Very little actual good and a lot of bad science has come from public funding.

> Very little actual good and a lot of bad science has come from public funding.

Are you serious?

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#168

Post by Rapzid »

jebblue wrote: post #144
encoderer wrote: post #70

Yeah, and Nixon had a secret plan to end the war. Twice.

The war that was started by the Democratic Party: http://blogs.britannica.com/2009/01/2-the-vietnam-war-top-10... "President John F. Kennedy had sent military advisors and then troops into South Vietnam. After Kennedy’s assassination, what to do about the Vietnam War became a pressing matter of business for the new president, Lyndon B. Johnson." From there see the VietNam War link: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked…

Why does everything have to be about which party is at fault for what? That was a comment about one person's campaign promises.

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#169

Post by GabrielF00 »

natmaster wrote: post #140
GabrielF00 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some googling shows this to be, at best, partially true. While marriage license requirements were used to prevent miscegenation, they were not invented for that purpose and they have been used for other purposes. >Not until the 16th century did European states begin to require that marriages be performed under legal auspices. In part, this was an attempt to prevent unions between young adults whose parents opposed th…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the_... The context here is United States. I don't know anything about European marriage nor is it relevant to this conversation.

This Yale Law Journal article outlines the arguments made by 19th century state courts on both sides of the common law marriage issue: [http://www.jstor.org/stable/797340]

Re: Rand Paul Pledges to Immediately End NSA Mass Surveillance If Elected President

#170

Post by GabrielF00 »

tzs wrote: post #157
natmaster wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't see how a libertarian would make a good case for the government to force the mother to continue to sustain and provide for it. So all neglect laws should be removed? > The libertarian thing to do would be to ban such regulation. That requires a constitutional amendment. Those are not easy to get passed.

> So all neglect laws should be removed? That was the position of Murray Rothbard [1], who was one of the major intellectual founders of modern libertarianism, particularly anarcho-capitalism. He was a founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Most internet libertarians seem to be followers of his school of libertarianism (although they often do not know it...). His book "The Ethics of Liberty" covers children in ch…

Is the world envisioned in the second paragraph really one that people want to live in?
Post reply on HN