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

EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#41

Post by rayiner »

AutoKorrect wrote: post #39

in the end, this would mean nothing. Think about it: the President already has an extra-Constitutional kill list, why stop there?

What extra-Constitutional kill list? I'm a strong proponent of civil rights, but the rhetoric around the issue is a bit ridiculous. The Constitution doesn't have all of these things you think are in there, and both Due Process and the extra-territorial application of the Constitution are much fuzzier concepts than your rhetoric contemplates.

The Constitution is not the be-all, end-all of what should limit governmental action. At the end of the day, we have a democratically elected government. And voters consistently elect people who believe in the god-given right of America to kill any foreigner who poses a threat to the country, with no process at all. Opposition to this policy is, like gun control, something Democrats abandoned at the national level with Clinton in order to keep the party from being swallowed up in obsolescence. I don't agree with it, but you can only fault a President so much for doing what people want him to do.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#42

Post by rayiner »

chimeracoder wrote: post #19
w1ntermute wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, the sad truth has been that most average people have responded to this issue by saying that they have nothing to hide and don't mind since it helps catch terrorists. Normally, you could expect Republicans to oppose a big government program like this, but, as we all know, as soon as you say the word "terrorist", they're all suddenly in favor of big government and big spending.

> Normally, you could expect Republicans to oppose a big government program like this, but, as we all know, as soon as you say the word "terrorist", they're all suddenly in favor of big government and big spending. It works on both sides of the aisle. I'm too embarrassed to count how many progressives I know who opposed the FISA wiretaps, the PATRIOT act, and Gitmo under Bush, yet bent over backwards to find ways to…

So as a Democrat whose opinions have evolved on the subject, it's not just blind partisanship. A lot of the fear-mongering about the PATRIOT Act that was waved around in 2001 just hasn't come to pass, and it has been watered down over time. The same thing with Guantanamo. The Supreme Court pretty much smacked down the Executive between 2004-2008, and the fears never materialized. This is the list of defense attorneys for the Guantanamo Bay detainees: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_attorneys#Guanta.... This isn't a big scary shadowy thing anymore--the place is crawling with lawyers now.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#43

Post by rayiner »

mcantelon wrote: post #36
crusso wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes from voters who are too apathetic or ignorant to understand the value of basic Liberty. Any other finger-pointing is pretty meaningless.

>It comes from voters who are too apathetic or ignorant to understand the value of basic Liberty. No it doesn't. Voters aren't complaining to government about this stuff. Someone else is pushing for this. These sorts of ideas don't come from nowhere. >Any other finger-pointing is pretty meaningless. No it isn't. If we know who's pushing for this we can possibly persuade them to stop. Politicians aren't going to stop…

> No it isn't. If we know who's pushing for this we can possibly persuade them to stop. Politicians aren't going to stop if someone is donating to their campaigns and there isn't a massive public outcry, but a special interest pushing for this might be easier to reach (or, if they can't be reached, they can be exposed, increasing the chance of the kind of public outrage that politicians might actually react to)

This is an oft-repeated but utterly wrong characterization of the political process. It fits a compelling narrative for some people, but it has no basis in reality.

Here is the basic truth: it takes neither public outcry or big donations to get politicians to do something like this. Wal-Mart, Lockheed, etc, don't need to grease any palms to get a Congressperson to jump at their command. No, all they have to do is use some magic words: "jobs," "terrorists," etc. Politicians are a deeply paranoid bunch. They are paranoid of being labeled "soft on crime" or "soft on terrorism" or "bad for jobs." And they are deeply paranoid about these things because they are trigger words for the public.

A good example of this is how Obama fell over himself to compete with Romney about who could be more pro-coal. Why did Obama swing so hard on that issue? Not for fear of losing donations. The "clean coal" lobby gave $240k to Obama's campaign. That's nothing in a campaign that raised over $1 billion. No, he did it because "anti-coal" is a buzzword, not just for people in coal mining states, but for blue-collar Democrats who equate "anti-coal" with "anti-industrial jobs" and the more liberal elements of the party.

The same thing is true of terrorism. There is not a huge public outcry saying "make us safer" but there doesn't need to be. Nobody wants to be painted as "pro terrorist" and the fear of terrorism is still a great way to get a project through the DOD or NSA.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#45

Post by graue »

rayiner wrote: post #42
chimeracoder wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Normally, you could expect Republicans to oppose a big government program like this, but, as we all know, as soon as you say the word "terrorist", they're all suddenly in favor of big government and big spending. It works on both sides of the aisle. I'm too embarrassed to count how many progressives I know who opposed the FISA wiretaps, the PATRIOT act, and Gitmo under Bush, yet bent over backwards to find ways to…

So as a Democrat whose opinions have evolved on the subject, it's not just blind partisanship. A lot of the fear-mongering about the PATRIOT Act that was waved around in 2001 just hasn't come to pass, and it has been watered down over time. The same thing with Guantanamo. The Supreme Court pretty much smacked down the Executive between 2004-2008, and the fears never materialized. This is the list of defense attorneys…

Scroll up a bit on that same page, and it sounds like there are serious abuses.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#46

Post by white_devil »

rayiner wrote: post #43
mcantelon wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It comes from voters who are too apathetic or ignorant to understand the value of basic Liberty. No it doesn't. Voters aren't complaining to government about this stuff. Someone else is pushing for this. These sorts of ideas don't come from nowhere. >Any other finger-pointing is pretty meaningless. No it isn't. If we know who's pushing for this we can possibly persuade them to stop. Politicians aren't going to stop…

> No it isn't. If we know who's pushing for this we can possibly persuade them to stop. Politicians aren't going to stop if someone is donating to their campaigns and there isn't a massive public outcry, but a special interest pushing for this might be easier to reach (or, if they can't be reached, they can be exposed, increasing the chance of the kind of public outrage that politicians might actually react to) This…

> That's nothing in a campaign that raised over $1 billion.

Well, he sure got bought fucking big time though.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#47

Post by flyinRyan »

rayiner wrote: post #42
chimeracoder wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Normally, you could expect Republicans to oppose a big government program like this, but, as we all know, as soon as you say the word "terrorist", they're all suddenly in favor of big government and big spending. It works on both sides of the aisle. I'm too embarrassed to count how many progressives I know who opposed the FISA wiretaps, the PATRIOT act, and Gitmo under Bush, yet bent over backwards to find ways to…

So as a Democrat whose opinions have evolved on the subject, it's not just blind partisanship. A lot of the fear-mongering about the PATRIOT Act that was waved around in 2001 just hasn't come to pass, and it has been watered down over time. The same thing with Guantanamo. The Supreme Court pretty much smacked down the Executive between 2004-2008, and the fears never materialized. This is the list of defense attorneys…

>A lot of the fear-mongering about the PATRIOT Act that was waved around in 2001 just hasn't come to pass

What? The PATRIOT act has almost exclusively been used for non-terrorist cases. I.e. we were lied to about what it was for. And if you think how Gitmo has been used "wasn't that bad" I'd like to know what would need to happen for you to think it actually was bad.

Post reply on HN