I am glad to argue with some people other than KoH for once though. You guys need to come over and join our General Talk threads, I'm never going to catch up to the big-time spammers if KoH is the only one that will argue with me.

This thread is funny. Really. I love the political back and forth and I'd chime in, but I see that there are enough Democrat supporters/Republican loathers here to argue on my behalf.

Carry on. Oh, Obama 2012 FTW.

Depends on if Dragon really jumps in CX :P

I might need your backup if this becomes a 2v1

Well Bullfluff!


One or more of your Congressional representatives have chosen to complicate things – to make you jump through an additional hoop. It's called a "captcha". Your message will be blocked and unread unless you complete the form below.

Congress specializes in adding burdens and complications to those who oppose their plans. Examples abound. Please don't let Congress stop you by skipping this extra step; your voice is needed.

We were unable to fetch the captcha image for at least one of your representatives. Chances are, his or her website is temporarily down or is acting unpredictably. Try refreshing this page after a few minutes, and we'll give it another try.

I am a Dem but I don't like the fact that Obama went from using public funding during the primary and then accepted big corporate money during the election. One of his campaign promises was about rescinding all of "W's" Executive Orders, which could easily be done by his issuing his own Executive Orders, none of which were done. Obama also renewed the "Patriot" Act and did absolutely nothing about the Military Commissions Acts of 2005 and 2006. Those 3 Acts together did more to violate our rights than anything ever done in our history.

I was listening to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage on republican talk radio just to hear what lunacys they're spouting. When they said that Obama has this country over $14 Trillion in debt I went and did some fact checking and here's what I came up with: http://zfacts.com/p/1195.html

Republican National Debt: $12 Trillion and Counting

January 11, 2012. Republicans blame the "Democratic Congress" for their debt increases. The trouble is that Congress was only Democratic 8 out of the 20 years, and in those 8 years, on average, Congress passed smaller budgets than the Republican presidents requested. The specifics are all right here: It Was the Republicans.

So, let's add up the debt under Reagan and the Bushes. We can't blame Reagan for the debt's increase until his first budget took effect, October 1, 1981. Then, for 12 years until Sept. 30, 1993, the Republicans ballooned the debt. Later, George W. Bush took over.

Under Reagan and Bush: $3.4 Trillion increase in the debt.
Under George W. Bush: $6.1 Trillion.[1]
Total: $9.5 Trillion. (without counting interest)

But wait, there's interest on that debt ... continued below the graph. The debt went up during Clinton's years only because of $2.2 Trillion interest on the Reagan-Bush debt. Otherwise Clinton would have paid off most the remaining WWII debt. G.W.Bush got sand-bagged by Reagan.

Just like a mortgage, the debt earns interest, and so the Reagan-Bush-I debt grew during the Clinton years. The average debt interest rate in those years was about 6.5%, which would increase it over 50% without compounding, but with compound interest the total debt – including interest – increased by $2.2 trillion.

Total Republican debt from above: $9.5 trillion
Interest on Reagan-Bush debt under Clinton: $2.2 trillion
Interest on $11.7 trillion after G. W. Bush: $0.3 trillion
(detailed calculation)
Grand Total Reagan-Bushes Debt: $12 trillion (as of Sept. 30, 2010).

If the Republicans had not run up this $12 Trillion debt, we could easily have pulled out of the Great Recession.

Lest we forget, Reagan, devalued our dollar down to a dime. That was long after Nixon took us off the gold standard and because of Reagan devaluing our money, in combination with Nixon taking us off the gold standard, some "fat cats" became downright obese with wealth.

70% of our economy IS consumer driven. If the consumers have no jobs they have no money and without them spending WE have NO economy! I keep hearing the phrase "you're not a patriot, etc". All I can say is that if I'm not being a "patriot" because I refuse to keep on taking a shafting by our government and big corporations then I'll continue not being a "patriot". I consider a Patriot as being the person who fights for our rights as a "free" people.

BTW, CISPA passed:
http://www.campaignforliberty.org/.../26/cispa-roll-call-42612

AYES NOES PRES NV
REPUBLICAN 206 28 7
DEMOCRATIC 42 140 8
INDEPENDENT
TOTALS 248 168 15

Well said, WarTime!!

Aren't you a distinguished mayor in some city somewhere in the east side of the USA?

I like Ron Paul... Whatever he is.. He's rarely wrong.
Well, if he IS wrong, he's the best liar out there.

;o)

The Internet is a PUBLIC thing, kids. Why should you be able to say and do things on the Internet that you shouldn't say and do in Public?




America is becoming a country of what can you get away with and not what should you do.

I also believe this.. They, (big brother) wants to control every aspect of your life, that they can get!
One problem is, we as 'the public' just lie down or bend over, at the first opportunity, even when fundamentally, we know it's against the rules on our civil liberties..

No one wants to step up..? THAT, is what's fluffed up..

Without this internet being un-restricted, I'd not even had prolly been exposed to a lot of information.. So, I'd stay ignorant, which is prolly what this thread is about, in the first place...

At the same time, how are we to know... who's simply full of fluff..?
Most are obvious, once I think about it.. snteps p thre rights of that protester

US govt:
A bill Obama signed recently saying that the secret service can arrest you if they think you've otherwise disrespected the prez, possibly sending john Q Public to prison for a year.... And trying to distance itself from the typical protester is completely wrong. Don't fluff with our ability to say "fluff YOU!" or step on the rights of that protester, to say what ever it is...
Freedoms seem to be taken from us at every opportunity... It happens just a little bit at a time, we seem to remain unaware mainly.. But quick to concede..

Do not let anyone relieve you of your gun... PERIOD!

Thank you....
Thank you very much!

The Internet is a PUBLIC thing, kids. Why should you be able to say and do things on the Internet that you shouldn't say and do in Public?




America is becoming a country of what can you get away with and not what should you do.

I also believe this.. They, (big brother) wants to control every aspect of your life, that they can get!
One problem is, we as 'the public' just lie down or bend over, at the first opportunity, even when fundamentally, we know it's against the rules on our civil liberties..

No one wants to step up..? THAT, is what's fluffed up..

Without this internet being un-restricted, I'd not even had prolly been exposed to a lot of information.. So, I'd stay ignorant, which is prolly what this thread is about, in the first place...

At the same time, how are we to know... who's simply full of fluff..?
Most are obvious, once I think about it.. snteps p thre rights of that protester

US govt:
A bill Obama signed recently saying that the secret service can arrest you if they think you've otherwise disrespected the prez, possibly sending john Q Public to prison for a year.... And trying to distance itself from the typical protester is completely wrong. Don't fluff with our ability to say "fluff YOU!" or step on the rights of that protester, to say what ever it is...
Freedoms seem to be taken from us at every opportunity... It happens just a little bit at a time, we seem to remain unaware mainly.. But quick to concede..

Do not let anyone relieve you of your gun... PERIOD!

Thank you....
Thank you very much!

See, I don't necessarily see the internet as fully public. Anything that requires a password to get to is like anything that requires a key to get to in a physical property.

If you post something on, let's say, a random internet forum like this, yes. That's public. If you expected privacy, you shouldn't gave posted it somewhere where anyone could see it.

However, email? dropbox? google documents? People deserve privacy there. To a lesser degree, facebook CAN be semi-private, but many people use it in a way that negates their ability to complain about it, if they try to collect as many friends as possible and post every thought they have.

And Pres. Obama has pledge a veto of this bill, so even though it passed, I'm still not worried about it going into effect as law.

As soon as it's regulated, it will cost to access the net, at different levels, making it just another way for big brother to make more money, in the name of revenue. imo..

Google wanted to do this, but went over like a lead fart!

Pres. Obama has pledge a veto of this bill, so even though it passed, I'm still not worried about it going into effect as law.

Obviously Obama was full of fluff re. his pledge! Why aren't you worried?

Despite those who feel that half or more of America's population, or infrastructure, or future viability should be left wide open to Enemy Attack simply because the words "personal liberty" are invoked aren't either very bright or very informed. Or they are actively taking advantage of the system as it is.

That defines a mentality of selfishness. "As long as I have my unfettered Freedom, fluff the other 299,999,999 million Americans AND our future".... Are you kidding me?

I don't know about you guys, but the utter collapse of my way of life is NOT an acceptable option, here. I see this Franklin "liberty vs security"quote pop up a good bit. Pretty easy to say when:

A) You're fighting for or just won Independence as a REVOLUTIONARY.

B) Any formal response will take 3 months minimum to materialize.

C) You still have nothing to lose

D) You think that the Good of the One is always better than the Good of the Many

E) You need to make inflammatory statements to the People so that what you say becomes popular opinion

F) There's something in it for you personally

G) The French need to feel like they're backing a Winner against their Arch Enemies

H) The lack of mental acuity that might allow a person to think that the majority of any oppressed society might actually always do the right thing once they have the power to do so

I) You can take advantage of high principles to serve yourself regardless of personal responsibility or cost to others

When ANY of you can look me in the eye and claim that based on Personal Privacy and Liberty that it's an acceptable cost for your wife, child, parent, relative or close friend to be exposed to attack and varying degrees of pain, suffering and death in terms of rapidity and pain, I'll show you a person who is at best clueless and at worst such a narcissist that they should die first.

Dragon: My problem isn't with greater internet security. It's with the analysis that I've read that implies this isn't really any better than the previous bills.

In short, our Congressmen, for all the knowledge they DO have, don't know fluff about technology, and from what I've read, the way this bill was put together shows that.


To reply to your other point: I generally agree with you on the Franklin quote. It's still and will always be a relevant quote, but at the same time, the very nature of government is that we sacrifice certain liberties for security. The question is simply how much.

Did you actually stop to think before you posted that?
#1. A ton of our "home" bases, Army, Air Force, Marines, Navy, are CLOSED! Instead we support, under our current rules, a ton of bases in foreign countries and THEIR economies instead of our own!

#2. "W" sent our National Guard, you know, the people that are supposed to stay at home to protect our Nation, to fight in our "War Against Terror" that will take, in "W's" words, DECADES and cost us, our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, our way of life as we knew it before it started, ILLEGALLY BTW, because ONLY congress can actually declare war!

#3. So I ask you, WHO is here protecting our homeland? The PRIVATE Armies of Haliburton, Blackwater/xE (who, btw, "W" sent into New Orleans during Katrina), Caci International or any number of other "civilian contractors"??? Or is it "Homeland Security"? Just in case you hadn't noticed, Homeland Security is exactly what the name implies, SECURITY GUARDS at the Airports!


Just in case you also hadn't noticed what's going on around you over the past 3.5 decades, our FDA was gutted by your "god" Reagan! He left them with a bunch of laws that they can NOT enforce because they don't have the people on the ground to enforce them!! Which gives you the answer as to why there have been so many outbreaks of E-Coli and other bacterial infections in our food supply!

Here's another one for you; Aspertame / MSG / Monosodium Glutamate, was brought to us by none other than Donald Rumsfeld who, at the time, 1980, was a PR person for Searle Drug Company, the producer of those products and being close friends with Reagan, he went to him and said how good these things would be in our foods as preservatives! Reagan, in spite of the objections to the contrary from no less than 35 well respected scientists, "made it so"!

Honestly? We don't need politicians to be afraid for us, really. What we need from them is to do the right things for everyone and not just the "top 1%"!!!

Thank you. I was asked to run for Mayor but after giving it some consideration I chose not to.

You're right about Ron Paul, I do like a lot of his ideas but his party barely tolerates him only because he still wins his elections, just not the ones for president because his party has the people so polarized and brainwashed that they can't think for themselves. I'm friends with a lady you would appreciate on facebook. Her name is Lynn Tilton. She's a Dem from NYC with many of the same ideas as Ron Paul and is a multi Billionaire boot. She brings in on average $8 - $17 Billion a year for her business. She's a hottie. Here's her website: http://patriarchpartners.com/HerWritings.aspx

QM, read some of her writings and you'll see exactly what I'm saying about her.

I find it amusing that this Lynn Tilton is a Democrat and has many of the same ideas as Ron Paul.

Clearly our labels are sometimes a bit narrow.

To actually return to the original topic, here's an article I just read that I thought summed it up pretty well:
http://mashable.com/...9/where-cispa-stands-now/

Summary:

CISPA has passed the Republican-held House on a vote that, as WarTime showed earlier, wasn't perfectly along party lines, but mostly was. It now goes to the Democrat-held Senate and then there's the fact that it is believed that it would be in danger of a veto from Pres. Obama.

The language in the original bill at least was apparently far too open-ended, but some of that has been amended. It seems from the article that there are a lot of people and businesses that still see many legitimate problems with this. Among dissenters is Microsoft, who started off in favor of CISPA but has since backed away from their support (reasons why aren't discussed).

Unlike SOPA, which was about intellectual freedom vs. internet security, this is about individual privacy vs. internet security.

If the language has been tightened up somewhat from the very broad language about national security (which was left undefined), then I don't see why this is nearly as big of a deal. Generally, I agree with Dragon concerning the importance for security and safety from our government, but I also don't like laws that write blank checks for future administrations/Congresses, etc. to do whatever they want and actually have it be LEGAL.

If what is permissible and when/why it's permissible is fairly well defined, then this law doesn't really seem like the end of the world to me, but I'm guessing the outcry is because that's not necessarily true about this law (at least prior to the amendments)

You're right about the original wording in the bill, it was too open ended. But with Microsoft still against it, with all the screwed up fluff like H1B1 Visas that Bill Gates used to outsource our jobs here in this country while having Americans train these foreigners to take their jobs at lower wages, it makes me wonder why Microsoft is still against CISPA.