Hillary to continue NSA mass surveillance?

[UglyCasanova]

Hillary won the first debate handily, and I applaud her for standing up for our civil rights on the stop and frisk issue, but as far as privacy and the dragnet surveillance performed on all of us it seems the public outcry over Snowden's revelations fell on deaf ears. In the segment about cyber security she said the following:

But let's talk about the question you asked, Lester. The question you asked is, what do we do here in the United States? That's the most important part of this. How do we prevent attacks? How do we protect our people?

And I think we've got to have an intelligence surge, where we are looking for every scrap of information.

I can't help but read that "every scrap of info" line as indication that the status quo started under Bush and continues under Obama remains in place. I would hope that someone who is against illegal searches and invasion of privacy under stop and frisk would be against illegal (my opinion of them anyways) searches and invasion of privacy in regards to NSA domestic spying, but unfortunately it doesn't look like it's going anywhere.

And no I don't think The Donald would get rid of it either, nor do I think he's sophisticated enough to even take up the issue.

 

[glenn1]

Hillary won the first debate handily, and I applaud her for standing up for our civil rights on the stop and frisk issue, but as far as privacy and the dragnet surveillance performed on all of us it seems the public outcry over Snowden's revelations fell on deaf ears. In the segment about cyber security she said the following:



I can't help but read that "every scrap of info" line as indication that the status quo started under Bush and continues under Obama remains in place. I would hope that someone who is against illegal searches and invasion of privacy under stop and frisk would be against illegal (my opinion of them anyways) searches and invasion of privacy in regards to NSA domestic spying, but unfortunately it doesn't look like it's going anywhere.

And no I don't think The Donald would get rid of it either, nor do I think he's sophisticated enough to even take up the issue.

Both major party candidates are fails when it comes to privacy and other civil liberties. If you're a libertarian like me neither candidate is an acceptable choice although on any single random issue you might be able to say one was comparatively better than the other.

 

[UglyCasanova]

I'd agree with that.

 

[fskimospy]

Ever since Obama was elected a bipartisan consensus has emerged on mass surveillance. Despite all the things Obama has done that I love, I think his position on civil liberties is abominable. Sadly, the worst parts of his presidency are on issues where the opposing party not just agrees, but often argues that he hasn't gone far enough. No major party supports a robust 4th amendment anymore.

 

[bshole]

Both major party candidates are fails when it comes to privacy and other civil liberties. If you're a libertarian like me neither candidate is an acceptable choice although on any single random issue you might be able to say one was comparatively better than the other.

Man it must piss you off every time that you have to drive on a socialist highway, eat socialist inspected food, visit a socialist park/forest, drive a socialist inspected car, have a socialist firefighter put out a fire, have a socialist police officer investigate a crime, etc....

America is primarily socialist mixed with capitalist plutocracy. From my perspective the socialist part is working while the capitalist plutocracy part is murdering us all. Nowhere in there is anything even remotely resembling libertarianism.

 

[UglyCasanova]

From my perspective the socialist part is working while the capitalist plutocracy part is murdering us all. .

From my perspective driving on the roads around here I couldn't disagree with you more.

I'm not arguing for toll roads everywhere, that would be a nightmare, and am all for government spending on infrastructure. I just wish we actually did it (and efficiently).

 

[glenn1]

Man it must piss you off every time that you have to drive on a socialist highway, eat socialist inspected food, visit a socialist park/forest, drive a socialist inspected car, have a socialist firefighter put out a fire, have a socialist police officer investigate a crime, etc....

America is primarily socialist mixed with capitalist plutocracy. From my perspective the socialist part is working while the capitalist plutocracy part is murdering us all. Nowhere in there is anything even remotely resembling libertarianism.

Your unrelated opinions about socialism and plutocracy have nothing whatsoever to do with either privacy, civil liberties, my post or the OP unless the roads they're constructing have evesdropping devices built in.

 

[Muse]

From my perspective driving on the roads around here I couldn't disagree with you more.

I'm not arguing for toll roads everywhere, that would be a nightmare, and am all for government spending on infrastructure. I just wish we actually did it (and efficiently).

We may need a national program to fix this, the bridges, highways, crumbling infrastructure in general. Something like the programs FDR instituted. Leaving that stuff to the states won't work. Well, it may work great in some places, acceptably in others, but is not going to work everywhere, at least in today's world. Call if socialism, it's just a word. BFD what you call it, we need to get things done. Capitalism won't do it, local government sometimes will, sometimes won't.

 

[glenn1]

We may need a national program to fix this, the bridges, highways, crumbling infrastructure in general. Something like the programs FDR instituted. Leaving that stuff to the states won't work. Well, it may work great in some places, acceptably in others, but is not going to work everywhere, at least in today's world. Call if socialism, it's just a word. BFD what you call it, we need to get things done.

Many (if not most) libertarians don't have much issue with government being involved in creation and maintenance of non-rivalrous, non-excludable public goods (although roads can arguably fall into the category of club goods). That doesn't mean that lack of objections to infrastructure means we would likewise not object to actual socialist policies like transfer payments, etc. where the benefit by definition flows exclusively to single people. Everyone benefits and can use a public road more or less equally, that is manifestly not the case when you tax me to give a check to someone who chooses not to work.

 

[Jaskalas]

Civil Liberties are set to continue their nose dive following the 2016 election.

 

[TheGardener]

Rights of privacy are not the domain of either party. I doubt either candidate or any of the fallen candidates give a crap about it, except when their email account gets hacked, and the hacks are exposed as the hacks they are. I think that the only way a bridge or road get repaired, is so that more cameras and listening devices can be added to the collection system. Ten years from now, we will probably have government and business mandated cameras in our homes. You know, for our safety and protection, as well as ease of ordering more toilet paper from Amazon.

Judge Bork was absolutely right when he stated that the Constitution had no provisions for a right of privacy. If any of you remember him.

 

[zinfamous]

I think the right-to-no-privacy has become such a bipartisan agreement among both parties because they see a populace fully willing and prepared to openly give up those rights, even at the basest level, every day. Social media has overwhelmingly conditioned the majority of today's people and all successive generations that a desire for privacy is, well, anti-"social."

It's a new paradigm and by the time these dunderheads get around to realizing that they have tangentially allowed these intrusions into their data due to their general apathy regarding such issues, it will be too late. hell, it's probably too late.

 

[nakedfrog]

I'm kind of surprised the thread title ends in a question mark. Is there anyone that thought otherwise?