While the Democrats are running their dog and pony impeachment hearings, they were making sure we continue living in a police state

[RVonse]

But thats not it. I dont want the government to collect data period. Even if I live the pure life like mother Teresa, I dont want my data collected. It should not be the business of the government to collect information on everyone. And the constitution secures these rights of its citizens.

I notice you did not take Harry up on his challenge to quote the part of the Constitution that says we must protect the border. While we are on the topic of the Constitution and the government collecting your data, however, I would like to direct you to Article 1, Section 2, which has something to say about collecting your data (the census).

Section 8. "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions"

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But thats not it. I dont want the government to collect data period. Even if I live the pure life like mother Teresa, I dont want my data collected. It should not be the business of the government to collect information on everyone. And the constitution secures these rights of its citizens.

I notice you did not take Harry up on his challenge to quote the part of the Constitution that says we must protect the border. While we are on the topic of the Constitution and the government collecting your data, however, I would like to direct you to Article 1, Section 2, which has something to say about collecting your data (the census).

Section 8. "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions"

Now only if the word "invasion" meant unarmed Spanish speaking people crossing the border in small numbers.

 

[RVonse]

I don't think it is any of your government's business surverying ordinary civilians against their will and without their knowledge

So, you're against a cop in a car driving through your neighborhood looking for any kind of suspicious activity to be investigated further? No, of course you aren't. What you're against--as always with you--is the straw you're stuffing.

In this instance it's the implication of a government agency, like the NSA, spying on you illegally in order to gin up a false case against you. That's the core of this particular strawman.

And not in regard to simply collecting meta-data with an indifferent search algorithm flagging certain key words; in the sense of a Hollywood-style Libertarian fever dream covert operation with a dozen or so nefarious human agents listening to your intimate conversations and remotely turning on your phone's microphone and turning your TV into a camera, so that they can watch your every move as you sit on your couch and jack off and make personal judgements on your actions, because, my god, you're so important and what if? I mean, it's 1984 man! Or, current day China, apparently.

And of course your strawman completely ignores the fact that you have voluntarily given your consent to Facebook and Twitter and every credit card company and Amazon and every other thing you've ever signed--but never read--in our society so that those companies in turn could use your information for marketing and advertising purposes and, yes, if compelled to by law, as also stated in every TOS, the very government agencies you're invoking in your allusions to conspiracy theories past, present and future.

But, of course, it ALL hinges, once again, on the key element; ILLEGAL and what that entails, but that's always obfuscated in the stuffing of the straw.

So you have zero problems with a cop driving his patrol car through your neighborhood looking for suspicious activity that may need to be investigated further, but when he or she does the exact same thing in cyber space, suddenly it's libtard armageddon in spite of the fact that you willingly gave your permission for every corporation in the world to chart your every "like" and "dislike" every nano-second.

And, of course, your straw won't accept for the fact that NO ONE wants anything illegal done at any time, so we're all in agreement that no one should be allowed to do anything illegal at any time, which means we're not even talking about the same thing, but then, with strawmen, no one ever is.

So do you really want to discuss the intricate legality behind granting various policing agencies authority to search for suspicious activity and how it is regulated on a case by case basis, or do you want to just keep to your usual of stuffing of vaguely insinuating alarmist straw from under your bridge?

Your analogy of a cop car is a very poor one. For one important reason, a cop and/or his car can not collect data that is immortal. Thats not the case with NSA.

You say you are fine with meta data storage today but what happens in the future when someone who does not like you gains the power to use your personal information against you?
Your politcal positions today might seem fine but tomorrow another entity may decide you are a threat that needs to be removed. These kinds of behaviors are possible, they can and have happened before.

Furthermore, the wholesale collection of meta data actually causes our intelligent agencies to be less intelligent. They dont know how to filter it all.

We have a bloated NSA agency violating our basic freedoms in exchange for safety of a terrorist act which is less likely than being struck by lightning. And you are actually fine with this!

 

[RVonse]

So what?I don't particularly care what Constitutional Hypocritii think about the Constitution as their interest in it is merely self-interested.

There is nothing hypocritical about my stance at all.

I am pretty sure a Mexican citizen is not bound to the US constitution even if he is living in the US. That happens to be one reason they can not charge Assange with treason.

 

[RVonse]

Section 8. "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions"

Now only if the word "invasion" meant unarmed Spanish speaking people crossing the border in small numbers.

Small numbers....ha, ha, ha.

You can argue whether or not immigration has been good or bad. But you can not argue about how massive it has been. The demographics of the entire country has been changing massively since 1990's.

Invasion is the correct word.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The demographics of the entire continent have been changing massively since 1492.

FIFY.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Your analogy of a cop car is a very poor one.

Do tell.

For one important reason, a cop and/or his car can not collect data that is immortal.

That is, quite possibly, the stupidest argument I've yet read. Aside from the fact that you meant "eternal" (not "immortal"), and the fact that such data is not eternal (as the universe will eventually cease to exist), your argument is self-defeating. ALL recorded evidence is, in effect, eternal. Just because a piece of paper that has "RVonse confessed to killing a man" gets misplaced or burned up or the like, that doesn't change the fact that you were found guilty of murder, nor should it in cases where the destruction of evidence has in fact resulted in a guilty person's acquittal as that is the ONLY person that would benefit from non "immortal" evidence; a guilty person.

You say you are fine with meta data storage today but what happens in the future when someone who does not like you gains the power to use your personal information against you?

The exact same thing that would happen today--or one hundred years ago--if someone "gains the power to use your personal information against you."

Your politcal positions today might seem fine but tomorrow another entity may decide you are a threat that needs to be removed.

Are you under the impression that a bad actor is somehow restricted in their bad actions to elements of fact?

Furthermore, the wholesale collection of meta data actually causes our intelligent agencies to be less intelligent.

Tell that to Bin Laden's orphaned children.

They dont know how to filter it all.

I didn't realize you were an expert in the field and not just spewing horseshit out your ass.

We have a bloated NSA agency violating our basic freedoms

You mean the ones you freely signed away when you opened your Facebook account?

in exchange for safety of a terrorist act which is less likely than being struck by lightning.

"Safety of a terrorist act"? Want to try that sentence again? Do you mean you signed the Facebook TOS because you want to be safe from terrorists or something? Or are you trying to assert that the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act somehow grants authority to the NSA to watch you farting on your couch through your TV whenever they just feel like it? Because that is not the case.

And you are actually fine with this!

RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION AT A STRAWMAN! OH MY GOD! THAT'S SO UNUSUAL!!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Section 8. "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions"

Now only if the word "invasion" meant unarmed Spanish speaking people crossing the border in small numbers.

Small numbers....ha, ha, ha.

You can argue whether or not immigration has been good or bad. But you can not argue about how massive it has been. The demographics of the entire country has been changing massively since 1990's.

Invasion is the correct word.

1970, Whites were 90% of the nation. Hispanics, 4%. 2010, Whites are 72% of nation, Hispanics 16%.

Since 1970, the population of whites has increased by 45 million.
Since 1970, the population of hispanics has increased by 42 million.

For every Hispanic person today in the US, there are 4.5 white people. Clearly we are being overwhelmed!

As a side note, Asian population since 1970 has increased 1000%! And the dreaded 'Other' has increased by 8200%!!!

In fact, if you look at the poulation increase among Asians and "Other", they amount to about 60% the increase in population in the US since 1970 as that of Hispanics. So really, if we need to fear anyone... I'm fearing 'Other'!

 

[RVonse]

The exact same thing that would happen today--or one hundred years ago--if someone "gains the power to use your personal information against you."

100 years ago the technology did not exist to collect and store the kind of data that happens today. Data was hard to collect but more importantly it was relatively expensive to store. There had to be good reasons not to discard old information. Even family genealogy records were limited and DNA records did not exist at all. There was no comparison of data kept 100 years ago versus today.

But even back then confidential data was a concern. Especially if you happened to be living during the times of the secret service during ww2.

If history is any guide. A corporation like facebook or google will never have the power to hurt you as an actual arm of the federal government like the NSA.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

The exact same thing that would happen today--or one hundred years ago--if someone "gains the power to use your personal information against you."

100 years ago the technology did not exist to collect and store the kind of data that happens today.

And yet, bad actors were still able to gin up false reasons to go after others. Gee, funny how that works. It's almost as if someone intent on committing a criminal act is going to do so no matter what.

And it argues that "immortal" data could exonerate just as it might be used against you, so, no, the fact that such data may have a longer shelf life actually works in the favor of the falsely accused and not the other way around.

 

[ruby sparks]

Small numbers....ha, ha, ha.

You can argue whether or not immigration has been good or bad. But you can not argue about how massive it has been. The demographics of the entire country has been changing massively since 1990's.

Invasion is the correct word.

1970, Whites were 90% of the nation. Hispanics, 4%. 2010, Whites are 72% of nation, Hispanics 16%.

Since 1970, the population of whites has increased by 45 million.
Since 1970, the population of hispanics has increased by 42 million.

For every Hispanic person today in the US, there are 4.5 white people. Clearly we are being overwhelmed!

As a side note, Asian population since 1970 has increased 1000%! And the dreaded 'Other' has increased by 8200%!!!

In fact, if you look at the poulation increase among Asians and "Other", they amount to about 60% the increase in population in the US since 1970 as that of Hispanics. So really, if we need to fear anyone... I'm fearing 'Other'!

Whites are on their way to not being a single majority and may even become a minority in the not too distant.

Sort of like way back when their ancestors arrived and eventually wiped out almost all of the indigenous people, in a way. Kidding. It’s not really a lot like that.

But the current demographic trends aren’t good if you’re an easily worried white person. What will become of a once great white nation? It hardly bears thinking about.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So what?

I don't particularly care what Constitutional Hypocritii think about the Constitution as their interest in it is merely self-interested.

Again. So what? Do YOU care about your constitution? Do you care about your invasions of privacy? Or are you just going to attack others who do because you find them to be inconsistent in it?

 

[RVonse]

Who is the dog and who is the pony?
Who lied in your opinion?

I heard on the radio going to work today that now Shifty Schiff is switching from an impeachment hearing to censorship, whatever that means. Apparently Nancy is worried about losing her job over this whole affair.


So I guess even the democrat voters see this for what it really is. A bullshit dog and pony show.


During the hearings nothing the voters wanted got done. No USMCA and no wall. But they still somehow had time for the Patriot Act! I love my congress members, they are always trying to represent my best interest.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Who is the dog and who is the pony?
Who lied in your opinion?

I heard on the radio going to work today that now Shifty Schiff is switching from an impeachment hearing to censorship, whatever that means.

Yeah... lover of the Constitution doesn't understand what a censure is.

Apparently Nancy is worried about losing her job over this whole affair.

For those who are apparently completely unaware of the last 24 months, Pelosi had been dragging her feet on impeachment. She didn't want to do it. The Ukraine issue forced her hand and she moved forward with it, thinking she'd call the GOP's bluff. The GOP keep calling on the raises though. Which leaves the Dems with few options. Censure could be an option, but from what I've seen, I haven't seen anything about the Dems shifting to a censure.

So I guess even the democrat voters see this for what it really is. A bullshit dog and pony show.

Mr. 9/11 CT'er... can't see a conspiracy when it actually is factually presented in front of them.

During the hearings nothing the voters wanted got done. No USMCA and no wall. But they still somehow had time for the Patriot Act! I love my congress members, they are always trying to represent my best interest.

Did Trump hack this account?

 

[RVonse]

During the hearings nothing the voters wanted got done. No USMCA and no wall. But they still somehow had time for the Patriot Act! I love my congress members, they are always trying to represent my best interest.

Did Trump hack this account?

What is the most embarrassment of all is that both Canada and Mexico are eager and expecting a signed USMCA agreement. Because unlike the democrats they see the wisdom of positioning all of north america against China.

But our congress is so badly managed we cant even get that accomplished. Its like our congress is being run by the organization of anti America.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

During the hearings nothing the voters wanted got done. No USMCA and no wall. But they still somehow had time for the Patriot Act! I love my congress members, they are always trying to represent my best interest.

Did Trump hack this account?

What is the most embarrassment of all is that both Canada and Mexico are eager and expecting a signed USMCA agreement. Because unlike the democrats they see the wisdom of positioning all of north america against China.

But our congress is so badly managed we cant even get that accomplished. Its like our congress is being run by the organization of anti America.

How fucking stupid are the people you know that would buy that bullshit? Stupid enough to vote for Trump, I guess.

 

[laughing dog]

During the hearings nothing the voters wanted got done. No USMCA and no wall. But they still somehow had time for the Patriot Act! I love my congress members, they are always trying to represent my best interest.

Did Trump hack this account?

What is the most embarrassment of all is that both Canada and Mexico are eager and expecting a signed USMCA agreement. Because unlike the democrats they see the wisdom of positioning all of north america against China.

First, this has nothing whatsoever with positioning North America against China. Second, and most importantly, Mexico and Canada had a trade agreement with the USA that Trump ripped up. He then bullied then with tariffs to accept a new agreement which, as the USA is their major trading partner by far, they realized it was better than 4 years of a trade war.

But our congress is so badly managed we cant even get that accomplished. Its like our congress is being run by the organization of anti America.

Interestingly, the farmers in my area say that about your beloved Trump.

 

[Derec]

Whites are on their way to not being a single majority and may even become a minority in the not too distant.

And the Left is rejoicing in that. Which is why they support mass 3rd world migration both in US as well as in Europe.

But even today, whites are being discriminated against by things like racial preferences. The racist policy of giving preferences to blacks and hispanics will probably even be expanded further once blacks + hispanics are a majority in the US. And how long until whites get expropriated as they are currently in South Africa? Elizabeth Warren and some other D candidates are already advocating for a "reparations" plan which is basically giving blacks free money because of their skin color.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I'm brown. So I have no personal incentive to care either way to. You go well over the top there Derec, but I do see your point. Reparations for slavery is an especially stupid concept, unless you can find the actual people who were harmed and can quantify it, rather than basing it on mere skin colour and granting it to recent immigrants who got here well after slavery ended.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Whites are on their way to not being a single majority and may even become a minority in the not too distant.

And the Left is rejoicing in that.

Not quite. We're "rejoicing" to getting closer to the end of institutionalized oppression based on nothing more than a raging overriding ignorance due to the amount of melanin in one's skin.

But even today, whites are being discriminated against by things like racial preferences.

See, it's that kind of horseshit that we're "rejoicing" being done with; the pathetic attempts by racists to paint themselves as the more victimized because they stuck their toe in the water that they've been using to drown everyone else with for centuries. It's transparent and pathetic.