Posted on 06/09/2013 4:50:27 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
It occurs to me that the only reason the IRS scandal is in a scandal in the first place is because legislation started with good intentions decided that our government would use tax status as a controlling factor in free speech.
As a result, the federal government agency (IRS) that is supposed to be full of eye-shade bean counters and responsible for collecting revenue and enforcing the rules related to revenue and income taxation is now the “GateKeeper to the First Amendment”.
Left to it’s own devices, the IRS should be focusing on the most improbable task assigned to man; taking the tax legislation developed with good intentions and (usually) economic ignorance, developing forms and instructions, and distributing information that will allow citizens of this country a fighting chance of being to complete an income tax return correctly.
Instead we are adding the task of administering Health Care rules to the “Freedom of Speech” duties this agency has to accomplish. And, oh, by the way, try to collect enough taxes to keep the country out of bankruptcy. Or at least far enough out of BK that Ben Bernake can continue to print cash in large bills and we can pretend that this is working.
LOL--that's because the records of abuse are destroyed. But we aren't smart enough to figure that out.
Does the name Bradley Manning ring a bell, there DiFi???
Hayden pulled it out of his arse too. Says there has to be a specific reason to access the database that is terrorist-related. Hayden says you have to identify who the bad guys are. He neglects that the current Admin considers conservatives to be the bad guys. Hence the door opens for abuse. Duh.
By the same argument, you could search every house in America looking for one suspected criminal and remain within the framework of the 4th.
And (full disclosure) I ain’t no libertarian. A rule of “hot pursuit” should be preserved but expanding it to include every phone call and every email is Ceaucescu-like.
Real scary.
The one good thing about all this is that only the most die-hard Obamatons can pretend that we have not had a point all along about this guy.
Hayden came off as an idiot. Why would anyone believe this regime wouldn’t use these records the same way they did in the IRS.
When they put the Tea Party on the terrorist list it gave them the ability to mine that database to see if anyone was talking to suspected Tea Party leaders.
Why didn’t they pick up the calls from the Boston Bombers?
I don't have television. Did the host change the subject, or yell "Go to commercial. Go to COMMERCIAL!!!"
"I used to work for Hayden back when he was a Colonel. I suspect if he saw me today, he’d remember me."
In Korea, I had to meet with (then) Major General Hayden in his office to brief him on some installation security issues for Yongsan Garrison. When I reported to his office I was struck by all the Pittsburgh/Steeler memorobilia (I was born and raised in the Pittsburgh area). I briefed my piece, presented a few courses of action and recommendations. He gave his guidance and asked if I had any further questions. I asked if he thought Bleier or Harris was the better running back, and we proceeded to have a nice little chat about the Steelers of yore. :-)
Contrasts it to the IRS. Ignoring the fact that the IRS disregarded the law as well.
Hayden came off as an idiot. Why would anyone believe this regime wouldn’t use these records the same way they did in the IRS.
When they put the Tea Party on the terrorist list it gave them the ability to mine that database to see if anyone was talking to suspected Tea Party leaders.
Why didn’t they pick up the calls from the Boston Bombers?
—
Obviously, your question answers itself. Further, I don’t see any evidence that Obama’s admin cares one iota about preventing terrorism beyond the political ramifications of an attack. And now that they have politically withstoood Boston (and Benghazi) I think they have ZERO interest in preventing terrorism. They actually trade on it to no small extent.
It is all about the assumptions made when developing the threat matrix. Which groups and what activities are considered a threat.
Mary Matalin was hard to understand.
We are developing rapidly the tools of a police state straight out of Brave New World and 1984. All it will take is the government to turn on the switch and overnight our world will be transformed--all in the name of protecting us from ourselves. Medical records, credit card purchases, phone called, Internet activity, etc. will all be consolidated in one huge database. And supercomputers will be able to process this data to target groups and individuals. All very frightening.
Hayden is just another bureaucrat who is not concerned about individual liberties, but rather, doing a job with the best tools available. As long as we have human beings operating these systems, there will be abuse. 100% security should not be the metric used to determine what information the government should have on its citizens. The Constitution should be our safeguard--not Congress or secret courts.
thy? Don’t know where that came from... :)
Bingo.
Paul Krugman is saying we’re living more under an authoritarian surveillance world. Did I hear George Will defending this? Anyone? I must have, because Greta challenges him and asks why does this have to be secret? Also, the FISA court is a rubber stamp - there’s only one side - no one else is questioning their request.
Probably because 'Islam', 'allah', and the moeties of Islamoterrorism,
just like anyone who is connected to the Chicago Mob
or the high up in the DNC,
is removed from the list ... and never followed further.
McCain on CNN.
They deserve each other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.