4 ms·

One thing I'm confident in is that the further Rand Paul makes in the election process, the more discussion and awareness of mass surveillance's threat to democ

by zmanian 12y ago

One thing I'm confident in is that the further Rand Paul makes in the election process, the more discussion and awareness of mass surveillance's threat to democracy itself.

higherpurpose 12y ago
I remember when Ron Paul ran in the primaries, and in one of the first debates from 2011 I believe, they asked the Republican candidates whether they support a stronger Patriot Act or not. Like all the other 4 or 5 other candidates tried to out-match each other in how much stronger they would like the Patriot Act and other such laws to be. Ron Paul? He was the only one who said he would do away with it. Full stop. If only Rand Paul could reverse that majority of opinion this time in the debates, and force most candidates to say they'd also scale back on the mass surveillance, support repealing the Patriot, FISAA, EO12333, and possibly even pardon Snowden (probably even promising that in the campaign would be the best litmus test to see whether a candidate is actually serious about truly reforming the surveillance powers).
- rayiner 12y ago
  > I believe, they asked the Republican candidates whether they support a stronger Patriot Act or not. Like all the other 4 or 5 other candidates tried to out-match each other in how much stronger they would like the Patriot Act and other such laws to be. It's worth thinking about the significance of that. These guys aren't doing it because it's wildly unpopular with voters.
  - DennisP 12y ago
    That's true but it's only GOP primary voters they were concerned about.
    - meepmorp 12y ago
      I think you're overestimating the degree to which the average US voter gives a shit about the Patriot Act (or NSA surveillance, for that matter). The response was red meat for the primary voters, sure, but it's not likely to be significant negative for the wider electorate.
  - serf 12y ago
    > It's worth thinking about the significance of that. These guys aren't doing it because it's wildly unpopular with voters. but one could argue that it's so popular with voters due to fear mongering, the labeling of everyday criminals as 'terrorists', and the national call to arms every few weeks when some psycho (undoubtedly referred to incorrectly as a terrorist) shoots his way through somewhere. At what stop in this twisted feedback loop are we going to place blame? It seems pretty naive to put the blame on the scared (and voting) public.

by zmanian 12y ago

One thing I'm confident in is that the further Rand Paul makes in the election process, the more discussion and awareness of mass surveillance's threat to democracy itself.

higherpurpose 12y ago

I remember when Ron Paul ran in the primaries, and in one of the first debates from 2011 I believe, they asked the Republican candidates whether they support a stronger Patriot Act or not. Like all the other 4 or 5 other candidates tried to out-match each other in how much stronger they would like the Patriot Act and other such laws to be. Ron Paul? He was the only one who said he would do away with it. Full stop. If only Rand Paul could reverse that majority of opinion this time in the debates, and force most candidates to say they'd also scale back on the mass surveillance, support repealing the Patriot, FISAA, EO12333, and possibly even pardon Snowden (probably even promising that in the campaign would be the best litmus test to see whether a candidate is actually serious about truly reforming the surveillance powers).

rayiner 12y ago
> I believe, they asked the Republican candidates whether they support a stronger Patriot Act or not. Like all the other 4 or 5 other candidates tried to out-match each other in how much stronger they would like the Patriot Act and other such laws to be. It's worth thinking about the significance of that. These guys aren't doing it because it's wildly unpopular with voters.
- DennisP 12y ago
  That's true but it's only GOP primary voters they were concerned about.
  - meepmorp 12y ago
    I think you're overestimating the degree to which the average US voter gives a shit about the Patriot Act (or NSA surveillance, for that matter). The response was red meat for the primary voters, sure, but it's not likely to be significant negative for the wider electorate.
- serf 12y ago
  > It's worth thinking about the significance of that. These guys aren't doing it because it's wildly unpopular with voters. but one could argue that it's so popular with voters due to fear mongering, the labeling of everyday criminals as 'terrorists', and the national call to arms every few weeks when some psycho (undoubtedly referred to incorrectly as a terrorist) shoots his way through somewhere. At what stop in this twisted feedback loop are we going to place blame? It seems pretty naive to put the blame on the scared (and voting) public.