My opinion is that just as Eisenhower warned many years ago, there is a military-industrial complex that has taken a great deal of power away from the people and their elected representatives.

I also think that Americans across the political spectrum are horribly blase about the Bill of Rights in toto. People just don't care about civil liberties. Were the 4th Amendment to be proposed today it would not pass.

They will be bored to tears when they listen to my conversations or read my texts. Yes, I have Verizon. They will say that chick needs to get a life...LOL

I think it's funny if governments say they defend our freedom by taking liberties away.

What liberties are they taking away, exactly?

In this case I'm talking about the erosion of the 4th Amendment. But at the moment you can find similar ways of eroding civil rights in Russia and Hungary.

Interersting, Lilo. I agree for the most part (more about the most part and my defense of the President in a minute). Mike Lupica wrote an interesting piece just yesterday about how the war on privacy is all but lost. I encourage you to read it: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...ticle-1.1365660

Now, in defense of the President (not just this President, but ANY incoming President), I'll play Devil's Advocate. Isn't it entirely possible that the President didn't know just what kind of evil he was up against UNTIL he took office? I think it was just too easy to blame Bush for everything because, let's face it, Bush comes off as such a simpleton. But we're still waterboarding, aren't we? We're still using the Patriot Act, aren't we? We're still doing A LOT of things, aren't we?

Coming into office in January of 2009, it was just too damn easy for Obama to blame Bush for such things because he just didn't know the extent of the evil these religious terrorists were involved in. Long story short, he just didn't know what he was up against. Now he knows better. Now don't get me wrong, I still think Bush is/was at least partially retarded. But there's no doubt in my mind that history will vindicate him as far as some of these charges go. And the bottom line is, our guy, Obama, is now employing some of the very same tactics.

We can't have it both ways. We can't blame Bush for the Patriot Act, but then say, Well, Bush's guy wrote it, so that takes Obama off the hook. If he uses it he's just as responsible. Maybe even moreso because he's a liberal who's fucking with privacy rights. And that's tantamount to a righty selling out on gun control. It's like our friend Don Tomasso posted just the other day. Something like, "If Bush did this his hair would be on fire." I give him A LOT of credit for admitting as much.

I'm not sure if I'm against this. If I expect the government to protect me, then they should be privy to the information they need to do so. Down goes the 4th. It just goes to show, these amendments can and will be changed to fit the era in which we are living. Though, not the 2nd. Nobody should touch the 2nd. No database of my gunz.

You're probably used to that right? A tyrannical government taking advantage of the citizens under the guise of religious law or "keeping us safe" fucking crock of shit. My business is my business not Bush's, not Obama's or anyone else's. Fuck the government, these days I trust it less and less.

You're probably used to that right? A tyrannical government taking advantage of the citizens under the guise of religious law or "keeping us safe" fucking crock of shit. My business is my business not Bush's, not Obama's or anyone else's. Fuck the government, these days I trust it less and less.

In the age of anthrax and nukes it's quite irrelevant. The moment a terrorist attack happens, everyone blames the government for their incompetence. My main problem with them, is the extent of what they could do to you once they know what they know. For instance I don't feel comfortable with lack of due process. With giving them the right to kill citizens with the death penalty and with shutting down the newspapers. Freedom of speech is more near and dear to my heart. If that is granted, you can nag all you want that why your privacy is being compromised, all the while knowing that maybe that's for the best if you don't want to be victim of another terrorist attack.

There will always be terrorists and there will always be government oppression. Nothing is going to change that. All the "blame" stuff is just politics. In this country the right wingholes will blame President Blacula for any and all terrorists attacks, and probably call him a socialist dictator for all the wiretaps.

Interersting, Lilo. I agree for the most part (more about the most part and my defense of the President in a minute). Mike Lupica wrote an interesting piece just yesterday about how the war on privacy is all but lost. I encourage you to read it: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...ticle-1.1365660

Now, in defense of the President (not just this President, but ANY incoming President), I'll play Devil's Advocate. Isn't it entirely possible that the President didn't know just what kind of evil he was up against UNTIL he took office? I think it was just too easy to blame Bush for everything because, let's face it, Bush comes off as such a simpleton. But we're still waterboarding, aren't we? We're still using the Patriot Act, aren't we? We're still doing A LOT of things, aren't we?

Coming into office in January of 2009, it was just too damn easy for Obama to blame Bush for such things because he just didn't know the extent of the evil these religious terrorists were involved in. Long story short, he just didn't know what he was up against. Now he knows better. Now don't get me wrong, I still think Bush is/was at least partially retarded. But there's no doubt in my mind that history will vindicate him as far as some of these charges go. And the bottom line is, our guy, Obama, is now employing some of the very same tactics.

We can't have it both ways. We can't blame Bush for the Patriot Act, but then say, Well, Bush's guy wrote it, so that takes Obama off the hook. If he uses it he's just as responsible. Maybe even moreso because he's a liberal who's fucking with privacy rights. And that's tantamount to a righty selling out on gun control. It's like our friend Don Tomasso posted just the other day. Something like, "If Bush did this his hair would be on fire." I give him A LOT of credit for admitting as much.

The Fourth Amendment applies only to areas where citizens have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The Fourth Amendment applies only to areas where citizens have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The Court held in a landmark case of Katz in the 1960s that there exists a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of a phone call from a public phone booth, and therefore the government's use of the conversation without a warrant or probable cause was improper, and therefore any conviction of Mr. Katz, based on illegally obtained information, had to be thrown out.

However, while the expectation of privacy exists in the actual phone conversation, there is no such expectation in the fact that the call was placed at a specific time from a specific place. The conversation used a third party (the phone company), which lessens the expaectation of privacy on the basis that a call was made.

I have always had problems with some of the provisions of the Patriot Act, and I believe taht some of the provisions, like roving wiretaps and surveillaance of any private call between people in the US and a foreign country, when challenged, will be deemed unconstitutional.

I found it ironic that Bush had claimed after 9/11 that the attackers disliked us because of our freedoms, but the government responded by enacting legislation that curtailed freedoms. Obviousy the American government distrusts the people it represents as much as the people distrust it.

I personally don't have a problem with any of it, regardless of whoever is in office. I've got nothing to hide and I don't see it as my rights being threatened.

If that is granted, you can nag all you want that why your privacy is being compromised, all the while knowing that maybe that's for the best if you don't want to be victim of another terrorist attack.