tvashtarkatena

FUnny that you've referenced a dated REPUBBLICAN ways and means committee report and not the actual legislation itself LOL.

Study the Civil War and you'll understand about 9/10ths of everything you need to know about why America is so fucking out there.

Doubly funny because that's where all the progressives went to escape Bush. That'll make for some interesting neighborhood block parties.

I hear Costa Rica's starving for more loud, fat Yanquis.

i could care less what rob said or what your motivation was for posting his mustacheness - my point was it's ironic that you hold in contempt a man who's central fucked up idea, that only some people are worthy of life, you also appear to be in agreement with This is a surprise to anyone? That idea is tucked into just about half of FW's posts. FW, like many self styled 'free thinking' libertarian conservatives, is really exfoliating a calcified state of popular convention circa 1960. You know, all the 'get a job, longhair' shit. I suppose some might consider that way of non-thinking novel in 2010...or not.

Sooooooo...whattaya guys think about health care passing? If you done talking about Prole sucking Hitler's cock, that is.

The Rfucks have written their own political death warrant. HELLLL-OOO irrelevancy. They're the hysterical version of modern day Victorian hangers on, stunned by a world that has set them on the back porch to die like so many unwanted spider ferns.

The health care bill is all about the fags and minorities wanting us pay for the consequences of their lifestyles.

We made it OK to be a fag, and now they're everywhere. We need to stop their campaign of recruiting our children by returning to the days when fags were few and far between because everybody knew what you're gonna get if you're a fag. Actions have consequences. Wanna be a perv? Fine...it's gonna cost ya. It's called personal responsibility.

Minorities and fags act like they've been here from the beginning.

Hard working white men are losing the battle for our country, and you guys are joking about it.

Really? Have you read much of the drivel around here? The anecdote I posted was not intended to support the theory that every road is going to be monitored. I was merely illustrating that there IS monitoring happening in SOME areas. I agree that the chances of blanket monitoring of the roads is HIGHLY unlikely. As far as the post regarding drones I know folks who actually believe that is happening right now. Now that is funny. The original poster claimed that ALL (his emphasis) NFS roads were on TV. Some Canuck who occasionally posts claimed that drones were used along the border. Last month our engineless 27' sailboat was 'interdicted' by 2 half million dollar Border Patrol boats crewed by six agents as it drifted across the border on a windless day just off Dungeness Spit. This year they're rolling out new million dollar boats that can do 75mph. The same agency is building a 7 to 50 billion dollar anti-Mexican fence. Can DHS afford to fly a few drones along the border? Um...yeah, they can. Predators patrol the Mexican border

Yeah, except that the NSA's job is to spy, and they pretty much enjoy a blank check budget, and the military's job is to track subs, and they also have an almost unlimited budget. Hence, the slight credibility issue of a very budget limited NFS monitoring a third of a million miles of road for...what reason exactly? But hey, your friend said it, so it must be true. My point is that the very real issue of government surveillance is not addressed effectively or credibly by chasing after fantasies like this one. There's plenty of very well substantiating stuff happening to act upon.

Yes, that logically follows. My formula for happiness, which is apparently shared by others here, is to accept a low standard of journalism, you know, lines about 'give aways to the drug companies' and such, that's not editorializing, that's fact, myan, when it supports my emotional needs, and demand a higher standard than possible when it doesn't. Why would I want to know who specifically met with whom and what was exchanged? Cook it down for me!

Bears appreciate other furry critters like no other species. With thousands of real cameras that are being installed: the ones that photograph every license plate going in and out of Medina, in public parks, on the ferry system, in the city, with the NSA filtering all electronic communication, with the major telecoms making a profit on supplying our personal records to the feds without probable cause and in violation of their bullshit privacy policies.... ....the government has gone too far by installing satellite brain wave readers in marmots. Notice how those little bastards never take their eyes off you? And bushy tailed wood rats; ever notice how every time you chuck a rock at one the weather suddenly gets nasty? COINCIDENCE????

The same could have been said when the telephone was invented. Using communications technology, a necessary part of modern life, need not equate with sharing our communications with anyone who cares to monitor it, regardless of how often the owners of Google and Facebook tell us otherwise (and they certainly do as often as possible). Your privacy and the privacy of those you communicate with electronically is of little apparent value to you; that's your choice, but you're making a few assumptions and decisions for your social network that I'm not sure they'd agree with unanimously. There's usually more than one party involved in any communication. Some of the rest of us place a bit more value on our privacy. We question why the government, or private entities, should feel that they can invade it anytime and for any reason.

Way kewler than crickets.

Duly noted. Now what are you, personally, going to do about it? How will you personally exercise your political power in a focused way? You might consider an appropriate donation to one of the very few organizations who is effectively monitoring and acting upon government surveillance.

Processing power is pretty cheap now, and, according to Moore's Law, it continues to get cheaper. Today's high end professional work station processor will go for about 4 cents by 2020. You'll have full surveillance capable, wireless, networked Happy Meal toys available for give aways by then. Our government has spent many billions of dollars tracking as many aspects of our lives as it can...soon that will be every aspect of our lives. If people are cool with that, OK. If not, instituting stronger privacy laws and policies to control the use of inevitably more powerful and affordable technologies will need to be enacted. The more expensive the installed base of surveillance equipment, the harder that's going to be to do. We should limit what information can be collected, why (probable cause comes to mind), by whom, and what happens to the information once its in government hands. Right now, we don't in any substantive way.

Studies in the UK, which has more surveillance cameras per capita than anywhere else in the world, and the US, reveal that public video surveillance has little to no effect on crime. The reasons are probably not knowable, but it might be that the miscreants correctly assume that no one is watching, and therefore no one will respond. Law enforcement clearly loves video cameras, given the epidemic of installations around the country going on right now, but they are essentially a waste of money. Cutting public budgets to get rid of specific policies is not a very predictable way to stop such policies. Bolstering privacy laws would prove far more effective and long lasting.

Law enforcement has been trying to fly drones over urban areas for general surveillance for a few years, now. The FAA won't let them. Drones are a huge privacy issue, especially when there are experimental, battery powered, video equipped drones that weigh all of 3 grams now.

Any time I read phrases like 'back room deal'...yeah, the real pros have no need to pander. The story, when credible, should speak for itself without the Chez Lives! bullshit.

This is a pretty clear case of a journalist bucking for a hit story. He made the story up, now he's filling in the blanks by mischaracterizing, which is apparently not even a word, the situation and other people's statements. Happens all the time...particularly on the web. Read Billcoe's 'surveillance cameras on every one of thousands and thousands of forest service roads' post in the climbers section for a more local example.

Before you burn your fingertips furiously writing your congressmen... This story grew from a single incident of finding a single surveillance camera used pursuant to a law enforcement investigation in that area. The camera was battery operated and not anchored to anything; it was there for a limited time and for a specific purpose, not as part of the execution of a new policy. This issue appears to be more web myth than reality, but government surveillance and the erosion of privacy remains a very real issue. Here's a link for anyone wanting to know more about or become involved with more vetted issues within our state: Technology and Liberty Project