NSA collecting records from millions of phones daily

LadyJazzer wrote: Sorry...Your "subtle distinctions" are laughable at best...

Then we'll make it simple for you...

M OS T T H E T E A P A R T Y C O N S E R V A T I V E S A R E A G A I N S T T H E S N O O P I N G

...many other conservatives are not.

LadyJazzer wrote: ...and Mitch McConnell, and Richard Shelby, and Peter King, and Lindsey Graham, and John McCain, and Saxby Chandliss, and ....

Dang, I just can't keep up...

Nope...I'm obviously not "illiterate" ... But thanks for asking. :rofllol

Four of your examples John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and Saxby Chamblis have faced TEA Party challengers.

Who on the left ran against Feinstein or Barack "Gitmo" Obama in 2012?

Go sell crazy somewhere else...We're all full up here....

LadyJazzer wrote: Go sell crazy somewhere else...We're all full up here....

lol Hoist by her own petrard?

No, I hoisted you on yours... But thanks for playing...

"I know you are but what am I?"

"I'm rubber and your glue ..."

LadyJazzer wrote: Yeah, background checks for guns = bad...

Scooping up ALL your phone data = good...

I just can't keep up with what the 'Baggers are supposed to be outraged about from one day to the next...

Once again, you can count on Jazzy to misstate the premise and then erect a strawman argument against it. The idea of a background check isn't bad, it's the manner in which it is done that allows the contents of one's gun safe to be part of the data that is bad. I have registered myself to vote. Presumably that means that someone has looked into my background and verified that I am permitted to vote. I have absolutely no problem registering myself with the government to own guns either so that my background can be examined and it can be verified that I am not one of those who is not permitted to own a gun. That knowledge in the hands of the government, like the knowledge that I have made a phone call, does not infringe upon any of my constitutionally protected rights.

It is when the government seeks to know what is in my safe, or what the content of the call was, where it must justify the infringement on my privacy, the right to be secure in my papers, my person, and my property to an independent, and at least theoretically, neutral third part by swearing an oath that there is good reason to suspect that I am engaged in nefarious activity and so they wish a warrant issued so that they can infringe upon my privacy.

This is the difference which you wish to overlook. Not only that, but the federal government only has an interest when the sale or transfer of a firearm involves people who do not reside in the same State, ie interstate commerce. It was never delegated any authority to insert itself into what is purely intrastate commerce between two individuals who both reside in the same State or impose any restrictions upon such commerce.

FBI Director Faces House Judiciary Committee Oversight - FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about counterterrorism practices. Lawmakers focus their questions on the National Security Agency's information-sharing program called "PRISM."

Live now...

http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN3/

Of course... if you are a follower of our political guru "Something The Dog Said" you will already know that watching this will be a waste of time. For all other non-low-information-voters who want to be better informed citizens... if you have the time... watch or listen to this hearing.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... er+Line%29


"On June 18, 1972, the Washington Post reported that the night before, there had been a break-in at the offices of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate Hotel. Although the break-in story made the Post’s front page, no one could then foresee the consequences that would spin out over the ensuing months.

This morning, the Post’s Erik Wemple reported that forensic analysis has confirmed multiple invasions of at least one computer used by CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson in late 2012. Attkisson has been one of only a handful of reporters who have dared to write critically about the Obama administration. In October 2011, we noted her statement that a representative of the White House had screamed and sworn at her because she was not being “reasonable” about the Fast and Furious scandal. A representative of the Department of Justice was more moderate; she merely yelled at Attkisson, but didn’t curse at her.

Last month, we noted Attkisson’s public statement that she had experienced multiple “intrusions” with respect to more than one of her computers. She said that she first noticed “irregular activity” on one of her computers in February 2011, when she was reporting on Fast and Furious and the Obama administration’s “green energy” scandals.

Forensic analysis has now confirmed"..............

HOW is this any different than the "outing" of Valerie Plame.....BOTH SIDES of this piece of excrement are "screwing" with people's
lives....DO NOT see Plame's perpetrator being punished....HER career is hosed.....YET that is ok?