No more ridiculous than any of yours.

 

The premise of your quote is I shouldn't worry about giving up freedom if I have nothing to hide. It fundamentally goes against the basic principles of this country.

LOL we're on a blog where most people hide their identity. There's a reason for that. People value their privacy. Why don't you publicly disclose on BGP your name and perhaps some family members?

 

Also. will you email me your email and facebook login and passwords please?

 

I'd like to scroll through your internet activity. You have nothing to hide, right?

 

With regards to my phone calls, not a dang thing. You?

I am very aware that you and others feel this way and it's ok, I truly understand. To say that it was implied hiding behind safety is just flat out wrong in the way I believe and think. I believe that the country as a whole is greater in protecting freedom and more important than any one individual's personal freedom in many cases.

 

It is my belief that it is selfish and self serving to think otherwise. Just a totally different mindset.

 

Do I want someone to be watching my every move and what I do? No, I don't, but that is not what I think is happening with this act. There is a purpose here in my belief and that is protecting us to have our rights.

 

Our country was founded on personal freedom. Selfish or not it is the fundamental principle of this country.

 

The idea of greater good for all can be a statement used to call for higher taxes , more social programs , and in this case restricting constitutional rights. I don't by it.

 

What it is best for all is to secure their individual freedoms and allow the right to life , liberty , and the pursuit of happiness.

The premise of your quote is I shouldn't worry about giving up freedom if I have nothing to hide. It fundamentally goes against the basic principles of this country.

 

 

Wow. Glad you're a mind reader now.

 

What I was meaning is what do you care if the Feds know what number you're calling? Whoever your service provider us already has the info. Actually, they have more personal info on you.

 

One person's freedom does not trump the good of an entire nation.

Our country was founded on personal freedom. Selfish or not it is the fundamental principle of this country.

 

The idea of greater good for all can be a statement used to call for higher taxes , more social programs , and in this case restricting constitutional rights. I don't by it.

 

What it is best for all is to secure their individual freedoms and allow the right to life , liberty , and the pursuit of happiness.

 

 

I submit one way to secure their personal freedoms is through the Patriot Act.

Our country was founded on personal freedom. Selfish or not it is the fundamental principle of this country.

 

The idea of greater good for all can be a statement used to call for higher taxes , more social programs , and in this case restricting constitutional rights. I don't by it.

 

What it is best for all is to secure their individual freedoms and allow the right to life , liberty , and the pursuit of happiness.

 

Sometimes, but not always. I certainly believe in social programs that help those that can't, understanding that some will take advantage of the loopholes. In fact, there is little doubt in my mind that many of our problems have been cutting the availability of mental health services.

 

...and Mr. Paul is making his stand for his own self serving and selfish ways to run for the Presidency. To think otherwise, is well, just blindly loyal and incredibly naive.

Wow. Glad you're a mind reader now.

 

What I was meaning is what do you care if the Feds know what number you're calling? Whoever your service provider us already has the info. Actually, they have more personal info on you.

 

One person's freedom does not trump the good of an entire nation.

 

There is a difference between a private company who I chose to do business with and the government giving me no choice.

A lot of that (but not all) is already tracked due to IRS regulations and has been for a long time. If you donate cash or with money order it would be hard for anyone to track it any way.

 

If your giving to a candidate or PAC they have to keep records of contributions and file them quarterly already. If your giving to group that is Tax-Exempt they have those records in case you want to claim the donation later on your taxes.

 

And we have seen the massive abuse by the government-run IRS. If there was ever a case for curtailing government power it is the IRS attacks on individuals based on who they gave money to.

Wow. Glad you're a mind reader now.

 

What I was meaning is what do you care if the Feds know what number you're calling? Whoever your service provider us already has the info. Actually, they have more personal info on you.

 

One person's freedom does not trump the good of an entire nation.

 

If you are deemed a political threat they can use the information in a manner similar to the IRS atrocities against citizens.

 

If the government wants to protect us then it should - a) control the borders, b) enforce visas vigorously. That IS the role of government its a role they are not doing. Yet they want our detailed information to catch terrorists they have allowed into the country and refuse to deport.

 

Let's face it, Rand Paul is running for POTUS. He is just grandstanding and playing politics.

 

Bingo.

With regards to my phone calls, not a dang thing. You?

 

Its not just about phone records. Your smart phone device is linked to your gps (location), emails, facebook messages, google search history, financial information, what you buy through your bank (if you have app on your phone like a Chase banking app), text messages, etc.

 

The PATRIOT Act allows the NSA to collect in bulk and store that information without ever getting an individual warrant.

...and Mr. Paul is making his stand for his own self serving and selfish ways to run for the Presidency. To think otherwise, is well, just blindly loyal and incredibly naive.

 

That's absurd. He's been fighting the NSA bulk collection of data since he was elected. His dad opposed it back in the early 2000's when it was originally voted on. The Paul family has a long history of fighting this gross violation of the 4th amendment.

If you are deemed a political threat they can use the information in a manner similar to the IRS atrocities against citizens.

 

If the government wants to protect us then it should - a) control the borders, b) enforce visas vigorously. That IS the role of government its a role they are not doing. Yet they want our detailed information to catch terrorists they have allowed into the country and refuse to deport.

 

I agree with your number 1 & 2 completely.

 

The Feds don't get detailed info by seeing a number called. They could care less about me calling my Mother.

I agree with your number 1 & 2 completely.

 

The Feds don't get detailed info by seeing a number called. They could care less about me calling my Mother.

 

True - unless your mother is a foreign national or outside the borders of the country or has any links to organized group. And in all those cases the government has the ability and means and already did collect all the communications - including content - on her - without the Patriot Act.

 

The collecting of data and meta-data on citizen to citizen, inside the boarders transactions is a recent thing. Every cross border electronic data and voice and communication has been recorded by the government for at least a few decades. Andd every foreign national inside the country is subject to surveillance. And none of this required the Patriot Act.

True - unless your mother is a foreign national or outside the borders of the country or has any links to organized group. And in all those cases the government has the ability and means and already did collect all the communications - including content - on her - without the Patriot Act.

 

The collecting of data and meta-data on citizen to citizen, inside the boarders transactions is a recent thing. Every cross border electronic data and voice and communication has been recorded by the government for at least a few decades. Andd every foreign national inside the country is subject to surveillance. And none of this required the Patriot Act.

 

Those that don't want the Patriot Act seem to be against one provision in the law. To scrap the entire law, they are throwing to baby out with the bath water. The law provides for much more that the data mining.

 

What I find humorous is some of the same ones that want the Patriot Act scrapped defend the ACA and it's overreaching and intrusive provisions to the end.