[Freed-M] GOP and Feinstein join to fulfill Obama's demand for renewed warrantless eavesdropping | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Discussion
1

Maybe we can use this as an object lesson on the strategies that have kicked liberty into the ditch for a hundred years or more...especially in the last forty years... ...especially in the last twenty-five years...and especially in the last thirteen years.

In 1978, the police-state sponsored another police-state authorization bill called FISA. Since then there have been various controversial amendments to this police-state authorization. But all of the controversy surrounds its downstream consequences.

Meanwhile NOBODY...NOBODY...NOBODY...looks upstream at the police-state expanding the power of government. That's how it makes money.

2

Hi John,

What am I missing here. Help me figure it out. You are stating the obvious on a list that already knows the facts about government expansion. In principle, we libertarians have been anti-tax, anti-Federal Reserve, anti-aggression (endless wars, the engine of the state, included), and anti all intrusive legislation enabled by the funding that taxes and the Fed provide.

In spite of our efforts to defeat tax increases and end the Fed's powers to provide funding, non-libertarians keep electing politicians who vote for more taxes, more aggression, and more intrusive legislation.

Should we who care be rehashing the wrongs created by a misguided and selfish electorate, and blaming a "police state" for our troubles (BTW, who but the voters via their elected officials created this so-called "police state"?). Or should we be listening to the needs that prompt the electorate to act as it does and addressing those needs with intelligent non-government-expanding solutions.

My intention is only to understand.

Marcy

3

Marcy,
Sure.
If it is that obvious why are we not talking about repeal of FISA?

Yes absolutely we should blame the police-state. The police-state is expending every possible effort to put itself over on the people with every possible device.

5 trillion dollars blaming various foreign government

(for half that, we could give a million dollars to everyone in prison and send them to those "bad" countries.)

2.5 million people in prison
16 trillion in debt

Drugs are blamed
Terrorism is blamed

Obama is blamed

Bush is blamed
Congress is blamed

But no blame on the police-state: UNELECTED, taxpayer paid, gun grabbing, gun carrying, influence peddling, fear mongering, mega-lobbying, liberty sucking police-state. It got the money.

Meanwhile, I quit "smoking" forty years ago. I'm not about to start now. I have seen where it has gotten us. e.g. If you bring your shotgun into public, today, you are a criminal. The police will take you away. Things have never been worse and yet the debate is still about gun-control and not about the government-agents of gun-control: the police-state. I won't discuss whether I want the police state, with or without gun-control. I don't want the police-state.Then gun control goes away too along with a host of evils.

If I call Feinstein, I will be the only one talking in terms of the repeal of FISA. And yet it is the ONLY thing that needs to be discussed in relation to privacy. And I won't grab that third rail alone. And Feinstein can't do a damned thing about it without some political will behind her. But all the political will is about the wrong targets. In this way, the controversy on Rand Paul's amendment plays us into the hands of the enemy.

The conversations must change to develop a meaningful understanding of the problems. Then we must focus our attention on the real targets: not Obama, not a "stupid" electorate, not "bad" ideas, not "bad" politicians, not any politicians.

There is no building an airplane with conversation about barbecues. And yet we talk about briquets, medium rare, and rotisseries.

There is no recovery of liberty without talking about the police-state. And there will be no recovery of liberty without building the political machine to defeat it. And I know you are in the trenches trying to do that. This shift of perspective will increase your success.

Does that help?
John

4

Hi John,

I appreciate your trying!! But no, no help at all. Our goals might be similar, but our methods of trying to achieve them do not seem to agree at all. The beauty of the situation is I do not have to prove you wrong, or you prove me wrong; we can work toward those goals in our own way. BTW, to clarify my methods, I posted earlier the New Year's Resolutions List written by our late, great Libertarian Harry Browne; I pledge to follow his methods every New Year.

Marcy

5

Marcy,
Bwahahaha! It's working already. :slight_smile:
You see? We are talking about what WE are going to DO.
I'm talking about my methods; you about yours. Hopefully others will join the conversation in these terms. This will produce alignment along our terms instead of the terms of our opposition.
John