Feds Wants GPS in ALL Cars

[JustSomeDude]

And the hits just keep on comin'...

Transportation secretary wants GPS device in all motor vehicles to tax you by miles traveled: http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-lahood-vehicle-mileage-tax,0,6754105,print.story

Should I mention the threat of bank nationalization? http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090220/ts_nm/us_banks_shares_5

The libs decried Bush for wiretapping terrorists, but they'll probably all support GPS in our motor vehicles, because they're too stubborn to admit socialism is wrong. And they have to try and believe Blammoz is still all about love and hope and change and peace and love and hope and change and love and change and hope and change and love.

Can't wait 'til the feds get into the libs' bank accounts with their nationalization plans. Man this is gonna be a fun four years. Hee hee heeeee! :)

[salsashark]

from what I've read the Obamanation Administration has already shot down the transportation secretary's idea of a mileage taxation.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/20/transportation-chief-considers-taxing-miles-driven/

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Wanna do something? Raise the gas tax. I've less problem with that than punishing those of us who have lighter, more-efficient vehicles that damage the roadway less and lessen our dependence on petroleum but drive more miles. What a complete dipshit.

Now, I'd approve of the measure for pure electric cars ONLY, because they pay no gas tax, but still use the roads. Oh, and bicycles too!:)

[Snowman]

Do you honestly think that the government cannot track your every movement at this very moment?

Every time you use your debit or credit card you are login in to a database someone that takes down who, where, when and what you were doing.

There are cameras that cover most urban areas, whose video and facial recognition software can pull you out of a crowd.

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.

And you’re suddenly outraged about a little box attached to your car so they can find out far you go to be taxed?

[JustSomeDude]

from what I've read the Obamanation Administration has already shot down the transportation secretary's idea of a mileage taxation.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/20/transportation-chief-considers-taxing-miles-driven/

I guess they figured they need a less invasive way of raising our taxes. As if raising our taxes wasn't invasive in the first place.

:dunno:

Thanks for the update tho Salsa!

[64BonnieLass]

Do you honestly think that the government cannot track your every movement at this very moment?

Every time you use your debit or credit card you are login in to a database someone that takes down who, where, when and what you were doing.

There are cameras that cover most urban areas, whose video and facial recognition software can pull you out of a crowd.

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.

And you’re suddenly outraged about a little box attached to your car so they can find out far you go to be taxed?

Yea, and I'm hiring the people who do it. :shocked: It's amazing what these guys can do in Business Intelligence. Spooky really!

[Devaclis]

Your cell phone already does this for you, and them. Stop being paranoid

[Mental]

Yeah Oregon was doing that last year as a pilot program. Several insurance companies have offered discounts if you let them put a black box in your car. Hell OBD II and OBD III already have the provisions in them to rat you out for speeding and failure to service you emissions controls. Your car just broadcasts a signal and you get a ticket in the mail. Rental car companies have tried (and in several cases succedded) in "fining" you becuase the GPS in their cars rat you out for speeding. No court, no judge, no due process, just an automatic charge to your credit card. On-Star can take complete control of your vehicle, disabling it, tracking it, and a host of other naughty things and peaple are gladly paying to give up that kind of freedom in the name of security and safety. Big Brother is not the goverment, it is the industry, and we the consumers are begging them to run our lives.

Anyone old enough to remember Max Headroom the show?

The bank thing is even more interesting. I read an nice conspiracy theory that this is a non-partisan effort for the Fed to basically take over banking and push for an all electronic economy. As was alluded here a while back, that way there is no cash sales, no drug sales, no indvidual gun sales. Everything can be tracked, not for law enforcement, but to make sure they get sales tax on every transaction in the country. Moreseo, the only bank, Fist Fedreal Bank of Gimmie All Your Damm Money keeps your direct deposited paycheck, collects their income tax immediately, and decides who and what you can spend your money on. Normally I don't suscribe to such crap, but you gotta admit, it seems viable given recent years.

[JustSomeDude]

Do you honestly think that the government cannot track your every movement at this very moment?

Every time you use your debit or credit card you are login in to a database someone that takes down who, where, when and what you were doing.

There are cameras that cover most urban areas, whose video and facial recognition software can pull you out of a crowd.

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.

And you’re suddenly outraged about a little box attached to your car so they can find out far you go to be taxed?

I was waiting for the first liberal defense of this, just to see what approach would be taken. Glad to see it lacks all logic and reason... as expected.

Must... defend... Obama.... at... all... cosssts. :crazy:

[salsashark]

Do you honestly think that the government cannot track your every movement at this very moment?

Every time you use your debit or credit card you are login in to a database someone that takes down who, where, when and what you were doing.

There are cameras that cover most urban areas, whose video and facial recognition software can pull you out of a crowd.

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.

And you’re suddenly outraged about a little box attached to your car so they can find out far you go to be taxed?

http://cr4.globalspec.com/PostImages/200709/TinFoil_DB52B2F1-0E7F-A983-F0F9D799A20B06C8.jpg


I guess they figured they need a less invasive way of raising our taxes. As if raising our taxes wasn't invasive in the first place.

:dunno:

Thanks for the update tho Salsa!

Oh they'll find a way... I have no doubt about that...

[PhL0aTeR]

Do you honestly think that the government cannot track your every movement at this very moment?

Every time you use your debit or credit card you are login in to a database someone that takes down who, where, when and what you were doing.

There are cameras that cover most urban areas, whose video and facial recognition software can pull you out of a crowd.

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.

And you’re suddenly outraged about a little box attached to your car so they can find out far you go to be taxed?

thats good to know.... at least they dont care when i text the guy i buy weed from:siesta:

[Snowman]

I was waiting for the first liberal defense of this, just to see what approach would be taken. Glad to see it lacks all logic and reason... as expected.

Must... defend... Obama.... at... all... cosssts. :crazy:
Interesting that you see it that way. I guess that says something about your paranoia’s. I was not defending anyone. Every statement I made is true, moreover they has been in place for a while now.

Personal privacy is not a liberal or conservative subject with me. It’s about keeping other people out of my business. Having all my action traceable in itself not a problem to me. However, the people in charge of that information and what they choose to do or not to do with it gives me cause question what kind of oversight they must have in order to preserve my rights

And to my good friends at the NSA.
“Nice job on your new white house, it’s just the bomb. Eradicating that bush out front made the yard so much more appealing. However, being so close to the airport aren’t you afraid they are going to crash an airplane though your living room and knock over your stereo towers?” :)

[salsashark]

^^ :pointlaugh::applause:

[~Barn~]

I was waiting for the first liberal defense of this, just to see what approach would be taken. Glad to see it lacks all logic and reason... as expected.

Must... defend... Obama.... at... all... cosssts. :crazy:


What he said has nothing to do with Obama. (?) :wtf:

He just stated facts. You do get that part, right?

[Filo]

Good Lord, some of you people are paranoid. And please, STFU about politics. Post pictures of kitten, Dana, for the love of God.

Oh, and mods, lock this thread. It is going nowhere good.

[~Barn~]

And reset Snowman's post count while you're at it, too!

Reset it to "Obama".

[64BonnieLass]

Good Lord, some of you people are paranoid. And please, STFU about politics. Post pictures of kitten, Dana, for the love of God.Oh, and mods, lock this thread. It is going nowhere good.

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u311/Terri_Romaneschi/Misc/FUNNY-ANIMALS.jpg

[64BonnieLass]

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u311/Terri_Romaneschi/Misc/untitled8.jpg

[Snowman]

Leave it to Terri to save the day… :)

[Mental]

...Personal privacy is not a liberal or conservative subject ...

Quoted for truth


...And to my good friends at the NSA.
“Nice job on your new white house, it’s just the bomb. Eradicating that bush out front made the yard so much more appealing. However, being so close to the airport aren’t you afraid they are going to crash an airplane though your living room and knock over your stereo towers?” :)

Quoted for funny

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Do you honestly think that the government cannot track your every movement at this very moment?
No, they can't. I don't use EZ-pass, I do't have a PC, and I don't have a cell, so unless they attached a tracking device to my vehicles as I slept.......

Every time you use your debit or credit card you are login in to a database someone that takes down who, where, when and what you were doing.
True. Don't ever use a check then either.

There are cameras that cover most urban areas, whose video and facial recognition software can pull you out of a crowd.
Um, SOME urban areas, and they are not going to have the facial recognition software active on them in general either. I did some work with a company that did that stuff. Too expensive, too complicated for general use, and, frankly, doesn't work at distances or in a big crowd well, or at night or in inclement weather conditions well either.

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.
There is that remote POSSIBILITY, but in actual fact, they lack the manpower or server space to bother with everyone. Impossible. Just the "profiled" ones, and justly so. Don't talk about flying planes into buildings in Arabic and you're ok. They can't use anything else against you without a court-ordered wiretap.

And you’re suddenly outraged about a little box attached to your car so they can find out far you go to be taxed?
Yes, I am. I'd short that f#cker out in a heartbeat.

Have you been watching "Minority Report" reruns lately or is something else the cause of your paranoia?:)

[Snowman]

Have you been watching "Minority Report" reruns lately or is something else the cause of your paranoia?:)
Anything a Las Vegas casino has access to I guarantee you the government has access too. They do not need to track every person all the time but if they wanted to find out where you I can assure you every form of personal tracking will be used.

My issue is not that they can but what checks and balances are in place to make sure they only do it when necessary.

Even though your lifestyle may put you as far off the grid as the Unabomber, they still can find you if they choose and what check is in their way to protect your rights.

Stop living in the 19th century, Frank. :)

[rforsythe]

Anything you say into a phone or type into the internet is routed through secret rooms copied off and analyzed for potential incriminating language.
There is that remote POSSIBILITY, but in actual fact, they lack the manpower or server space to bother with everyone. Impossible. Just the "profiled" ones, and justly so. Don't talk about flying planes into buildings in Arabic and you're ok. They can't use anything else against you without a court-ordered wiretap.

Um no, actually it's very real and happens 24x7. AT&T has rooms in their major data switching centers where literally every packet is copied off, stored, and analyzed (other carriers do as well, they're just less public after AT&T's came to be known). They don't need the manpower because it's automated, and they absolutely have the server space. The technology also absolutely exists to analyze large volumes of traffic. What you call impossible, I call reality.

Also, most of your transactions aren't just recorded; they are profiled and analyzed. A former employer of mine (which just happened to have their fingers in most airlines, a few car rental co's, hotels, mortgages, tax services, and a whole lot more) used their access to this information for exactly that purpose. Guess what -- the government may still have some checks and balances on what they can gather about you and use, but private companies do not. Guess who buys that information from private companies, thereby exploiting that loophole.

Voice analysis also happens, though I suspect moreso on international calls (and yes, every int'l call is listened to by the NSA, and run through large computers running voice recognition technology). Large-scale domestic wiretapping was taking place under the Bush administration however, done by the NSA, with the cooperation of telco providers, and under an executive order. Congress is at this time mulling over either prosecuting telcom management for illegal surveillance, or giving them immunity. AT&T also has some really neat software that takes call logs through their switches and can actually build a social network diagram from them; it was released some years ago now, so I suspect they have something better now (as does any other phone provider). If you use something electronic and any sort of tag or code can be linked to you, I guarantee it is being collected and correlated somewhere.

Oh and read the Patriot Act sometime. They don't need a court order to do anything. They can arrest you and hold you indefinitely in secret by simply saying you are suspected of terrorism, without any due cause or judicial oversight.

Sorry to burst your bubble of "they really aren't watching me". Very little that any of us do anymore is NOT recorded and analyzed to some degree, or correlated with other little bits of information.

[Kim-n-Dean]

What Ralph said. Carnivore is the software. Packet sniffing doesn't take a whole lot of power.

You see every day on the news how they track some nut job down by his credit card or cell phone...

[rforsythe]

What Ralph said. Carnivore is the software. Packet sniffing doesn't take a whole lot of power.

You see every day on the news how they track some nut job down by his credit card or cell phone...

Carnivore is old school. It's well beyond that at this point.

[Kim-n-Dean]

BTW - Your junk mail is usually tailored to you too. They compile credit card data for your spending habits. Been going on forever. I actually have a friend who compiles that data.

[Kim-n-Dean]

Carnivore is old school. It's well beyond that at this point.
That figures. I'm old school too...

I did think they still called it that, though.

[Lurch]

That would explain the letter I got from the fed's a while ago about my firework material purchase.

[Kim-n-Dean]

They're gonna GPS your blown gas guzzler:eyebrows:

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Um no, actually it's very real and happens 24x7. AT&T has rooms in their major data switching centers where literally every packet is copied off, stored, and analyzed (other carriers do as well, they're just less public after AT&T's came to be known). They don't need the manpower because it's automated, and they absolutely have the server space. The technology also absolutely exists to analyze large volumes of traffic. What you call impossible, I call reality.
Are you telling me EVERY persons EVERY call is recorded verbatim, and analyzed on the spot word-for word? I find that hard to believe.

Also, most of your transactions aren't just recorded; they are profiled and analyzed. A former employer of mine (which just happened to have their fingers in most airlines, a few car rental co's, hotels, mortgages, tax services, and a whole lot more) used their access to this information for exactly that purpose. Guess what -- the government may still have some checks and balances on what they can gather about you and use, but private companies do not. Guess who buys that information from private companies, thereby exploiting that loophole.

Voice analysis also happens, though I suspect moreso on international calls (and yes, every int'l call is listened to by the NSA, and run through large computers running voice recognition technology). Large-scale domestic wiretapping was taking place under the Bush administration however, done by the NSA, with the cooperation of telco providers, and under an executive order. Congress is at this time mulling over either prosecuting telcom management for illegal surveillance, or giving them immunity. AT&T also has some really neat software that takes call logs through their switches and can actually build a social network diagram from them; it was released some years ago now, so I suspect they have something better now (as does any other phone provider). If you use something electronic and any sort of tag or code can be linked to you, I guarantee it is being collected and correlated somewhere.
I vote for prosecuting.

Oh and read the Patriot Act sometime. They don't need a court order to do anything. They can arrest you and hold you indefinitely in secret by simply saying you are suspected of terrorism, without any due cause or judicial oversight.
Mmm, maybe, but they can't prosecute you for doing anything like selling dope or whatever that's NOT a security issue. They still ned a court order for any information like that to be presented as evidence, or it'll be thrown out.

Sorry to burst your bubble of "they really aren't watching me". Very little that any of us do anymore is NOT recorded and analyzed to some degree, or correlated with other little bits of information.

That's one big reason I'm NOT "connected" and still have my rotary phone and live in the 17th century.:) Ok, well, maybe I don't still have my rotary phone, but.....

[Lurch]

They're gonna GPS your blown gas guzzler:eyebrows:

They will have to catch me first.

[Kim-n-Dean]

They will have to catch me first.Speed kills!!!
So, play it safe and drive a Chevy!!

[Lurch]

Speed kills!!!
So, play it safe and drive a Chevy!!

Thats true 2 years and it still hasn't done any blowing:turtle:

[Kim-n-Dean]

Thats true 2 years and it still hasn't done any blowing:turtle:Yeah, just like your... ah, never mind...

[Lurch]

Yeah, just like your... ah, never mind...

I'm hope to fix that tonight.

[rforsythe]

Are you telling me EVERY persons EVERY call is recorded verbatim, and analyzed on the spot word-for word? I find that hard to believe.

- International calls, yes. That's been common knowledge for a long time. Domestically, I'm sure it was confined to certain areas just because of the scope, but it was indeed wide-scale monitoring. When you have a computer analyzing the audio, it can be done incredibly fast.

I vote for prosecuting.

- So do I. But money talks and bullshit walks, so my guess is that won't go far. Hell we just gave hundreds of billions of $$ to obvious crooks over the past couple months, do you really think some guy who listened to your phone calls when he wasn't supposed to is going to get anything more than a stern talking-to and a free golf game?

Mmm, maybe, but they can't prosecute you for doing anything like selling dope or whatever that's NOT a security issue. They still ned a court order for any information like that to be presented as evidence, or it'll be thrown out.

- They need a court order to prosecute you in a civilian court. If you are held, watched, or prosecuted under the Patriot Act, you will be tried in secret, without the benefits of constitutional protection. Whether it has been used as such or not, it's damn near KGB-type shit. That is why most folks who actually know what it says are very, very against it.Oh, here's a link worth looking at; another city going the "blanket surveillance" route: http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/1440402,mayor-daley-emergency-surveillance-cameras.article

[JustSomeDude]

Interesting that you see it that way. I guess that says something about your paranoia’s. I was not defending anyone. Every statement I made is true, moreover they has been in place for a while now.

Personal privacy is not a liberal or conservative subject with me. It’s about keeping other people out of my business. Having all my action traceable in itself not a problem to me. However, the people in charge of that information and what they choose to do or not to do with it gives me cause question what kind of oversight they must have in order to preserve my rights

And to my good friends at the NSA.
“Nice job on your new white house, it’s just the bomb. Eradicating that bush out front made the yard so much more appealing. However, being so close to the airport aren’t you afraid they are going to crash an airplane though your living room and knock over your stereo towers?” :)

Snow,

I was making a gereralization about liberals in the light of some of your previous posts here. If I am wrong, and you are a raving conservative, please let me know and I'll gladly apologize! However, I think you just missed my joke. Allow me to explain...

Many liberals decried the wire tapping protocols allowed by the Patriot Act, and made it a rallying call against Bush as an invasion of privacy issue. I just find it very amusing that some of those same liberals are now proudly defending anything Obama does, even if the policies are the same they would have blasted Bush for. It reminds me of the old bumper sticker, "WAR IS WRONG... unless a democrat is president."

When liberals implement a little objectivity, and bash the same policies that were insitituted by conservatives, it'll be easier buying their commentaries. But it is difficult to blindly accept your philosophy that now we all should just deal with invasion of privacy as "well, that's what government does." Call me kooky, but had federal GPS tracking in every single motor vehicle been suggested by a George Bush or Mitt Romney, I doubt you'd call it "government business as usual," and suggest we all move along. Nothing to see here!

Please... try selling crazy elsewhere, we're all stocked up here at the CSC.

[TFOGGuys]

http://publicintellectual.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/tin-foil-hat.jpg

Seriously, by the time most people think about trying to limit government surveillance of their lives, it's far too late. And video cameras are far more prevalent than one might think. F'rinstance, the City of Aurora has over 1600 video cameras at intersections, snapping 2 frames per second. All of this info is stored on servers for a minimum 180 days. Take a look at any signalized intersection in most any major city, and you'll see at least 2 cameras, often more. Still think you can evade "the man"?

[Filo]

Dude, step away from the coolaid. They want you dead. Do you realize you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing the liberals of (in your second paragraph)? You act like every Republican is the second coming and every Democrat the embodiment of the Prince of Darkness. Use Google dude - Ray LaHood, the transportation secretary, is a REPUBLICAN. It was his idea to do the mileage tax via GPS. If I remember my politics correctly, LaHood, Bush and Romney are all in the same party.


Like Jim said - look up at any intersection, any shopping center, many light poles between intersections, at retail counters, at ATMs, at the dashboard of the police car behind you, in the airport, at bus stops, in parks, at sports arenas, in your work place - there are cameras literally everywhere watching what you do.


Many liberals decried the wire tapping protocols allowed by the Patriot Act, and made it a rallying call against Bush as an invasion of privacy issue. I just find it very amusing that some of those same liberals are now proudly defending anything Obama does, even if the policies are the same they would have blasted Bush for. It reminds me of the old bumper sticker, "WAR IS WRONG... unless a democrat is president."

When liberals implement a little objectivity, and bash the same policies that were insitituted by conservatives, it'll be easier buying their commentaries. But it is difficult to blindly accept your philosophy that now we all should just deal with invasion of privacy as "well, that's what government does." Call me kooky, but had federal GPS tracking in every single motor vehicle been suggested by a George Bush or Mitt Romney, I doubt you'd call it "government business as usual," and suggest we all move along. Nothing to see here!

Please... try selling crazy elsewhere, we're all stocked up here at the CSC.

[JustSomeDude]

Dude, step away from the coolaid. They want you dead. Do you realize you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing the liberals of (in your second paragraph)? You act like every Republican is the second coming and every Democrat the embodiment of the Prince of Darkness. Use Google dude - Ray LaHood, the transportation secretary, is a REPUBLICAN. It was his idea to do the mileage tax via GPS. If I remember my politics correctly, LaHood, Bush and Romney are all in the same party.


Like Jim said - look up at any intersection, any shopping center, many light poles between intersections, at retail counters, at ATMs, at the dashboard of the police car behind you, in the airport, at bus stops, in parks, at sports arenas, in your work place - there are cameras literally everywhere watching what you do.

Filo - I suggest you take a minute and actually read my post. Where did I say ANY person, Democrat OR Republican was "the second coming"?! Oh, and please use quotes when defending your claim. I simply stated that objectivity should be used when making claims against policies - or those claims can't be taken at face value due to political bias. That's all I'm pointing out here. Does that bother you?

As for LaHood being a Republican, maybe YOU should stop drinking the koolaid. Your blind bias by making that comment only further demonstrates my point, and exposes your ignorance. For had you any knowledge of LaHood you would know he is nothing of a conservative, and about as much of a Republican as I am a Democrat. Do you think Obama appointed him to his cabinet because of his charm?

Based on your logic, all liberals should have supported and voted blindly for Ben Nighthorse Campbell, simply because he initially wore a Democrat badge. Or maybe Leiberman should be used as the poster boy for the future of liberalism.

So thank you for making my points for me. Maybe when you get away from the labels, and appreciate policies a little better, you'll understand my comments about political bias and objectivity. Until then, it seems you can only level baseless claims as a result of political affiliations and labels.

I'm sorry you're having such difficulty comprehending my point. Or maybe you're just offended that I've exposed political bias... which says more about you than it does me.

:dunno:

[Filo]

Spin it man, spin it.


Filo - I suggest you take a minute and actually read my post. Where did I say ANY person, Democrat OR Republican was "the second coming"?! Oh, and please use quotes when defending your claim. I simply stated that objectivity should be used when making claims against policies - or those claims can't be taken at face value due to political bias. That's all I'm pointing out here. Does that bother you?

As for LaHood being a Republican, maybe YOU should stop drinking the koolaid. Your blind bias by making that comment only further demonstrates my point, and exposes your ignorance. For had you any knowledge of LaHood you would know he is nothing of a conservative, and about as much of a Republican as I am a Democrat. Do you think Obama appointed him to his cabinet because of his charm?

Based on your logic, all liberals should have supported and voted blindly for Ben Nighthorse Campbell, simply because he initially wore a Democrat badge. Or maybe Leiberman should be used as the poster boy for the future of liberalism.

So thank you for making my points for me. Maybe when you get away from the labels, and appreciate policies a little better, you'll understand my comments about political bias and objectivity. Until then, it seems you can only level baseless claims as a result of political affiliations and labels.

I'm sorry you're having such difficulty comprehending my point. Or maybe you're just offended that I've exposed political bias... which says more about you than it does me.

:dunno:

[fullgrownbear]

Spin it man, spin it.

Are you retarted? You totally misquoted him, then you say that?:pointlaugh: WTF

[Filo]

Dude,

I have made the assumption that you are a conservative and a staunch conservative at that - in the mold of a Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. That is a conservative who finds that they can show themselves superior by condescending to the opposition, calling them names, and making baseless undefendable claims about their intelligence. I have made that assumption based on your previous posts, but since you are so into citing examples, let me give you some from this very thread...



The libs decried Bush for wiretapping terrorists, but they'll probably all support GPS in our motor vehicles, because they're too stubborn to admit socialism is wrong. And they have to try and believe Blammoz is still all about love and hope and change and peace and love and hope and change and love and change and hope and change and love.

Can't wait 'til the feds get into the libs' bank accounts with their nationalization plans. Man this is gonna be a fun four years. Hee hee heeeee! :)

The use of "libs" for liberals, "Blammoz" for - I assume - Obama and the glib insinuation that you hope the next four years will be a distaster for the ruling party all contribute to the overall tone of disrespect for your president and condecention towards anyone with a liberal political view point that differs from yours.


I was waiting for the first liberal defense of this, just to see what approach would be taken. Glad to see it lacks all logic and reason... as expected.

Must... defend... Obama.... at... all... cosssts. :crazy:

The previous quote is another example - here you show that you have been baiting those whose viewpoints are different from yours and then go to show that you feel yourself to be more intelligent and better than them simply because you have a difference of opionion. Again condecending and pugnacious, however with a twist of irony at the end.


Snow,

I was making a gereralization about liberals in the light of some of your previous posts here. If I am wrong, and you are a raving conservative, please let me know and I'll gladly apologize! However, I think you just missed my joke. Allow me to explain...

Many liberals decried the wire tapping protocols allowed by the Patriot Act, and made it a rallying call against Bush as an invasion of privacy issue. I just find it very amusing that some of those same liberals are now proudly defending anything Obama does, even if the policies are the same they would have blasted Bush for. It reminds me of the old bumper sticker, "WAR IS WRONG... unless a democrat is president."

When liberals implement a little objectivity, and bash the same policies that were insitituted by conservatives, it'll be easier buying their commentaries. But it is difficult to blindly accept your philosophy that now we all should just deal with invasion of privacy as "well, that's what government does." Call me kooky, but had federal GPS tracking in every single motor vehicle been suggested by a George Bush or Mitt Romney, I doubt you'd call it "government business as usual," and suggest we all move along. Nothing to see here!

Please... try selling crazy elsewhere, we're all stocked up here at the CSC.

Now, in the above quoted post, you state - in the second paragraph - that the liberals have (quotes added for your newly found desire for precision) "decried the wire tapping protocols allowed by the Patriot Act, and made it a rallying call against Bush as an invasion of privacy issue. I just find it very amusing that some of those same liberals are now proudly defending anything Obama does, even if the policies are the same they would have blasted Bush for." The implication in this post is that the liberals among us (with whom you seem to group me - more later) have had a knee jerk reaction against a policy implemented by a Republican administration solely because that administration is Republican. My comment below (which I have quoted here for completeness) speaks to that in an ironic way. Specifically, I am pointing out that you have, in creating this topic and thread, ridiculed the policies of an administration simply because it is an administration with a different political bent than yours. I believe that we have established above that you have, historically on this board, made it clear you are of the Republican persuasion. As you said to Snow - again quoting for the bibliography (please note, the words in brackets have been inserted by the editor and are intended to convey a new, slightly different meaning to the quote) "I was making a gereralization about liberals in the light of some of your previous posts here. If I am wrong, and you are a raving [liberal], please let me know and I'll gladly apologize! In your next paragraph, you start with "When liberals implement a little objectivity, and bash the same policies that were insitituted by conservatives, it'll be easier buying their commentaries." Again, in the following post by me, I was trying to point out (using the ironic construct again) that if you switch the words liberals and conservatives, you will get a sentance that is just as valid.



Dude, step away from the coolaid. They want you dead. Do you realize you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing the liberals of (in your second paragraph)? You act like every Republican is the second coming and every Democrat the embodiment of the Prince of Darkness. Use Google dude - Ray LaHood, the transportation secretary, is a REPUBLICAN. It was his idea to do the mileage tax via GPS. If I remember my politics correctly, LaHood, Bush and Romney are all in the same party.


Like Jim said - look up at any intersection, any shopping center, many light poles between intersections, at retail counters, at ATMs, at the dashboard of the police car behind you, in the airport, at bus stops, in parks, at sports arenas, in your work place - there are cameras literally everywhere watching what you do.

This next section now refers to the post by you that follows. My exact words were (since I know you are such a stickler for being exact) "You act like every Republican is the second coming and every Democrat the embodiment of the Prince of Darkness." So, I didn't say you said it. I said you acted like it. A reasonable person would understand that, in that case, I was using hyperbole to make a point. That point, in its exact and somewhat boring statement, is that you tend to have a strong bias towards the policies of the Republican party and a disdain for the policies of the Democrat party. Since that was the general gist of the posts in this thread, I thought (as I mentioned in the above referenced post) that I would point out to you that you were acting exactly as you are claiming the "liberals" on this board were.



Filo - I suggest you take a minute and actually read my post. Where did I say ANY person, Democrat OR Republican was "the second coming"?! Oh, and please use quotes when defending your claim. I simply stated that objectivity should be used when making claims against policies - or those claims can't be taken at face value due to political bias. That's all I'm pointing out here. Does that bother you?

As for LaHood being a Republican, maybe YOU should stop drinking the koolaid. Your blind bias by making that comment only further demonstrates my point, and exposes your ignorance. For had you any knowledge of LaHood you would know he is nothing of a conservative, and about as much of a Republican as I am a Democrat. Do you think Obama appointed him to his cabinet because of his charm?

Based on your logic, all liberals should have supported and voted blindly for Ben Nighthorse Campbell, simply because he initially wore a Democrat badge. Or maybe Leiberman should be used as the poster boy for the future of liberalism.

So thank you for making my points for me. Maybe when you get away from the labels, and appreciate policies a little better, you'll understand my comments about political bias and objectivity. Until then, it seems you can only level baseless claims as a result of political affiliations and labels.

I'm sorry you're having such difficulty comprehending my point. Or maybe you're just offended that I've exposed political bias... which says more about you than it does me.

:dunno:

Now, the above paragraph really cuts to the quick. You manage to malign my intelligence "Filo - I suggest you take a minute and actually read my post." - the implication being that I can't read or understand; then you manage to condecend to me and at the same time inflate yourself "I'm sorry you're having such difficulty comprehending my point. Or maybe you're just offended that I've exposed political bias... which says more about you than it does me." and "So thank you for making my points for me. Maybe when you get away from the labels, and appreciate policies a little better, you'll understand my comments about political bias and objectivity. Until then, it seems you can only level baseless claims as a result of political affiliations and labels."

These two quotes really point out that you are making assumptions about what I think of the original proposal; they also call into question my intelligence, they show a desire to show that you are superior to me in your understanding of politics, policies and lables; they also assume you know my political leanings (which I assure you, you do not). Good tactic. This is where I say something like "This is exactly what a Republican would say", right? Please note that I did not say that, I am simply using the previous sentance to, once again, use irony to make my original point - that point being that you are behaving exactly the way you are accusing snowman of behaving.


Are you retarted? You totally misquoted him, then you say that?:pointlaugh: WTF

Thank you Mr. Bear for insulting someone you have never met and for completely misunderstanding what I was saying. The length of this post (and the quotes in it to support my points) is just so that I can rest easy tonight knowing that I have done everything I can to satisfy your undoubtably high standards.

[Jim_Vess]

If you take the bodies far enough out into the desert and bury them deep enough, there is nothing to be paranoid about.

Just my .02. :crazy:

[Kim-n-Dean]

...F'rinstance, the City of Aurora has over 1600 video cameras at intersections, snapping 2 frames per second. All of this info is stored on servers for a minimum 180 days. Take a look at any signalized intersection in most any major city, and you'll see at least 2 cameras, often more. Still think you can evade "the man"?According to my neighbor, who works for and repairs all the electronics for CDOT, allmost all of those cameras are signal devices. The intersection next to my house got a traffic light put in and rather than tear up the pavement, they use cameras to signal the light to change. He claims they're not monitored or hooked up to anytyhing other than software that can recognize something is now in it's field of view.

This was further backed up by the police when my house got robbed and I wanted to see if the camera picked up anyone. The cameras in my area (Aurora) aren't hooked up to anything.

Now, am I saying ALL intersections are like this? No!!

[~Barn~]

Speaking of intersection cameras....

I got a Greenwood Village "Red Light" ticket the other day, and the letter that they sent me, had URL links to about 4 different views of my car, a close-up on my mug, both front and back license plates, and a motherfrickin' .mpeg movie file of me (I contend) making the yellow light.

Yeah... technology is bad ass.
Sigh....

[Kim-n-Dean]

Speaking of intersection cameras....

I got a Greenwood Village "Red Light" ticket the other day, and the letter that they sent me, had URL links to about 4 different views of my car, a close-up on my mug, both front and back license plates, and a motherfrickin' .mpeg movie file of me (I contend) making the yellow light.

Yeah... technology is bad ass.
Sigh....
Kim got a photo speeding ticket a few yeas ago. The photo's included were sooooo clear, you could see that she didn't shave that day. Thank god she wasn't takin' a toke or tippin' that fourty!!!