Electronic ids

[Rych]

The U.S. House of Representatives approved on Thursday a sweeping set of rules aimed at forcing states to issue all adults federally approved electronic ID cards, including driver's licenses.

Under the rules, federal employees would reject licenses or identity cards that don't comply, which could curb Americans' access to airplanes, trains, national parks, federal courthouses and other areas controlled by the federal government. The bill was approved by a 261-161 vote.

The measure, called the Real ID Act, says that driver's licenses and other ID cards must include a digital photograph, anticounterfeiting features and undefined "machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements" that could include a magnetic strip or RFID tag. The Department of Homeland Security would be charged with drafting the details of the regulation.

Republican politicians argued that the new rules were necessary to thwart terrorists, saying that four of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers possessed valid state-issued driver's licenses. "When I get on an airplane and someone shows ID, I'd like to be sure they are who they say they are," said Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican, during a floor debate that started Wednesday.

States would be required to demand proof of the person's Social Security number and confirm that number with the Social Security Administration. They would also have to scan in documents showing the person's date of birth and immigration status, and create a massive store "so that the (scanned) images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format" permanently.

Another portion of the bill says that states would be required to link their DMV databases if they wished to receive federal funds. Among the information that must be shared: All data fields printed on drivers' licenses and identification cards, and complete drivers' histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions and points on licenses.

The Bush administration threw its weight behind the Real ID Act, which has been derided by some conservative and civil liberties groups as tantamount to a national ID card. The White House said in a statement this week that it "strongly supports House passage" of the bill.

Thursday's vote mostly fell along party lines. About 95 percent of the House Republicans voted for the bill, which had been prepared by the judiciary committee chairman, F. James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican. More than three-fourths of the House Democrats opposed it.

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat from Washington, D.C., charged that Republicans were becoming hypocrites by trampling on states' rights. "I thought the other side of the aisle extols federalism at all times," Norton said. "Yes, even in hard times, even when you're dealing with terrorism. So what's happening now? Why are those who speak up for states whenever it strikes their fancy doing this now?"

Civil libertarians and firearm rights groups condemned the bill before the vote. The American Civil Liberties Union likened the new rules to a "de facto national ID card," saying that the measure would force "states to deny driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants" and make DMV employees act as agents of the federal immigration service.

Because an ID is required to purchase a firearm from a dealer, Gun Owners of America said the bill amounts to a "bureaucratic back door to implementation of a national ID card." The group warned that it would "empower the federal government to determine who can get a driver's license--and under what conditions."

[TrailBate]

I actually support bar code tattoos.

[Rych]

I don't know why I'm for them, I guess it has to do with airplanes flying into building, generally I for keeping the government out of our live.

I'm for gun owners rights, but if there was a system for notifying the authorities the 1 person has bought 50 ak47s I don't see the downside.

[TrailBate]

how about saving the electronic id's just for tourists, foreign students, fellons, and the more recent immigrants?

it's funny how the government can get away with anything just by instilling fear in people. disgusting.

I dont' see how this is going to prevent terrorism. The article even states that 4 of the terrorists had VALID STATE ISSUED DRIVER'S LICENSES.

[TrailBate]

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

-Hermann Goering. (a Nazi leader, for those kiddies who don't know)

[Slider]

I support forehead tattoos, including info on political affiliations, sexual preference, driving record, full medical history, SSN, and a list of all videos and books that have been checked out. I propose that Karl Rove manage the program and retain all commercial rights to the database. I mean, if you can't trust the President's Deputy Chief of Staff, who can you trust?

Slider

[MissJean]

Why not just implant a chip in everyone, sorta like a Speed Pass for people, that way Big Brother can keep track of our every move.

This is getting ridiculous. Will we have to carry our “papers” with us at all times? Will we have to produce them on command to any cop who asks? Will we be detained if we don’t comply?

[slapheadmofo]

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

-Hermann Goering. (a Nazi leader, for those kiddies who don't know)




Ummm...I thought we actually WERE attacked a few years back. Could be wrong though, mind like a sieve and all that...

[MTBME]

"The group warned that it would "empower the federal government to determine who can get a driver's license--and under what conditions.""

Is that suppose to be a bad Idea? The government essentally has that power right now but it seems to be unenforceable. So now illegal aliens will have a harder time getting a valid drivers license.

[Slider]

MTBME - the states currently determine who can drive, not the Feds. Your post does bring up an interesting point, though. The same Republicans that are proposing this are the first to scream about the Feds overstepping their authority when imposing conditions on the states, yet the hypocrisy in this proposal escapes them.

There's a recent Supreme Court decision that will tie in nicely with this. The Bush boys' (father and son) court recently ruled that any cop who stops your car, for any reason, can let a dog search for evidence of drugs, or anything else it can turn up. Supposedly, our constitution protects us from unreasonable search and seizure.

If the national ID idea and the undermining of our contitutional rights are not the beginnings of a fascist state, I sure don't know what would be. Personal liberty used to be the cornerstone of our country. Thanks to "W", Rove and the rest of this adminstration's Nazis (put Ramirez at the top of that list), there soon will be no America as we know it.

Slider

[Rych]

So if this law does pass:

Are we more likely to have a nuke blown up on US soil?
Are we less likely to have a nuke blown up on US soil?
Would it make a difference either way?

If you new this technology could prevent a nuke attack would you still be against it?

[TrailBate]

So if this law does pass:

Are we more likely to have a nuke blown up on US soil?
Are we less likely to have a nuke blown up on US soil?
Would it make a difference either way?





only if the nuke also had to carry an ID

[TrailBate]

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

-Hermann Goering. (a Nazi leader, for those kiddies who don't know)




Ummm...I thought we actually WERE attacked a few years back. Could be wrong though, mind like a sieve and all that...


yeah, by muslim extremists. How does giving every american an ID stop this?
My point is that anytime W wants something his way, he just cries about the terrorists.

[Rych]

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

-Hermann Goering. (a Nazi leader, for those kiddies who don't know)




Ummm...I thought we actually WERE attacked a few years back. Could be wrong though, mind like a sieve and all that...


yeah, by muslim extremists. How does giving every american an ID stop this?
My point is that anytime W wants something his way, he just cries about the terrorists.



The Oklahoma City bombing was by American. I'm not sure IDs would prevent any terror attack. My thought is they may help catch people responsible.

[Slider]

The Oklahoma City bombing was by American. I'm not sure IDs would prevent any terror attack. My thought is they may help catch people responsible.


The question is: At what cost?

Why should we so readily toss our most cherished ideals, like personal liberty, simply because of 9/11? There are many, many more steps to be taken before we have to tie our own hands and gag ourselves: tighten border checks, improve intelligence gathering and interpretation, re-connect with our allies, stop mongering war around the world, and so on. The list is very long. WTF would we toss the very things that put America among the best places in the world to live? Because "W" says we should? Sorry, he doesn't carry that much credibility with me.

If anything, this is a blatant attempt to deny his own responsibility in the 9/11 attacks. He ignored direct warnings, (including the Richard Clarke memo published fully for the first time today) but is trying to deflect that by saying "It couldn't be prevented. We gotta look in your bedroom windows from now on." Basically, he wants to implement a single, simplistic, incredibly oppresive solution instead of actually addressing the failures, especially his own, that got us here in the first place. Look how hard he fought the very establishment of the 9/11 commission. He simply doesn't want answers, since the facts might impede his ascension to the throne he wants to create.

Do you really want to let this moron singlehandedly destroy our country? Doesn't this "Big Brother" thing scare you at all?

Slider

[TrailBate]

The Oklahoma City bombing was by American. I'm not sure IDs would prevent any terror attack. My thought is they may help catch people responsible.




how? the only way that would work is if you had to present your ID card EVERYTIME YOU PURCHASED ANYTHING, plus everytime you cross a border, every time you rent anything, everytime you go online, everytime you make a phone call, etc.

are you ready to do this? Are you ready for the government to have legal and open access to every goddam step you take?

[TrailBate]

Now that I think about it, Bush has been doing an awful lot to control the american population's minds. He prevents people from protesting anywhere near him, he has fake townhall type discussions, plants his own reporters into press conferences, he has the patriot act, the enemy combatant, these ID's, more power to police officer for searches.
how far is this guy going to go? What kind of country is this?

[slapheadmofo]

I dunno, I grew up on military bases where you had to show an ID to do or buy just about anything. BFD, just another card in the wallet really. I remember the first time I went to a Kmart and pulled out my ID card for the lady at the register; I had no idea you didn't have to do that stuff in the 'real world'. Kinda funny.

If you're worried about drug sniffing dogs, leave your weed at home or don't travel w/ so much that the dog can smell it from the outside of your vehicle. If you've just gotta travel w/ a bunch of illegal drugs, then I recommend you use your blinkers, make sure your inspection sticker is valid and for pete's sake, obey the speed limit. It's not all that hard not to get pulled over, and well worth the effort if you're gonna be doing any smuggling.

Regarding the 4 *******s w/ valid STATE licenses, the point seemed to be that it would be a lot tougher for them to have been able to get a hold of a valid NATIONAL ID card, therefore making it tougher for them slide by unnoticed.

[TrailBate]

I grew up on military bases, too. Had to have one once you turned 10. But all those ID's were for is just to make sure you were a military brat, and not some civilian taking advantage of cheaper on-base stuff. It was never scanned or anything to keep track of you.
And how can you trust an ID card issued by the federal government? Seems they had plenty of warning about 9/11 without them.

[Rych]

Truthfully, I don't know. I could be swayed one way or the other. I'm not sure if ids would help. But for the sake of argument what is the the downside of carrying an electronin id? So the government would know when I jump on a plane....so what.

[Rych]

Another thing....I rarely use cash anyone. There is a database of 99% of all my transactions. Is Bank of American any better than the government?


BTW...I think most drugs should be legalized, and I've never smoked in my life.

[Slider]

You have a choice whether to use a credit card or not. You won't have a choice with an ID card. Massive difference.

Leaving your dope at home will have no effect on dope-sniffing dogs. 80% off all US cash has traces of drugs on it. If you have a wallet, the dogs will get a scent, which means further searching, and even more loss of liberty.

The problem in the ID card is not solely about tracking your plane trips, but about the government having the power to track all aspects of your life. You mean to tell me you don't see the danger in that?

Try this scenario: Karl Rove decides you personally are a threat to his empire building. This is long after he's disposed of Bush, who was too wimpy in his willingness to rape the Constitution. He knows where and when you travel, how much money you spend, who you spend time with, and what you do when you are with them. Do you think he might use that info to help himself eliminate your threat to his megalomania?

Slider

[kernel crash]

Stop obcessing about Karl Rove. In a few years he will mearly be a footnote in history.

[Slider]

He'll only be a footnote if we make him one.

Slider

[sizlinseagulsoup]

I don't even think we should have social-security numbers that act as a National ID Number. FDR didn't either.

[Rych]

I don't even think we should have social-security numbers that act as a National ID Number. FDR didn't either.


Cool, finally. Kevin we have something we can agree on. Lets get rid of Social Security!

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Truthfully, I don't know. I could be swayed one way or the other. I'm not sure if ids would help. But for the sake of argument what is the the downside of carrying an electronin id? So the government would know when I jump on a plane....so what.


It keeps the populace complacent. Counter-hegemogic movements will be stopped before they ever begin, change will never happen. You think the 70's would have ever been the way they were with national ID cards? Think there would ever be Vietnam Veterans Against The War? Do you think people could protest Nixon?

National ID cards will allow the government from stop reality from being real. They already "censor" (I quote because I'm not being literal) the press by paying off reporters and having fake partisan hacks do the reporting. Without citizens to call out the politician's lies, there will be no accountability left. They are already erroding our rights with the Patriot Act, now they are using National ID cards to further monitor the people. Those who are no dosile will likely be harassed by governmental thugs.

Think I'm crazy, look at other tyrannical regimes around the world, it wouldn't take much for th US to be the same way.

I also think it's pretty hypocritcal that we are telling Iran and N Korea to stop their NUKE programs when Bush wants to fund the development of weapons that are MORE POWERFUL than nukes (as mentioned of Page 2 of the Boston Globe a few day back)l

[sizlinseagulsoup]

BTW...I think most drugs should be legalized, and I've never smoked in my life.


Anyone who is fiscally conservative should think that way. 5.5 Billion could do so much more good if I was spent on education, the enivornment, rather than putting pot-heads in jail.

I classic Republican viewpoint is that you shouldn't spend money that doesn't build a persons character (ie, spending money on welfare does nothing for character, nor does giving free food to the poor. Instead, you should spend money giving them job training, teaching them how to interview, etc).

Jailing people theoretically rehabilitates people, but in reality it doesn't. Drug conseling and more effective drug prevention education would be much more effective.

[slapheadmofo]

I can't imagine your gonna have to present your card for anything ID's aren't checked for now. And all the personal information mentioned above isn't all that hard to obtain right now if someone is looking for it anyway is it? How would another piece of ID give the government any more ability to track you than they have now?

And 'stop reality from being real'...dogs hitting on residue in peoples wallets from outside their cars...you guys are hysterical. We're talking about a frigging ID card, not some sort of forcefully implanted chip streaming info about our mundane lives directly to the oval office. "Oh, GW, I see here that this Trailbait rabblerouser has 3251 posts ranting against you. You want I should send a squad down to ambush him at his favorite trailhead and give him a little tune up? He should be there in a few minutes, his ID was just swiped at the D'angelos down the road. Yes sir, he got a large pastrami again. Yes sir, it does sound delicious."

:D

Seriously, what's a realistic scenario where someone doing legal things is going to be any worse off w/ another piece of ID in their pocket? I can't imagine it'll even affect a large percentage of American citizens doing illegal things. It may make things a little tougher on people in the country illegally though. Isn't that a good thing?

Oh and you guys are completely right - the war on drugs is a bad joke. That's a whole 'nother thread though.

[Slider]

Slaphead, dogs already hit on scents from cash. In his dissenting opinion, Souter cited a study that shows dogs err 50% of the time. I'll find the reference later, but there's a specific case where the poor arrestee had nothing but cash that had passed through the wrong hands. If you think the use of dogs won't lead to even greater abuse of civil rights, I got a bridge I want to sell you.

The same holds for the ID cards. Information is power, and every time that card is swiped - its electronic, remember - there's another data point that can be used. It ain't a ******* library card, and even those are fair game under the Patriot Act. The IDs are a huge leap down a very steep slope.

Slider

[slapheadmofo]

I haven't completely figured out where I stand on the dog searches for drugs - I don't doubt that there will be instances where they're used in a twisted way. And I believe that dogs are currently used in this manner anyway (?). If there was a way that the searches could only be valid for explosives, weapons, etc I think it would be a positive thing though.

But the subject at hand is the ID cards, and I'm still not seeing how SPECIFICALLY they would make a noticeable difference in the way we live our lives. I mean, you're not gonna be having to pull the thing out on a daily basis. They're not gonna ask for it at Store 24 or the local bar. It'll be used at the same times you're already leaving data points now, only it'll (supposedly) be a harder thing for someone that shouldn't have one to get.

[Slider]

The very existence of the card will make it possible for the abuses you cite to occur. Since government takes a mile for every inch you give it, I'd say the abuse is inevitable once the tool exists. Empowering the federal government this way is a huge mistake.

Slider

[TrailBate]

I love this mentality, "if you're not doing anything wrong, the new ID's shouldn't bother you."
great philosophy.
Since I'm not doing anything illegal, how about random police searches of your house and car? How about random searches of all your videotapes and hard drives? how about government surveillance cameras in your house? How about notifying the government everytime you cross state lines? Or making it necessary to get permission, official papers, and a scheduled time on when you can cross state lines? How about random strip searches on the street? Random blood tests and urine tests? ID tattoos?

The government has just decided to make EVERYONE a suspect.

[TrailBate]

Stop obcessing about Karl Rove. In a few years he will mearly be a footnote in history.


Is this the same Karl Rove that ratted out some CIA agents to try to get them killed so they would shut up about all the lies Bush has been telling? The same Karl Rove that made up the lies about Mccain in 2000, about him being a traitor during Vietnam (and Kerry) , and raping black women and fathering black babies? The same Karl Rove that helped make sure Bush won Florida in 2000?

[Slider]

Trailbait - Don't forget Ohio in '04. Definite Rove handiwork.

Got this in email a while back:

Subject: 2008 --COULD THIS HAPPEN ?

ORDERING PIZZA IN 2008

Operator: Thank you for calling Pizza Hut. May I have your national ID number?

Customer: Hi, I'd like to place an order.

Operator: I must have your NIDN first, sir.

Customer: My National ID Number, yeah, hold on, eh, it's
6102049998-45-54610.

Operator: Thank you Mr. Sheehan. I see you live at 1742 Meadowland Drive, and the phone number is 494-2366. Your office number over at Lincoln Insurance is 745-2302 and your cell number is 266-2566. Email address is sheehan@home.net <mailto:sheehan@home.net . Which number are you calling from sir?

Customer: Huh? I'm at home. Where'd you get all this information?

Operator: We're wired into the HSS, sir.

Customer: The HSS, what is that?

Operator: We're wired into the Homeland Security System, sir. This will add only 15 seconds to your ordering time.

Customer: (sighs) Oh well, I'd like to order a couple of your All-Meat Special pizzas.

Operator: I don't think that's a good idea, sir.

Customer: Whaddya mean?

Operator: Sir, your medical records and commode sensors indicate that you've got very high blood pressure and extremely high cholesterol. Your National Health Care provider won't allow such an unhealthy choice.

Customer: What?!?! What do you recommend, then?

Operator: You might try our low-fat Soybean Pizza. I'm sure you'll like it.

Customer: What makes you think I'd like something like that?

Operator: Well, you checked out 'Gourmet Soybean Recipes' from your local library last week, sir. That's why I made the suggestion.

Customer: All right, all right. Give me two family-sized ones, then.

Operator: That should be plenty for you, your wife and your four kids. Your 2 dogs can finish the crusts, sir. Your total is $49.99.

Customer: Lemme give you my credit card number.

Operator: I'm sorry sir, but I'm afraid you'll have to pay in cash. Your credit card balance is over its limit.

Customer: I'll run over to the ATM and get some cash before your driver gets here.

Operator: That won't work either, sir. Your checking account is
overdrawn also.

Customer: Never mind! Just send the pizzas. I'll have the cash ready. How long will it take?

Operator: We're running a little behind, sir. It'll be about 45 minutes, sir. If you're in a hurry you might want to pick'em up
while you're out getting the cash, but then, carrying pizzas on a motorcycle can be a little awkward.

Customer: Wait! How do you know I ride a scooter?

Operator: It says here you're in arrears on your car payments, so your car got repo'ed. But your Harley's paid for and you just filled the tank yesterday.

Customer: Well, I'll be a #%#^^&$%^$@#

Operator: I'd advise watching your language, sir. You've already got a July 4, 2003 conviction for cussing out a cop and another one I see here in September for contempt at your hearing for cussing at a judge. Oh yes, I see here that you just got out from a 90 day stay in the State Correctional Facility. Is this your first pizza since your return to society?

Customer: (speechless)

Operator: Will there be anything else, sir?

Customer: Yes, I have a coupon for a free 2 liter of Coke..

Operator: I'm sorry sir, but our ad's exclusionary clause prevents us from offering free soda to diabetics. The New Constitution prohibits this.. Thank you for calling Pizza Hut.


ONE NATION:UNDER SURVEILLANCE

[TrailBate]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/02/10/tracking.students.ap/index.html

notice the little part at the end about the school getting royalties for this....

[TrailBate]

Trailbait - Don't forget Ohio in '04. Definite Rove handiwork.



nah, 2004 was a fair election. Based on mass hysteria, mass stupidity, and mass gullibility.

[kernel crash]

"nah, 2004 was a fair election. Based on mass hysteria, mass stupidity, and mass gullibility."

Maybe it was based on a poor candidate from the Dem's. But don't worry. I'm sure now that Dean is the chairman of the Democratic National party, things will only get better... for the Republicans. Is this the best they could do or were they so desperate to keep Dean out of the mix for 2008? Looks like the Dem's are thinking they have to get a little more to the left. Could be lonely out there.

[TrailBate]

"nah, 2004 was a fair election. Based on mass hysteria, mass stupidity, and mass gullibility."

Maybe it was based on a poor candidate from the Dem's.


that too!

[Slider]

nah, 2004 was a fair election. Based on mass hysteria, mass stupidity, and mass gullibility.


I wouldn't be so sure. Great article in this month's Vanity Fair, by a Republican, who thinks things were very screwy. Forgetting about the whole Diebold e-voting scam potential, there were very serious issues about the number of machines available in poor and traditionally Democratic districts. Several thousand people waited to vote on TWO machines in one location. Some were there for more than ten hours. Even I probably would have headed home by that time. Disenfranchisement is as effective as plain fraud, as long as you cut off the right voters.

We really need the Barbara Boxer sponsored voting reform thing to pass, but it won't, of course, in a Republican Senate.

Slider

[Mr_Cheeze]

It's been pretty funny reading you guys getting your panties in a bunch over such a minor issue. It's another example of had a Democrat thought of it, you would be lauding it heartily. But not the Republicans, no. They're all evil and out to get us.

But then again, this is what liberals do with their chicken little mentalities. It's funny. You guys ought to get together with the ultra-right, anti-government wackos. You think more alike than you know.

[TrailBate]

It's been pretty funny reading you guys getting your panties in a bunch over such a minor issue. It's another example of had a Democrat thought of it, you would be lauding it heartily. But not the Republicans, no. They're all evil and out to get us.

But then again, this is what liberals do with their chicken little mentalities. It's funny. You guys ought to get together with the ultra-right, anti-government wackos. You think more alike than you know.


and what exactly is the minor issue? Lying about Iraq to get people behind a war? Creating a disastrous budget deficit? Making it worse with stupid government programs? Taking away basic civil liberties? Not allowing non-republicans into Bush's meetings and public events paid for by taxpayers? We're not making this stuff up, it's all been printed or broadcast, or simply witnessed by logical people who are paying attention.
I love it when people who can't defend what's going on, simply call everyone conspiracy theorists and chicken littles.
A lot of people are very upset by what is going on and are not just gonna sit by, shut up, and do nothing.

[Slider]

More curdled milk from the Cheeze: no specifics, just a rant about ranting, or not ranting, or whatever ill-focused diatribe he's offering today.

Cheeze: Do you NOT want fair, verifiable voting? If not, why?

More to the point of this thread: Does the idea of a large, government controlled database bother you? If not, why?

This should be easy for you, since you won't have to cite any reference other than your own opinion. You sure seem confident about it, so let's hear it. Try to support it, if you can.

Slider

[EVIL BOTA]

I thought we lived in a FREE country. I don't think the government knowing every frickin thing your doing is freedom.

Oh and If a guy wants 50 ak 47's He's sure no going to buy them legally..

WTF !

[TrailBate]

I thought we lived in a FREE country. I don't think the government knowing every frickin thing your doing is freedom.

Oh and If a guy wants 50 ak 47's He's sure no going to buy them legally..

WTF !




well, Bush wants guns to be MORE accessible, so you never know....

[slapheadmofo]

Man, you guys are a slippery bunch. It seem most of the times I pose any sort of direct question on the subject at hand, you go dancing off in a different direction or generalize to the point of irrelevance. Carrying an ID card and submitting to random comprehensive searches are not even close to the same thing. And yeah, we all know how you feel about the war and the election. You've beat it to death in a hundred other threads. Talk about "ill focused". ::)

So, how about a REALISTIC and at least somewhat SPECIFIC scenario of how this ID card might put an end to reality? Or even cause any legal citizen more than a minor inconvenience? Or maybe we can dance around that and head on over to how SUVs are the tool of the devil.

[Rych]

More curdled milk from the Cheeze: no specifics, just a rant about ranting, or not ranting, or whatever ill-focused diatribe he's offering today.

Cheeze: Do you NOT want fair, verifiable voting? If not, why?

More to the point of this thread: Does the idea of a large, government controlled database bother you? If not, why?

This should be easy for you, since you won't have to cite any reference other than your own opinion. You sure seem confident about it, so let's hear it. Try to support it, if you can.

Slider


Ok..."Do you NOT want fair, verifiable voting?" Do you think democrats want this? What’s verifiable? Sign your name? Democrats certainly don’t want that. How would they get all the dead people they register to sign their name? If you required a national id card to vote how would a corpse carry in their id card?

[Mr_Cheeze]

More curdled milk from the Cheeze: no specifics, just a rant about ranting, or not ranting, or whatever ill-focused diatribe he's offering today.

Cheeze: Do you NOT want fair, verifiable voting? If not, why?

More to the point of this thread: Does the idea of a large, government controlled database bother you? If not, why?

This should be easy for you, since you won't have to cite any reference other than your own opinion. You sure seem confident about it, so let's hear it. Try to support it, if you can.

Slider



Yes, of course I'm talking about the whole electronic ID conception. This idea has been mulled since long before George Bush was in charge. Yet, now that it is being discussed again, you guys all gravitate towards Bush bashing rather than intelligently discuss the real merits of such an idea. Instead the debate morphs back into whining over the belief that those evil Republicans (again) manipulated the election, in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

The irony of this discussion lies in that electronic id's are a perfect way to ensure fair, verifiable voting. We can't have that, though. This will leave out those illegal aliens and dead people and convicts that vote Democratic. Besides, The Republicans (them again) don't want it for that reason. They want to keep tabs on all of you!! So that the next thing you know you'll have to submit your ID in Dunkin Donuts and Best Buy so Big Brother can keep a database on your caffeine and consumer electronics consumption. Because you never know when they'll NEED that data to throw you in the Pen. Yea, it all makes perfect sense.

Like I siad, you guys sound like Alex Jones and his ilk.


And you can cut the indignancy act, Slider, whenever I make a point of taking direct aim on this anti-Republican and Bush-hate ranting that you continually spout. Can you or Trailbait ever make a point without bringing GWB into the foray? Or is that the point? It's like Ann Coulter arguments in reverse. Gee, more irony.


Yea, yea, I know. More "curdled milk". Drink up buddy boy.

[Slider]

Man, you guys are a slippery bunch. It seem most of the times I pose any sort of direct question on the subject at hand, you go dancing off in a different direction or generalize to the point of irrelevance.

I thought I was pretty specific in my post after yours, when I said if you give 'em an inch, they take a yard. Wasn't the whole Reagan revolution about reining in government's rampant growth? Why would the administration of a national ID card be any different?

Slider

[Slider]

Instead the debate morphs back into whining over the belief that those evil Republicans (again) manipulated the election, in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

What "evidence to the contrary" are you offering? Didn't seem to catch any in your reply. On the other hand, exit polls, direct observation about the waiting lines in specific Ohio districts, known flaws in Diebold machines, and lots more, suggest manipulation. As far as the relevance to this discussion, stolen elections and oppressive policies are both fundamental to a fascist state.


The irony of this discussion lies in that electronic id's are a perfect way to ensure fair, verifiable voting.

Well, this is actually true. In addition, so would implanted GPS chips that record our trips to the polls. But, again, you miss the point. Why would we cede this control to government when there are so many less oppressive alternatives?


Can you or Trailbait ever make a point without bringing GWB into the foray? Or is that the point?

Um, ya, that IS the point. Bush is a fascist pig, trying to undermine the most fundamental American principles. In case you haven't noticed, he's currently our President, doing his best to advance the policies we are discussing here. You'd prefer we talk about Brad and Jennifer? Oh - that's right - we ought to work in Clinton somehow. Sorry, I'll try that next time.

Slider

[Rych]

Aren’t polls run on the local level? If so the people in Ohio who had to stand in line for 10 hours have to look in the mirror to see who to blame

[TrailBate]

Man, you guys are a slippery bunch. It seem most of the times I pose any sort of direct question on the subject at hand, you go dancing off in a different direction or generalize to the point of irrelevance. Carrying an ID card and submitting to random comprehensive searches are not even close to the same thing. And yeah, we all know how you feel about the war and the election. You've beat it to death in a hundred other threads. Talk about "ill focused". ::)

So, how about a REALISTIC and at least somewhat SPECIFIC scenario of how this ID card might put an end to reality? Or even cause any legal citizen more than a minor inconvenience? Or maybe we can dance around that and head on over to how SUVs are the tool of the devil.




By itself, the ID card may not be a bad Idea, but taken together with all the other stuff Bush is getting away with, it's a bad omen.
Funny how you guys keep crying "socialist" or "communist" anytime a liberal wants to help the poor, yet when Bush comes up with a national encoded ID card, it sounds like a good idea. You guys will just believe and agree with anything Bush tells you.
With random searches becoming more legal, the Patriot Act, the "enemy combatant" which means they can hold you indefinately with no legal recourse, it's a shame this will get by. Do you really think Bush is going to stop here? Do you really think this ID is going to help prevent terrorism? You don't care. All you care is that it's "only a minor inconvenience" to law abiding citizens. Communism, Indeed!

[slapheadmofo]

So trotting out a tired old adage and then beating the corpse of the election horse some more is as specific as it gets huh? If that's the case, then I declare victory in the electronic ID debate. Your cards are in the mail.

BTW I've never mentioned communism, socialism or my support for ANY particular candidate or party. What I'm usually arguing against is the rabid partisan rhetoric you guys are constantly (and repetitively) spewing, many times to the complete exlusion of common sense, basic math, and any sort of empathy for those that don't fall into step w/ your agenda.

[TrailBate]

So trotting out a tired old adage and then beating the corpse of the election horse some more is as specific as it gets huh? If that's the case, then I declare victory in the electronic ID debate. Your cards are in the mail.


how many specifics do you need? There are plenty of posts on this board that site specifics, you just choose to ignore them, or invalidate their source.
I'm not crying conspiracy in the 2004 election, but there were enough problems in 2000.
If you believe more government monitoring and lies for the "greater good" are good things, then that's your opinion.

[Slider]

So you are saying that you DON'T think an ID card would be abused? You don't see the danger in a central database recording every swipe of that card?

Maybe it is hard for me to be more specific because the risks seem so patently obvious that they almost defy description. Beyond that, a masive change like this should require a rock-solid justification.

I can almost understand the implementation of the Patriot Act. A very scared public, whipped into even greater fear by an opportunist, budding fascist, might be willing to trade some personal liberty for some short term security. As bad an idea as that one was, this takes it way further. And it is time to say no.

Slider

[slapheadmofo]

Can't seem to find anything specific- please quote it for me if you can find it. Good luck.
If it's so obvious that this would change our lives in such a drastic way, you'd think someone could come up w/ at least one realistic scenario or how it would come about. Or maybe even some thoughts on how any more information would become available to interested parties than is available today? Anything...?

[Slider]

Do you know what HIPAA is? Health and Human Services has mandated a sweeping set of specifications on how medical service providers handle information so that it cannot be divulged to the wrong parties. Big federal program, designed to safeguard our data, which is spread throughout the country on many, many PCs.

Why do we need HIPAA? Because without it, the data was routinely abused. Sold to drug companies, insurance companies, and others who want to market to us, or worse. Now, that personal info certainly should be private, and HIPAA is a well-intentioned effort.

Now take the ID program. There will be a central database of information telling when we bought a plane ticket, where we went on the flight. and who we were with. Add to that info on any permits we applied for, driving infractions, court appearances, marriage license applications, entries into any federal buildings, voter registration, and lots more. This is in a single, central database, not all over the place like the target of the HIPAA regulations.

You mean to tell me that you don't think the potential for abuse will be many, many times what was found in the medical industry? Again, check out this bridge I got for sale, an antique, in New York....

Slider

[TrailBate]

Can't seem to find anything specific- please quote it for me if you can find it. Good luck.
If it's so obvious that this would change our lives in such a drastic way, you'd think someone could come up w/ at least one realistic scenario or how it would come about. Or maybe even some thoughts on how any more information would become available to interested parties than is available today? Anything...?


I see. the specifics you saw were not the specifics you were looking for. okay, I'm sure this is the only specific you will accept.
"I, George W Bush, President of the United States of America, hereby witnessed on these premises, documented and signed in triplicate, do hereby announce I will abuse the ID system, and use it to record any information that will help me do whatever I please.
As an addendum to this proclamation, I hereby declare the Constitution, especially those parts pertaining to civil rights, to be complete BS and withdraw all such provisions immediately"

I am sure this is the only specific you will accept.

[slapheadmofo]

Nope, I'll take anything you can find in this thread previous to Slider's last post that goes beyond a twist on some vague "the government is out to get me" idea. Once you fail to find anything besides that here, maybe someone could explain how having the feds know when I get a traffic ticket or get on a plane cause me problems? I mean, I truly don't see now having this information in one place is that big of a deal, and telling me that you think GWB is evil 1000 times over isn't exactly a convincing reason for me to think otherwise.

Slider, I'm not sure how the program you mention ties in w/ this - sounds like the medical industry was abusing the information and the government stepped in to curb it? How does that reflect badly on the governments intentions - seems that they were trying to protect people's privacy in that case? Also, medical records are a lot more of a confidential item than those that are purportedly going to be tracked - that would probably be something I wouldn't want to see in a centralized Fed database.

[TrailBate]

The patriot act. Enemy combatant. Greater access to internet and phone records. More leeway for searches. Not allowing non-republicans into public events paid for with taxes, holding fake town meetings attended only by supporters, planting pro-bush "journalists" into press conferences. Not allowing protestors anywhere near events that Bush attends. National encoded ID system accessible by the FBI, local police, immigration services, all tied into a central database. During last year's conventions, random searches of ANYONE were legalized.
Are you ready to present this ID to get your Blockbuster card? To close on a loan? To write a check at the Christmas Tree shop? To pick up your ticketbastard tickets? Your social security number was never meant to be used for anything else other than social security, but it became our standard ID number. What about fraud and ID theft?

ID supporters say how this could have prevented 9/11 or Kansas City. But how? Only if Unted Airlines swiped your new card and looked at all your personal info. and now the fact that you were at United is now on your card and part of your personal info. How about if Mcveigh swiped his card when he rented the truck. Now that is on his personal record. Maybe next you'll have it swiped when you buy a hunting rifle at walmart, liquor at the liquor store, etc.

[MissJean]

To those who are saying what’s the big deal about having to carry one more card in your wallet, well for me it’s the principle of the thing. The idea that the federal government wants to have a data base of its citizen’s movements is discomforting. Yeah, I know they won’t be keeping track of when I go to the 7-11 to get a Slurpy, but I can foresee that ID being swiped more & more often, just like your SS # is being asked for more and more often.
Now to some I’m going to sound Pollyanna-ish here, but the federal government is not here to be our parent. It does not need to keep track of when I am going on a plane, in a court building, or a national park.
So you will say the government is not looking to keep track of people like me, they want to keep track of the bad people. Lord knows, I don’t have anything to “worry about”, as a middle class, middle age, white woman from NH, I’m as benign as you can get. Well think back to the Joe McCarthy era & the Hoover FBI era & the Nixon era, there were thousands of regular people the federal government kept files on. It has been shown enough times that government power need to be kept in check. (Which makes me sound like a member of a militia or something ::)not the eastern liberal that I am ;))
As far as elections, we are the United States of America. It is up to the states to run elections. It is a messy process, but it is up to the citizens of those states to demand changes, not the federal government.

[Rych]

“Are you ready to present this ID to get your Blockbuster card?”

I use netflix because new releases are never available at BB. But I imagion if we had a national ID card that needs to be shown at BB then there will be less terrorist and illegal aliens renting videos thus increasing the supply of new releases to American s



“To close on a loan?”

You pretty much already do this…Right now you shown two forms of picture id, usually a passport works best. Then you have sign a document pertaining to the patriot act.

“To write a check at the Christmas Tree shop?”

Come on…what republican (or man) would be caught dead in Christmas tree shops? And why are people writing checks still? It’s the 21st century get a debit card.

“To pick up your ticketbastard tickets?”

Oh my god (ooopps used a word that liberals don’t like), the government might know that I attended a Dead concert. The black helicopters could use that information to follow me to my pot garden deep in the Grafton wetlands.

“Your social security number was never meant to be used for anything else other than social security, but it became our standard ID number. What about fraud and ID theft?”

I thought these cards would be tied to a digital picture?

[Slider]

Slider, I'm not sure how the program you mention ties in w/ this - sounds like the medical industry was abusing the information and the government stepped in to curb it?

Also, medical records are a lot more of a confidential item than those that are purportedly going to be tracked - that would probably be something I wouldn't want to see in a centralized Fed database.


I was establishing the value of the data. And, note, there was a LOT of abuse long before the Feds took any action. As regards your medical info - ever plan on using social security, medicaid, or medicare? All that info will be collected using this card.

Let's says Bush and Rove are effing angels, pure as the driven snow. Can you say for sure that will be the case for the then-current administration in, say, 10 years? 20? The point is the very existence of the database makes possible the abuse. Kinda like leaving a loaded gun in a house full of kids. Even if it is hidden, one day it will be found and used in a bad way.

Slider

[MTBME]

If not a National ID then what? Is it a perfect, foolproof idea? Probably not. But what is? Is there a gray area for abuse? Of course. But isn't just about all this information already available if someone really wants to look hard enough to find it. Do we not agree we have a huge problem with immigration, porous borders, easy access to drivers licenses and other social benefits? Will a National ID solve all these problems? Not in my lifetime but isn't it time that we at least have a National debate on the subject?

[slapheadmofo]

The patriot act. Enemy combatant. Greater access to internet and phone records. More leeway for searches. Not allowing non-republicans into public events paid for with taxes, holding fake town meetings attended only by supporters, planting pro-bush "journalists" into press conferences. Not allowing protestors anywhere near events that Bush attends. National encoded ID system accessible by the FBI, local police, immigration services, all tied into a central database. During last year's conventions, random searches of ANYONE were legalized.
Are you ready to present this ID to get your Blockbuster card? To close on a loan? To write a check at the Christmas Tree shop? To pick up your ticketbastard tickets? Your social security number was never meant to be used for anything else other than social security, but it became our standard ID number. What about fraud and ID theft?

ID supporters say how this could have prevented 9/11 or Kansas City. But how? Only if Unted Airlines swiped your new card and looked at all your personal info. and now the fact that you were at United is now on your card and part of your personal info. How about if Mcveigh swiped his card when he rented the truck. Now that is on his personal record. Maybe next you'll have it swiped when you buy a hunting rifle at walmart, liquor at the liquor store, etc.


You do realize your first paragraph is incoherent don't you? And nowhere do I find anything in that rambling that ties a national ID system to any of the things you listed there, nor has anyone come up w/ anything besides 'I don't like it' or 'the feds scare me' as a valid reason not to have it. And can't you currently get a unique ID number to use in lieu of your SS number?

As I stated before, I think the purpose of this ID is to help REDUCE fraud and ID theft. And as I've also stated a few times before, almost all these things you worry about being tracked already ARE being tracked. And (once again) it seems that they're hoping that since this (supposedly) will be a more difficult item to get a hold of fraudulently, the lack of one will call for some additional scrutiny and make things more difficult for those in the country illegally.

And exactly what's meant by "all your personal info"? You think the lady at baggage claims is going to hold up the line so she can read some sort of synopsis of my liquor store purchases over the past 8 mos, or refuse my boarding cuz I logged on to Arab News a couple times a week last year, or after I leave, giggle and tell the guy working next to her some tawdry little personal tidbit about me? I can't for the life of me figure out what it is that makes this so scary (besides the paranoia of course).

[TrailBate]

You do realize your first paragraph is incoherent don't you? And nowhere do I find anything in that rambling that ties a national ID system to any of the things you listed there, nor has anyone come up w/ anything besides 'I don't like it' or 'the feds scare me' as a valid reason not to have it. And can't you currently get a unique ID number to use in lieu of your SS number?

As I stated before, I think the purpose of this ID is to help REDUCE fraud and ID theft. And as I've also stated a few times before, almost all these things you worry about being tracked already ARE being tracked. And (once again) it seems that they're hoping that since this (supposedly) will be a more difficult item to get a hold of fraudulently, the lack of one will call for some additional scrutiny and make things more difficult for those in the country illegally.

And exactly what's meant by "all your personal info"? You think the lady at baggage claims is going to hold up the line so she can read some sort of synopsis of my liquor store purchases over the past 8 mos, or refuse my boarding cuz I logged on to Arab News a couple times a week last year, or after I leave, giggle and tell the guy working next to her some tawdry little personal tidbit about me? I can't for the life of me figure out what it is that makes this so scary (besides the paranoia of course).



you're obviously not paying attention. Republican? I was asked to give specific examples of why I don't trust what the government was doing, and why I don't trust the new ID. Those were examples of how the government is trying to control the movements of the average american, and keeping tabs on you. Then you say I haven't given any reasons?
yes, things you do are being tracked. Now it will be even easier to track even more information about you. Is this what the government is for?
Please explain how these new ID's will prevent fraud.

[TrailBate]

Washington, DC- Congressman Ron Paul today denounced the national ID card provisions contained in the intelligence bill being voted on in the U.S. House of Representatives, while urging his colleagues to reject the bill and its new layers of needless bureaucracy.
“National ID cards are not proper in a free society,” Paul stated. “This is America, not Soviet Russia. The federal government should never be allowed to demand papers from American citizens, and it certainly has no constitutional authority to do so.”
“A national identification card, in whatever form it may take, will allow the federal government to inappropriately monitor the movements and transactions of every American,” Paul continued. “History shows that governments inevitably use such power in harmful ways. The 9-11 commission, whose recommendations underlie this bill, has called for internal screening points where identification will be demanded. Domestic travel restrictions are the hallmark of authoritarian states, not free nations. It is just a matter of time until those who refuse to carry the new licenses will be denied the ability to drive or board an airplane.”
“Nationalizing standards for drivers licenses and birth certificates, and linking them together via a national database, creates a national ID system pure and simple. Proponents of the national ID understand that the public remains wary of the scheme, so they attempt to claim they’re merely creating new standards for existing state IDs. Nonsense! This legislation imposes federal standards in a federal bill, and it creates a federalized ID regardless of whether the ID itself is still stamped with the name of your state.”
“Those who are willing to allow the government to establish a Soviet-style internal passport system because they think it will make us safer are terribly mistaken,” Paul concluded. “Subjecting every citizen to surveillance and screening points actually will make us less safe, not in the least because it will divert resources away from tracking and apprehending terrorists and deploy them against innocent Americans! Every conservative who believes in constitutional restraints on government should reject the authoritarian national ID card and the nonsensical intelligence bill itself.”






Rep. Mary Bono (R-Cal.) has also argued that, "When we consider ourselves to be at war, people are going to have to recognize that some of their freedoms are going to be gone. Whether we are talking about national ID cards I don't know, or fingerprinting everybody, I don't know where we are going to go with security." (She later recanted the remark, however.) And Rep. George Gekas (R-Pa.), chairman of the House Immigration Subcommittee, has told the press that proposals to mandate national ID cards should not be dismissed out of hand.

Proposals to sacrifice civil liberties during wartime, as has occurred during past wars, will remain unsettling to many Americans, however, and nowhere is this more clearly the case than with proposals to demand that all Americans carry national IDs. National ID cards are not a new idea. As was discussed in a 1995 Cato Policy Analysis, national ID card proposals were most recently considered as a possible solution to illegal immigration. Similar national identifier proposals have arisen in debates over gun control, national health care, and Social Security reform. Moreover, many other countries currently require that their citizens carry some type of identity card.

What is new about the various national ID card proposals is that they have become more technologically sophisticated. The prospect of massive computer databases or registries, software data collection systems, digital fingerprinting, handprint scans, facial recognition technologies, voice authentication devices, electronic retinal scans, and other "biometric" surveillance technologies have suddenly become realistic options for government identification purposes. If Americans are concerned about the recent proliferation of traffic surveillance cameras on roadways and sidewalks, then they ain't seen nothin' yet.

But while the technologies may have changed, the fundamental problems with national ID cards have not. The most serious problem with national ID mandates remains the troubling ramifications for civil liberties. As former California Rep. Tom Campbell, currently a Stanford University law professor, has recently argued, "If you have an ID card, it is solely for the purpose of allowing the government to compel you to produce it. This would essentially give the government the power to demand that we show our papers. It is a very dangerous thing."

Indeed it is. As David Kopel, research director for the Colorado-based Independence Institute, has similarly argued, "We beat the Germans in World War II. We don't want to be a show-us-your-papers kind of country." And as Cato Institute President Ed Crane told the Washington Times recently, "We live in a free society and our first right is a certain level of privacy. We shouldn't be forced to show our papers wherever we go." While proponents of national ID cards will contend that such concerns are overblown, there is no denying that a national ID card could become the equivalent of a domestic passport that citizens are required to produce for the most routine daily tasks.

The other serious problem with national ID cards is more practical: They probably won't work. For example, who will be issuing these cards? If everyone is required to have one, then that means there will be a lot of bureaucrats responsible for collecting and filing our personal information. Beyond logistical questions about how that process will work and how much it will cost, it raises concerns about potential fraud and abuse.

Consider how easy it is to forge a driver's license in America today. Many teenagers routinely engage in identity theft or forgery when they create fake ID cards in an attempt to prove they are older than 21 years of age. As a recent USA Today feature story illustrated, the Internet and digital technologies have made do-it-yourself ID forgery easier than ever before. "Gone are the crude, cut-and-paste fake IDs common a few years ago that were so obviously bogus. They have been replaced with replicas whose detail and accuracy often astonish authorities," the paper reported. The story noted that, "The new fake IDs may not exactly match state-issued ones, but often they're good enough to fool bartenders, nightclub doormen and, sometimes, police officers." In light of the fact that teenagers are able to so easily forge new identities merely in an attempt to get into a nightclub, imagine what individuals with truly malevolent intentions would be able to do with national ID cards.

Moreover, bureaucrats could also be bribed or forcibly coerced into divulging information or producing fake ID cards. More realistically, hackers could invade centralized databases and distort or steal personal information. In any event, human error is a real possibility. As Jonathan S. Shapiro, an assistant professor in the Johns Hopkins University Department of Computer Science, has pointed out, airport security guards and other officials, "think they are relying on the cards when in fact they are relying on the integrity of the human process by which the cards are issued." In other words, an over-reliance on technology might end up giving us a false sense of security.

The bottom line is that mandatory national ID cards aren't going to help us catch many bad guys. While the first responsibility of government is to protect our lives and property, we shouldn't rush into giving up some of our freedoms unnecessarily. We need things that actually matter, not just symbolic gestures. Instead of providing such a meaningful solution, national ID cards will become, at a minimum, an unnecessary nuisance for most citizens. Worse yet, in extreme cases, it could produce massive breaches of individual privacy.

And at the end of the day, all this goes to show that theories about war and the growth of government are more true than ever. Notes Robert Higgs, author of Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, "As a cause of the development of big government in the United States… war seldom receives its due." If federal policymakers begin requiring that all Americans carry a national ID card, it could constitute one of the most significant increases in government power in our nation's history.

[Slider]

So this Congressman Ron Paul - must be one of those whacko leftie pinkos, I would guess. Lemme see....

Gee - imagine that! He's a Republican!!! And he's from Texas, of all places. Whaddya know.

Slider

[slapheadmofo]

you're obviously not paying attention. Republican? I was asked to give specific examples of why I don't trust what the government was doing, and why I don't trust the new ID.


Oh, I'm not paying attention? Here I'll help you out:

"Seriously, what's a realistic scenario where someone doing legal things is going to be any worse off w/ another piece of ID in their pocket?"

"the subject at hand is the ID cards, and I'm still not seeing how SPECIFICALLY they would make a noticeable difference in the way we live our lives. "

"So, how about a REALISTIC and at least somewhat SPECIFIC scenario of how this ID card might put an end to reality? Or even cause any legal citizen more than a minor inconvenience? "

"maybe even some thoughts on how any more information would become available to interested parties than is available today?"

No mention of why you don't trust the gubment (we're all VERRRYYY familiar w/ your thoughts on that already), but what you see as actual events that may take place one day as a result of this.

I have no political affiliation. The two party system sucks and partisan bickering is a giant waste of time and energy. It's like I almost can hear the wheedling tone thru my monitor 'na na na na nah nah...your a re-pub-li-cannn'. That's the lamest attempt at an insult I've ever received, and I'll tell ya, I get my share. :P

[TrailBate]

Oh, I'm not paying attention? Here I'll help you out:

"Seriously, what's a realistic scenario where someone doing legal things is going to be any worse off w/ another piece of ID in their pocket?"

First of all, I already answered the insane "this is no big deal to anyone not doing anything illegal" logic. Let's legalize random home searches, strip searches, random interrogations, phone record searches, hard drive searches, since none of this will bother anyone not doing anything illegal.
This is an encrypted "smart" ID card. The only way it would be effective is if an employee swiped it at the airport to see your personal info ie, digital picture, fingerprint, eyescan (technology for this exists and is being used) etc. Everytime the card gets scanned it will/can record WHERE it was scanned, when and by whom. Now part of your record. If a cop pulls you over for speeding, he can scan your card too and see what you've been up to, or at the very least, this traffic stop is now on your official record available to many government and non-government entities. Your social security number kept being added to more and more info besides just SS. Your credit cards, your loans, your drivers license, your employee records ALL took your SS number. THe same will happen with these ID's. Next the new ID's will be used to buy a gun at walmart, beer, fireworks, take out a loan, apply for a job, apply for school. Suddenly a LOT of people have access to your ID, and the gubment has more info on you. If this all sounds like no big deal to you, then there is no more point in arguing with you. People get fake passports and licenses all the time. with a fake passport, you can get a real National ID.
What if you don't have your National ID on you when a cop wants to see it? Enemy combatant, maybe?


now, why don't YOU tell me why this National ID card is a GOOD thing?

I'm all for standardizing drivers licenses. You can get 5 guys together from massachusetts, and you'll probably find 3 different Mass licenses.

Your logic is simply that nobody has officially said they'd like to do something questionable with these ID's, and until they do, you're ok with it. Well, by the time they do, it will be too late. I've heard the gubment tell me they will find WMD's in Iraq, that Medicaid will not be cut, that the deficit will not go up, that the feds will not interfere with state's rights. I've seen Bush hire Enron execs as "advisors", along with Worldcom. I could go on and on. And you will trust these people with a national, encoded ID card?

[TrailBate]

ChoicePoint scammed, data stolen
MSNBC
"Criminals posing as legitimate businesses have accessed critical personal data stored by ChoicePoint Inc., a firm that maintains databases of background information on virtually every U.S. citizen, MSNBC.com has learned. The incident involves a wide swath of consumer data, including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, credit reports and other information... Last week, the company notified between 30,000 and 35,000 consumers in California that their personal data may have been accessed by 'unauthorized third parties,' according to ChoicePoint spokesman James Lee. California law requires firms to disclose such incidents to the state's consumers when they are discovered. It is the only state with such a requirement... The Atlanta-based company says it has 10 billion records on individuals and businesses, and sells data to 40% of the nation's top 1,000 companies. It also has contracts with 35 government agencies, including several law enforcement agencies."


would you like this to happen to your national ID card? Now some criminals have your fingerprints, or eyescans for chrissakes!!

[kernel crash]

"a firm that maintains databases of background information on virtually every U.S. citizen,"

So what information is the National ID card going to produce that isn't already available out there? I think the horses have already left the barn.

[Slider]

There are lots of databases in the world, of course. Karl Rove made his mark by creating and milking one for Texas Republicans. The feds have plenty, too, as do all the redit agencies.

That has nothing to do with the risks posed by a national ID system controlled by the federal government. The data it will collect about your behavior would in large part be unique, and not previously centralized. Read back in this thread if you don't know what I mean by that. I really don't get how this incredibly obvious aspect seems to be missed by so many.

If you really want this sort of thing, why not blog you life for all to see. Include all your personal data, and your daily activities. Post the URL here. Show support for your position.

Slider

[geezer]

WILL YOU HAVE TO SWIPE ONE OF THESE DAMN THINGS TO HIT THE TRAILS???????????? ARE THEY GONNA HAVE A CARD READER AT EVERY TRAIL HEAD??????? ::)

[slapheadmofo]

now, why don't YOU tell me why this National ID card is a GOOD thing?

I'm all for standardizing drivers licenses. You can get 5 guys together from massachusetts, and you'll probably find 3 different Mass licenses.

Your logic is simply that nobody has officially said they'd like to do something questionable with these ID's, and until they do, you're ok with it. Well, by the time they do, it will be too late. I've heard the gubment tell me they will find WMD's in Iraq, that Medicaid will not be cut, that the deficit will not go up, that the feds will not interfere with state's rights. I've seen Bush hire Enron execs as "advisors", along with Worldcom. I could go on and on. And you will trust these people with a national, encoded ID card?




You? Go on and on? C'mon now!

I'm not going to go back through this thread and requote everything I've said again to correct you (again). Suffice to say, you're attributing statements and opinions to me that aren't even close to what I've written here. You need to work on not putting words in other peoples mouths and not trying to twist what other people say to fit your agenda and ignore what you don't want to hear (Speaking of, if the SS# thing is such a big issue to you, why didn't you go for the unique ID number? Isn't that an option?) Unlike those driven by partisanship, I try to look at things from more than one angle.

The whole time, what I've been asking is how (realistically)this ID card may impact my life. I personally couldn't think of a situation where it might cause me a huge problem. I figured someone here might have thought something like that through, considering how revved up you all were about it. If you carefully read back thru, no one came up w/ anything that wasn't either very vague or a giant stretch, and I don't believe anyone addressed the issue that came up multiple times regarding the fact that all this info is already out there for the taking. Slider, I did read back as you suggested, and the only instance that recording of unique personal behaviors is mentioned here is in a 'joke' email. That's not something I'm going to base opinions on.

Obviously, having this national ID/database is not an ideal situation, but we're living in a different world kids. The fact that much information is scattered and/or not readily available IS a hindrance to law enforcement and security; you can't argue that. I have nothing to hide, I don't care if I get pulled over on the way home from Logan and the cop that pulls me over knows I'm coming from Logan. I don't care if an airline clerk sees a digital picture of me. My 'retinal scan' isn't going to do anyone any good. I'll give you all a copy of you'd like. Have fun w/ it.

I'm willing to give up some privacy if it's a step towards better security. You all will be too once nailbombs start going off at the Mall around Xmas time. Go ahead and tell yourself it can't happen here, until it does.

[TrailBate]

The whole time, what I've been asking is how (realistically)this ID card may impact my life. I personally couldn't think of a situation where it might cause me a huge problem. I figured someone here might have thought something like that through, considering how revved up you all were about it.

I've answered this question many times, including 6 posts above this one. If you wanna call the answers vague or exaggerations, that's up to you.


Obviously, having this national ID/database is not an ideal situation, but we're living in a different world kids. I have nothing to hide, I don't care if I get pulled over on the way home from Logan and the cop that pulls me over knows I'm coming from Logan. I don't care if an airline clerk sees a digital picture of me. My 'retinal scan' isn't going to do anyone any good. I'll give you all a copy of you'd like. Have fun w/ it.

you've just agreed to a fascist state. good for you. And I think "we're living in a different world" is a McCarthy quote, from the Red Scare, is it? Another line the government uses to get away with whatever it wants

I'm willing to give up some privacy if it's a step towards better security. You all will be too once nailbombs start going off at the Mall around Xmas time. Go ahead and tell yourself it can't happen here, until it does.


You've just agreed to a fascist and communist state. good for you.
Nailbombs? NOW who is being paranoid? Don't forget the halloween mall bombings, the stolen UPS uniforms, and whatever other stupid chainmails have gone around.

You still have not answered why this is a good thing other than the vague "I haven't done anything wrong" answer. HOW is this going to prevent terrorism?

"those who would trade civil liberties for security, deserve neither."- Benjamin Franklin

[Slider]

The whole "when it happens here, you'll join me" argument is fear mongering in its purest form. On the other hand, your willingness to cede personal privacy truly scares me, slaphead, far more than nail bombs. I value freedom more than I value a false sense of security engendered by oppressive government intrusion, I guess.

In case this point was not made clearly enough for you yet: the big threat is access to many intimate details of our lives, via a central database, by a wide range of government servants and security personnel, like the police. I simply don't want them to have that info, because it will surely be abused.

As I've said, you are free to blog your whole life if you want. But, since this is the USofA, and since the constitution protects me from such government intrusion, I say let's enforce the very document that has made us what we are. As the Republican Congressman has said, this is not Russia. Let's keep it that way.

Slider

[TrailBate]

I love it how Bush is so intent on forcing freedoms throughout the world (through the barrel of a gun), while at the same time taking away freedoms here at home.

[kernel crash]

"I simply don't want them to have that info, because it will surely be abused. "

Well, not everybody feels as strongly about that as you do. That's at the heart of the differences of opinions.

"those who would trade civil liberties for security, deserve neither."- Benjamin Franklin

That's a great quote by Ben Franklin, but the world has changed quite a bit since old Ben uttered those words.

I'm not saying I want to toss my civil liberties in the dumpster. I think the government has to walk a tightrope here. But I'm not so sure I see the boogy man, (Karl Rove, George W, Dick Cheney, Michael Jackson), lurking in my closet.

[TrailBate]

"I simply don't want them to have that info, because it will surely be abused. "

Well, not everybody feels as strongly about that as you do. That's at the heart of the differences of opinions.




This is true. Some people believe the government is full of honest, Constitution-loving people who only do things in the best interest of it's country's citizens, and only use their powers for good, while others believe the government is full of incompetent, power- and money- hungry liars, thieves and crooks.

[slapheadmofo]

And some of us believe that not everything is simply black or white, red or blue, strictly evil or totally benevolent. You know, reality. Speaking of, you guys really don't think that we're going to see any further attack attempts on soft targets in the country in the coming years? You're not some of those guys that think Bush attacked the WTC (twice) are you? I mean, this **** happens all over the world on a regular basis. Why would you think we're immune to it?

Here's a great article that ties into this conversation. Sorry, you need to be a subscriber to access it, but I thought a few of you might be already. If not, I highly recommend the magazine. Lots of good stuff to chew on; right up your alleys.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200501/clarke

[Slider]

And some of us believe that not everything is simply black or white, red or blue, strictly evil or totally benevolent. You know, reality. Speaking of, you guys really don't think that we're going to see any further attack attempts on soft targets in the country in the coming years? You're not some of those guys that think Bush attacked the WTC (twice) are you? I mean, this **** happens all over the world on a regular basis. Why would you think we're immune to it?


A government that is a mix of both sleazebags and angels is still one that should not have access to this tool.

The rest is blatant misdirection. No one has said 9/11 won't happen again, or that it was self-administered, just that the solution in question not only fails to address that, but also does far more harm than good. The process would be exactly what is meant by "throwing the baby out with the bath water." Defending liberty by compromising it in a crucial way is inane.

Slider

[TrailBate]

Speaking of, you guys really don't think that we're going to see any further attack attempts on soft targets in the country in the coming years? You're not some of those guys that think Bush attacked the WTC (twice) are you? I mean, this **** happens all over the world on a regular basis. Why would you think we're immune to it?




Of couse we won't see any more attacks! That would only happen if Kerry were elected! Don't you listen when Cheney speaks?

that was a joke, btw.

yes, it will probably happen. a National ID system is not going to prevent it. Invading countries that had nothing to do with 9/11 doesn't help either.
and yes, it does happen all over the world, so what's the point of repealing civil liberties? Because the threat of terrorism is just an excuse; a smokescreen. The gov't initially proposed the ID system years ago as an answer to illegal immigration, and nobody went for it. Bush just found a new excuse.
If you REALLY want more gov't monitoring, and more security, go to a country that has both. Which would be......??? Maybe North Korea!!

[TrailBate]

As I've said, you are free to blog your whole life if you want. But, since this is the USofA, and since the constitution protects me from such government intrusion, I say let's enforce the very document that has made us what we are. As the Republican Congressman has said, this is not Russia. Let's keep it that way.

Slider


but you foget, Slider. Since the Constitution was written in "very different times", it is no longer valid. Unless you're a conservative republican who wants to stockpile assault rifles, THEN the constitution is valid....

[slapheadmofo]

No one has said 9/11 won't happen again


Oh, so why am I a 'fear monger' for bringing up a somewhat different scenario? A mall is a perfect soft target. I'd be all over that if I was a POS terrorist.

I'm willing to compromise some 'privacy', specially wrt things that are already being logged and recorded. And that's what I'm talking about: I'm not ceding anything - it's ALL ALREADY OUT THERE. Why do you guys keep overlooking that point? Putting information that's ALREADY being collected into one place for easier access, maybe to help avoid the communication and data linking problems we've seen between various agencies (closing some loopholes maybe?). Isn't that a problem that needs addressing? This seems like at least an attempt to to that. Somehow, every response I see blows this completely out of proportion.

You seem to realize that security IS a problem, correct? Any of you have any constructive thoughts about how we can tighten security w/o compromising your right to rent midget porn w/o the town clerk knowing about it (or whatever it is that you think is going to happen)? Wouldn't these ID's make things
harder on illegal immigrants?

Once again, very slowly and clearly this time:

I'm not for or against the ID's at this point. I've been able to think through a few scenarios where they could be helpful sercurity-wise. I hadn't been able to think of how they would hurt me. I mentioned that, as I'm interested in both sides of the coin. Responses ranged from calling me a communist and telling me to move to Korea to suggesting I post a daily blog of my activities on the internet to somehow tying my question to WMDs and then not understanding how that's a vague answer to pointing me to a joke email as a refererence. Oh, and of course a whole bunch of partisan crap to confuse things even further. Obviously I'm not going to get anything worthwhile from this conversation. Thanks for playing tho fellas, it's been real. Keep yourselves distracted w/ the infighting - seems real useful.

Take a look at that article I posted. I think you'll find it interesting.

D

[kernel crash]

"I simply don't want them to have that info, because it will surely be abused. "

By the way, just to clarify, my point with the above statement was the word "surely". As if to say it's a slam dunk, no doubt about it, not a shadow of a doubt. This will be used against us to take away our rights and turn us into something resembling a stalinist government. I just think those kinds of statements may be a little too harsh.

[Slider]

I do mean surely. It is simply a matter of chance, subject to the laws of probability. Of all the people with access to the info, it is impossible that none will have ulterior motives, or at least good motives but very bad judgement. The more time that elapses, the higher the likelihood. It is inescapable.

Slider

[Slider]

No one has said 9/11 won't happen again


Oh, so why am I a 'fear monger' for bringing up a somewhat different scenario? A mall is a perfect soft target. I'd be all over that if I was a POS terrorist.



You are a fear monger for trying to tie an unrelated consequence to a failure to take an action that you proscribe.

The world will end someday, too, but creation of this database will have no influence on that. It won't have any effect on our security either, except in the negative sense, by creating a false feeling of governmental benevolence and protection.

Slider

[slapheadmofo]

No one has said 9/11 won't happen again


Oh, so why am I a 'fear monger' for bringing up a somewhat different scenario? A mall is a perfect soft target. I'd be all over that if I was a POS terrorist.



You are a fear monger for trying to tie an unrelated consequence to a failure to take an action that you proscribe.



Wrong. I'm saying that when we start seeing these kinds of things happening, I believe people will become more willing to compromise or make sacrifices to try to prevent them. There will need to be some 'lesser of two evils' type decisions made. Making those decisions shouldn't be a knee-jerk reaction, and the debate that goes into them shouldn't spin into partisan rehashing of every issue that's come up in the past 5 years. It's a shame that that's the only thing that many people seem to be able to do these days. And AGAIN (holy **** when will it finally get through?) I'm not proscribing anything - I just can't see the big issue w/ ID cards and was looking for some pragmatic reasons why I shouldn't support them. WTF is so unclear about that? I go back and read what I've written and I can't see how you guys can be so confused w/ what I'm trying to get across. I'm really starting to think there's some sort of comprehension problem around here. Here, let's try it another way:

Going forward, what steps do you think should be taken to improve our security here at home?

(Oh, and none of this time machine crap logic allowed - ie: 'we shoulda stayed out of Iraq' and 'GWB stole the election' and 'Thomas Jefferson says...') That doesn't get anyone anywhere.

[Slider]

Slaphead, you really can't have it both ways. Here'a a quote:

"I'm willing to give up some privacy if it's a step towards better security. You all will be too once nailbombs start going off at the Mall around Xmas time. Go ahead and tell yourself it can't happen here, until it does. "

That is fear mongering. The nail bombs and the Federal IDs are unreleated. And, despite what you say, you claim you are not proscribing the ID cards. Well, yes, you are.

Beyond ID cards, there are many, many even more intrusive things we could do to increase our security. But you have to justify them first, against the drawbacks. And, as has been covered ad naseum in this thread, there are many, many drawbacks to the central database idea, with abuse potential at the top of the list for me.

Another quote from you: "I'm saying that when we start seeing these kinds of things happening, I believe people will become more willing to compromise or make sacrifices to try to prevent them. There will need to be some 'lesser of two evils' type decisions made. "

This is straw-man BS and it does nothing to justify the database. If anything, you undermine your own case. To follow your logic, since those things are not happening, we do not need the database.

I understand exactly what you are saying. I'm saying it makes no sense.

So what would I proscribe? Simple: rational foreign policy, rebuilding ties with our allies, more intelligence focused on what goes on outside our country, not inside it, and more proactive efforts to show respect for and build ties to those who don't happen to live here, and who don't share our ideals. The world simply isn't ours to run. On the other hand, this country is ours, and we're pissing it away.

Slider

[TrailBate]

I'm saying that when we start seeing these kinds of things happening, I believe people will become more willing to compromise or make sacrifices to try to prevent them. There will need to be some 'lesser of two evils' type decisions made. Making those decisions shouldn't be a knee-jerk reaction, and the debate that goes into them shouldn't spin into partisan rehashing of every issue that's come up in the past 5 years. It's a shame that that's the only thing that many people seem to be able to do these days. And AGAIN (holy **** when will it finally get through?) I'm not proscribing anything - I just can't see the big issue w/ ID cards and was looking for some pragmatic reasons why I shouldn't support them. WTF is so unclear about that? I go back and read what I've written and I can't see how you guys can be so confused w/ what I'm trying to get across. I'm really starting to think there's some sort of comprehension problem around here. Here, let's try it another way:

Going forward, what steps do you think should be taken to improve our security here at home?

and HOW will these ID's prevent them??
Lets say I'm going to build a nailbomb. I go to Home Depot to buy some nails. Since the gov't wants to know when I buy nails, I need to present my National ID card for the cashier to swipe, which will send data to all branches of the gov't and local police telling them I just purchased nails.
Since you can make explosives using common household items (according to Tyler Durden), I need to present my ID at any store I buy anything.
Now somebody at the gov't will check my daily activities everyday to see what I'm up to. If something looks suspicious, the feds will be at my door to ask me questions, search my house, and my hard drive to see if I have bomb building instructions anywhere. Now, since i'm on the "suspicious" list, I will probably be subject to random searches for the next several years.

THAT is the only way this ID would work. however, since you are positive the ID won't do this, what is the bloody point?

(Oh, and none of this time machine crap logic allowed - ie: 'we shoulda stayed out of Iraq' and 'GWB stole the election' and 'Thomas Jefferson says...') That doesn't get anyone anywhere.


violating civil liberties to make you feel more secure doesn't get us anywhere, either. We live in a free country. Less security is a price we pay for our freedom. What can we do? Well, tighter controls over our borders is one thing. If we have the tech to keep all intruders from getting with 50 miles of area 51 (yes, it exists. No, it does not have aliens.), we should be able to employ such a system along our borders, for less than the cost of a National ID database, and foreign wars.

Bush is doing a hell of a job sending immigrants with questionable backgrounds back to where they came from. Better communication between intelligence sectors of the gov't is a great idea, but not when you hire people with no intelligence backgrounds, just because they kissed your ass during your first term.

Perhaps if we stop supporting corrupt and oppressive foreign governments (Iraq and Afghan in the 80's, Israel and Saudi Arabia today), then turn on them when it suits us, or even worse, wait for the people of that country to overthrow that corrupt gov't themselves, then hate us for it (Iran), maybe if we stopped using sanctions that hurt civilians more than the governments we're trying to destroy, and maybe if we stopped holding thousands of muslims (or anyone else) for years and years with no legal recourse while torturing them, perhaps fewer people would be trying to kill us.

YOU still have not explained any benefits to this ID.


oh, it would also help if the next time Bush gets a memo on his desk that says "Bid Laden planning to attack inside the united states", he actually does something about it.
[/quote]

[TrailBate]

I'm SURE this will help ::)

[MTBME]

You might find this site interesting. Shows you how much stuff is already out there on the internet.

http://www.opcva.com/watchdog/

[Mr_Cheeze]

Slider keeps talking about fearmongering. Yet, isn't that what he's doing, too? Fear of government (um... only evil Republican government, that is). Fear of some mildly plausible eventuality where all of our very lives will resemble something right out of the movie Gattaca.

Fearmongering indeed.

[TrailBate]

Slider keeps talking about fearmongering. Yet, isn't that what he's doing, too? Fear of government (um... only evil Republican government, that is). Fear of some mildly plausible eventuality where all of our very lives will resemble something right out of the movie Gattaca.

Fearmongering indeed.




Yes, Clinton did not do enough against terrorism during his presidency, but he was too busy putting a half assed effort into Somalia, and was involved in Yugoslavia, so what can you do?
Besides, he was all ready to arrest Osama in Saudi Arabia before the Saudi's stepped in at the last minute and prevented it. Why they are an "ally" is beyond me. Didnt' they just give safe haven to a terrorist?

[Slider]

Cheeze,

To give you some semblance of a clue: fear mongering is connecting unrelated consequences to a specific action, for purposes of advancing an agenda. It is a well-defined process. If you don't think I can back up any claims I make, try me. But, as has been the problem in the past, you need some specifics, and not this generalized BS you advance.

Please tell me which non-Republican adminstration I should be focusing on. I can't seem to find one.

Maybe you are right: complacency would be far, far better. Maybe if I stick my head up my ass, I'll feel warm and cozy, and not be so aware of the budding fascism in this country. From now on, I pledge to ignore the facts, and promise to keep oblivious to policy that very directly affects our lives as US citizens.

In case you haven't guessed yet: That ain't gonna happen.

Slider

[BadDNA]

Anyone want to pitch in to buy some island and found NEMBA-land as an independant nation?

[Mr_Cheeze]

Cheeze,

To give you some semblance of a clue: fear mongering is connecting unrelated consequences to a specific action, for purposes of advancing an agenda. It is a well-defined process. If you don't think I can back up any claims I make, try me. But, as has been the problem in the past, you need some specifics, and not this generalized BS you advance.

Please tell me which non-Republican adminstration I should be focusing on. I can't seem to find one.

Maybe you are right: complacency would be far, far better. Maybe if I stick my head up my ass, I'll feel warm and cozy, and not be so aware of the budding fascism in this country. From now on, I pledge to ignore the facts, and promise to keep oblivious to policy that very directly affects our lives as US citizens.

In case you haven't guessed yet: That ain't gonna happen.

Slider




You're telling me "same old ****"? As if you don't have an anti-Republican, anti-Bush, pro-socialist, extreme-left agenda. Typical liberal blind allegiance. When are you ever going to admit that this has nothing to do with the issue itself, rather the fact that a particularly hated administration might be espousing it; although, this seems to be the only place on the entire internet where anybody is crying that the sky is falling over something that has barely made a blip on the national news radar. An issue SO FRIGGIN IMPORTANT TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE that... huh... nobody outside of a small minority of conspiracy theorists seems to be talking about it with any import. I guess everybody else is just hypnotized by the digressive efforts of the White House and their focus on "terrorism". Yea, that's it. All of us who shrug our shoulders... we're the stupid ones.

I know, I know. More general, non-specific ******** from Mr. Cheeze. That will continue to be your retort to my very specific shots at your tainted positions. I don't care what supposed sources or supposed facts you have to back up whatever statements. I'm not arguing the merits of the issue, itself, but the credibility of those like you who take such issues and act as if they are just looking out for the American people and the American way when all you are really doing is lamenting a waning Democratic party.

[Slider]

Man, how did you ever graduate kindergarten? This says it all:

"I don't care what supposed sources or supposed facts you have to back up whatever statements."

This is far worse than simple partisianship, this is determined ignorance. You are ADMITTING that you want to remain ignorant of the facts. I won't waste my time on someone like you any more.

Slider

[FriedRys]

It Will Happen Again: A Green Beret's Call To Save America by James Hoyt U.S. Army Special Forces(r) It's an interesting read, heres the introduction.

This book is a call to arms, not for the military, but for what remains of intelligent life on our planet:
If you are a Leader, you must stop devoting all of your personal energy to your selfish and short-sighted climb to the top of the mass of humanity. You must devote some of your effort towards guiding that mass in a direction that benefits everyone. This seemingly self-less effort will benefit you in the long run. Survival of the civilized world depends on it.
If you are a follower, be a good one. Stop trying to tell our leaders what to do. Good leaders lead. They do not do whatever their followers tell them to do. If you dictate our leaders' decisions, by supporting only those leaders that do what people tell the to do, they will have no power to guide us and build a better world for us in the long run. Support leaders that have vision and the courage to tell you (and your group) what you don't want to hear. It is the smartest thing you will ever do.
If we can stop focusing all of our attention on our own little worlds, we might just build a better world for everyone.

[Slider]

Yeah, that's exactly what we need, a militaristic country. Let's embrace fascism with open arms. ::)

Slider

[TrailBate]

Yeah, that's exactly what we need, a militaristic country. Let's embrace fascism with open arms. ::)

Slider


I didn't see any fascism in that. If anything, it was anti-fascism.

[Slider]

A Green Beret telling us to follow our leaders and not question them? A quote:

"Stop trying to tell our leaders what to do."

Well, that is wht democracy is all about. Our elected leaders are there to do what we tell them, not the other way around.

The first part, about leaders devoting "effort towards guiding that mass in a direction that benefits everyone." Is nice, but kinda smarmy and vague, and more about wishful thinking than political reality.

The problem with democracy is that it is very messy. A military man sees the value in order, but not the downside in blind obedience. Of the two, I'll take the option that allows us to make change as needed, and to provide input on the way we are governed.

Slider

[TrailBate]

A Green Beret telling us to follow our leaders and not question them? A quote:

"Stop trying to tell our leaders what to do."





I took that statement in context with the paragraph above it, which said "If you are a Leader, you must stop devoting all of your personal energy to your selfish and short-sighted climb to the top of the mass of humanity. You must devote some of your effort towards guiding that mass in a direction that benefits everyone. "
I just figured what you quoted was meant to go with a good leader, not with a guy like....well, you know.

But I guess it depends on what the writer really means. It could go either way. So I guess you'd have to read the book!

[Slider]

Ever read Machiavelli? He outlines what a good leader should be, assuming all the time that absolute power is part of the package. Paraphrasing pretty severely here, but he makes the case that becoming a leader in the first place means you've inspired your followers to have faith in you by demonstrating that you are worthy. This is kinda the "rule of the jungle" approach. The head lion kicks ass, and defends the pride, and everyone is happy.

Unfortunately, in the real world, giving absolute power to anyone means they'll act to benefit themselves. The "good king" might come along once once in a while, but you'll kiss a lot of frogs along the way. And considering the amount of damage that can be done along the way, the downside is enourmous.

Again, I'll take messy democracy. But you are right - I have not read the book.

Slider

[TrailBate]

neither have I.

But here is a guy worthy to be on Bush's cabinet:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/24/abortion.investigation.ap/index.html

[Slider]

Yeah, I saw that this morning and thought about posting about it. This information access is exactly the sort of thing that should in no way be allowed. If there's crime to be found, investigate using other means that are not so invasive of privacy. It is a fishing expedition, pure and simple, the kind that we are supposedly protected from under the Constitution.

Slider

[kernel crash]

I think we can sum up this whole tread as follows.

Slider, and others, feels when it comes to the constitution and their individual rights, they dont want anybody messing, tweaking, twisting or changing those rights in any way. Don't even talk about it. Even if those rights as currently written, puts him and his neighbors in potential danger from terrorists, who in turn are being protected by those same rights. Law enforcements hands are tied. Terrorist use our system against us. In this age of suitcase size nuclear devices, we could pay a heavy price. But at least we'll still have our rights.

Is there another way? The Constitution has been ammended before. Maybe some of these proposals, National ID etc., could be implemented on a trial basis where an independant review board could oversee the process. Hell knows we would never trust the party in power to look after our best interests.

[TrailBate]

I think we can sum up this whole tread as follows.

Slider, and others, feels when it comes to the constitution and their individual rights, they dont want anybody messing, tweaking, twisting or changing those rights in any way. Don't even talk about it. Even if those rights as currently written, puts him and his neighbors in potential danger from terrorists, who in turn are being protected by those same rights. Law enforcements hands are tied. Terrorist use our system against us. In this age of suitcase size nuclear devices, we could pay a heavy price. But at least we'll still have our rights.

Is there another way? The Constitution has been ammended before. Maybe some of these proposals, National ID etc., could be implemented on a trial basis where an independant review board could oversee the process. Hell knows we would never trust the party in power to look after our best interests.


wow. way to "sum up" a thread. ::)

apparently, some people are comfortable giving up rights to feel more secure. Others feel secure enough with the rights they have, and accept the possibility that bad things happen. Some people feel LESS secure with increased government intrusion in their lives. Some people feel the need to wrap their homes in plastic wrap (on advice from the GOV'T!) , since this will SURELY keep out biological weapons. Some people feel that there are other ways to make Americans safe, without repealing constitutional rights that hundreds of thousands of americans have died for since its inception, and specifically left other countries to come to America (or to build it from the beginning) so they could have.
If you feel so unsafe. stay home. Don't leave your house. live in a bubble. But don't intrude on my rights. I was born a human being, not property of the American government.

[kernel crash]

"I was born a human being, not property of the American government."

Being born does not grant you those rights you talk about. It is this American government that grant you those rights. And just so we understand each other I don't live in a bubble and I'll take my chances outdoors. I just may be a little more open minded about giving the government the tools to do a better job keeping this country secure.

[TrailBate]

"I was born a human being, not property of the American government."

Being born does not grant you those rights you talk about. It is this American government that grant you those rights. And just so we understand each other I don't live in a bubble and I'll take my chances outdoors. I just may be a little more open minded about giving the government the tools to do a better job keeping this country secure.


are you kidding me? I was not BORN with these rights? I only have them because the american gov't GAVE them to me? are you serious?
I guess George Bush really IS God then!

[kernel crash]

Damn serious. The point I'm making is if you were born in China, North Korea or the former Soviet Union, you would you not have the rights were talking about. If you want to talk about God and religion than that is another subject altogether. I'm talking about the fact that we are blessed having been born in this country. And understand I am no fan of George Bush.

[TrailBate]

No doubt we are blessed to be Americans, but everyone is born with God (or vishnu, or Allah) given rights. Governments only take these rights away, they dont' give them to you. If I were born in a part of the world with no government, would I not have rights to free speech, and to do as I pleased?
'course, this thread can now go totally philisophical.....

[kernel crash]

"but everyone is born with God (or vishnu, or Allah) given rights."

There are some atheists that would have a problem with that statement. That may make for a wonderful utopian view but the fact is that in the whole history of humanity, I doubt that there has been one minute where that wonderful idea of all men being born free has truely applied across the board. And speaking of God given rights, how many millions have died over other people's idea of God given rights?

[TrailBate]

now we're going into philosophy and religion!

My point is, without a government (which is created by man) you are free to do anything. Yes?

True, throughout much of history, mos