june gloom on 30/8/2009 at 10:06
Quote Posted by CCCToad
For example, think about what Dick Cheney would want to do with this power if he became president (hypothetically speaking, although there are plenty of others like him)
Dick Cheney would never become president because it would get in the way of his aspirations of being a Bond villian.
raevol on 30/8/2009 at 23:20
Quote Posted by DDL
The problem with the "Oh but what if a total DICKBAG had this power
instead?" argument, is that ultimately you end up doing utterly utterly NOTHING, because there's always going to be potential for abuse in pretty much everything.
I can see the point, certainly, but you have to apply limits or it's just stupid.
I don't think restricting the power of the Federal government, the Executive branch, or even just ensuring that good ole' checks and balances are in place is "nothing". I think considering the potential abuse of every bit of legislation is completely legitimate and should be done more. Patriot Act? DMCA? ACTA? Bueller?
My other fear with this "control of private sector networks" that the bill is pandering is that Obama is very obviously in the pocket of the RIAA/MPAA/etc. Is a torrent tracker a "cyber security" threat? What if someone puts secret government documents on it?
Martin Karne on 31/8/2009 at 00:21
Oh ffs, all of your downloaded music will end up in Obama's Blackberry.
CCCToad on 31/8/2009 at 02:36
Quote Posted by Martin Karne
Oh ffs, all of your downloaded music will end up in Obama's Blackberry.
Actually, I've heard obama prefers a zune.
CCCToad on 31/8/2009 at 15:43
"Zunegate" was a real facepalm moment.
It was a bad combination of rabid fanboyism. You have the rabid apple fans, who think that anyone who uses a microsoft product is contributing to big, evil corporatacracy (never mind that apple is a big, evil corporation), and the younger, more rabid obama fans who desperately need to see him as cool (good luck with that, the "cool factor" that a politician has usually vanishes pretty quickly).
I may not like Obama's views (based on his fairly radical statements made before he ran), but Judging the guy on his choice of MP3 player is ridiculous.
Its like saying that Sam Bradford (the heisman trophy winner in 2008) isn't a good football player because he games with the uncool Xbox 360 instead of the sexy Wii.
Marecki on 31/8/2009 at 21:51
I look forward to seeing how the US would try to enforce this, especially against the Russians or the Chinese.
greg9001 on 31/8/2009 at 22:31
My big question is..
What's up with Obama's 'Civilian Army' crap!
CCCToad on 1/9/2009 at 00:35
Quote Posted by greg9001
My big question is..
What's up with Obama's 'Civilian Army' crap!
Its basically hyperbole.
It is true that Obama is working to create a civilian volunteer corps. However, he did state that America needs a "civilian force" which is just as powerful and well funded as the military. At this point in time, no action has been taken to militarize them.
The actual quote:
Quote:
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the
national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a
civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as
strong, just as well-funded.
Knowing how paranoid America is about gestapo-type organizations ( WW2 and the Cold War means two generations grew up afraid of that being imposed on them), it was just a stupid comment to make. The "in context" argument doesn't make it any less dumb, as he should be aware of what a long soundbyte can do. Plus it doesn't make all that much sense in the context of the whole speech.
He basically shot himself in the foot. It means that any attempt to expand Americorps (or similiar) or start his own programs will likely be viewed as a first step towards that goal.
