Hillary Clinton Still Refuses To Make Her Views Clear On Surveillance, And That's A Problem

from the this-is-an-issue dept

Earlier this year, we noted that absolutely-running-for-President-while-pretending-to-think-about-it Hillary Clinton gave a stupid and vague non-answer answer to her position on government surveillance. It was the perfect politician’s answer, refusing to really take a position that could be held against her at some point in the future. Except, on important issues, refusing to answer sometimes isn’t an answer, and this is a perfect case of that. The leading contenders for the Republican nomination appear to have all made statements one way or the other, while Hillary has done everything possible not to take a position on the matter.

If Hillary Clinton has a position on the government’s domestic spying, she’s doing a good job of hiding it.

More than a year after Edward Snowden’s leaks, the former secretary of State has yet to offer a meaningful assessment of the National Security Agency’s mass-surveillance programs. She’s had plenty of chances, but in interviews, speeches, and even her new book, Clinton has repeatedly ducked the issue with vagaries and cliches.

The possible 2016 candidate rarely discusses NSA spying unprompted. And when she does, her remarks are often couched in opaque platitudes about the need to balance privacy and national security concerns.

Again, it’s not surprising from a political standpoint, but you have to wonder if it will come back to hurt her. While surveillance may not be a top voting issue these days, many inside DC seem to be underestimating just how important it is to many people.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Hillary Clinton Still Refuses To Make Her Views Clear On Surveillance, And That's A Problem”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

A non-answer answer you say?

“Hillary Clinton ordered American officials to spy on high ranking UN diplomats, including British representatives.

Top secret cables revealed that Mrs Clinton, the Secretary of State, even ordered diplomats to obtain DNA data – including iris scans and fingerprints – as well as credit card and frequent flier numbers.”


Anonymous Coward says:

Let’s examine the voting record:
Voted YES on the original PATRIOT and YES on its ’05/’06 extension.
Voted NAY on PAA07 and NO on FAA08.

So according to these votes metadata surveillance, NSLs, sneak-and-peek = OK. Pure content surveillance = NOT OK. Given that metadata is pound-for-pound more revealing compared to content I remain unconvinced of her being pro-reform.

Mason Wheeler (profile) says:

While surveillance may not be a top voting issue these days, many inside DC seem to be underestimating just how important it is to many people.

Well yeah. How often do they actually make issues that are important to most people into voting issues?

Think back two years. In the run-up to the 2012 elections, there was one political issue that got people throughout the country and throughout the world really fired up. Not just “I’m going to talk about this” levels, but to the point where they actually went out and took action. Calling lawmakers in record numbers, overwhelming Congressional switchboards, etc. And Techdirt was right in the middle of it, so anyone who’s been following this site for that long should remember what it was: opposition to SOPA.

Considering that the Obama administration in general, and Vice President Joe Biden in particular, have been strongly cheerleading every horrible copyright abuse proposal that’s come along since 2008, when I heard that every Republican candidate had spoken out in opposition to SOPA, I thought “OK, it’s all over now. Obama’s on the way out.”

Of course, we all know what happened, or more specifically, what didn’t happen. In a stunning miscalculation, somehow the Romney campaign utterly failed to make opposition to copyright abuse any part of their platform after that brief mention of support back in the primaries. And so nobody captured the votes of the one massive bloc of Americans who actually had a political issue that they cared deeply about… and we got stuck with the status quo.

Anonymous Coward says:

the 'least untruthful' candidate

But does it really even make any difference. As a candidate, Obama made his views on such topics not only unambiguous and crystal clear, but he promised to abolish these things if elected.

But as president, Obama didn’t just drag his feet when it came to fulfilling his campaign promises, he did the exact opposite of what he promised.

Personally, I prefer Clinton’s non-answers to Obama’s outright lies, but that’s just me. But in the end, it makes no difference who gets elected or what they promise to do — the end result is always the same.

Anonymous Coward says:

Correcting the first line of the article:

This morning, the FBI excitedly announced that they had arrested Blake Benthall as the alleged operator of Silk Road 2.0,

Changed to:

This morning, the FBI excitedly announced that they had arrested Blake Benthall (a paid FBI Stooge) so they can pretend they’ve had another “terrorism win”…

GEMont (profile) says:

Hillary should give a shit about Voters?

“While surveillance may not be a top voting issue these days, many inside DC seem to be underestimating just how important it is to many people.”

Unless Hillary was aware of the one thing that most Americans are not – that the voters really have no say in who gets (s)elected to office any more and the Vote itself is nothing more than a PR placebo soap opera, to keep the peasants believing in the dead American Dream, while the Ownership Society Members cash in America’s Chips for Chinese gold.

GEMont (profile) says:

Re: Hillary should give a shit about Voters?


Situation is probably far worse that originally thought.
It looks like there might be a very good reason why Clinton is not worried about what the US voting public thinks.

All the new political TV shows seem to be about women in and around the Oval Office… looks like the US Public is being propa-managed once again – groomed to accept a new ringer. A female president.

After all, Bush killed the chance of getting a Republican in office as long as memory holds – another 5-6 years or so – so the Republicans had to use the Black Card to get a Republican in a Democrat Hat into the Whitehouse. Obama.

The Black Card has run its course. Even most Blacks are now aware that Obama is a Trojan Horse. His chances of re-selection are extremely slim, even with a new war under his belt, as the corporations in control need someone that can inspire “CON-fidence” in the general peasantry.

So, that leaves only one choice – A Woman P-Resident.

And lets face it, Hillary is perfect. She wears a Democrat Hat and is about as fascist as Mussolini on a bad day.

She will cater to the banks and the Big Corporations and the Surveillance Security Industries and increase the Terror Budgets and decrease American Freedoms and kill the internet and do all of the really good shit Republican Fascists love so much… and she’ll enjoy doing it – 100%.

And the Republican Pundits can keep right on shitting on the White House as if they disapproved of everything she is doing, just like they do now with Obama.

(This process, Republican News poo-pooing the reigning fake Democrat P-Resident, keeps the idiot Democrats among the public thinking they must have elected the right person if its pissing off the Republicans so much, just like under Obama)

Yep. Looks like its Hillary For P-Resident and More Shit Sandwiches for the US Public. Might be time to reconsider that move to somewhere that still has a real democracy – like maybe Guam. 🙂

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...