"In a sane land, anyone who makes a statement like that..."
In this insane land, anyone who makes a statement like that could be next up for the Supreme Court! Sweet Goddess, imagine the masterpieces of legal scholarship that would flow like honeyed wine.
3-1 odds he would rule the first amendment unconstitutional. OK, you're right, make it 12-1.
Don't bother with the Congressional bloviating. This occurs on a regular basis and everyone involved knows it means only one thing. Reps will bitch and moan, then reauthorize the bill overwhelmingly. SSDD
He should have hired Charles Carreon to write all this for him. Not sure that would have made him look LESS like an idiot though.
Smith v. Maryland and United States v. Miller form the basis of what has become the third-party doctrine. Under this doctrine, if you voluntarily provide information to a third party, the Fourth Amendment does not prevent the government from accessing it without a warrant. The Court wrote in Smith, you have “no legitimate expectation of privacy” from warrantless government access to that information.
Without a warrant, or even probable cause, the Feds can ask Facebook to turn over any and all information they have on you already. We only have Zuckerbergs assurance that they aren't doing that already and that they won't in the future. Facebook is becoming a smorgasbord fit to tempt the LEO community into becoming a true glutton.
It will be up to the Supreme Court to ultimately decide, and all of the speculation I have read basically says "shake the magic-8 ball". Until then, placing this much raw data in any one companies hands is problematical.
Unfortunately, this kind of behaviour really can, and should, affect their credibility. They are demonstrating that they are willing to sell out the people they claim to advocate for. Makes you wonder what other positions they have, say on judges or legislation, they have that are amenable to change based on their donors wishes.
If the colonies refused to give up slavery, then they should not have allowed in, it really is that simple. Hindsight does not play in to it at all. Simple ethics and humanity does.
"The founders understood that the way the constitution was written would help set the tone for the freedom of the slaves slowly over time so they took what they could get at the time"
All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. Kicking it down to your ancestors to fix your fuckups is quintessentially American, I will give you that.
The history of the US is replete with incidences that by the the countries professed morals can only be considered evil in nature. Today that evil is most embodied in the right wing of the Republican Party. Certainly not exclusively, Democrats certainly have to share some of the blame. The Randians however, evil to the core.
And no, I'm not bankrupt, just someone who has never been Christian. (And no, not an atheist either.)
And while yes, the Enlightenment did inform the Founders, it primarily informed their writings. Unfortunately many of their actions did not comport with their ideals. The three-fifths compromise was proof enough that many did not have the fortitude to back their ideals with actions. And it is their actions they should be judged on, not their professed ideals. The Founders idea of 'Liberty' only applied to landed white men, no one else. I judge them on what they did (and still do) not on what they said.
It's about distraction. That's it. It's one of the first things I was taught about dealing with chronic pain and tinnitus over 25 years ago. They may try and make it all scientific sounding, but it's something that's been done for many decades.
Hmmmm. Sounds like they've been consulting with the FBI on the 'proper' use of #$%^(!)(.*
*Name redacted due to NDA
Deny everything. Admit nothing. Demand proof.
Well they got that corollary to Murphy's Law down pat.
Re: Brown eyes for a reason....
He's completely full of it on the collaboration bit, yes. Enforcing federal law is the job of the feds, not local cops. Funny how the states rights arguments go out the window as soon its biggest proponents get into power.