Congressman: President’s Push To End Data Collection, Will Actually Increase Collection

“It actually expands the scope of collection, of unconstitutional collection. It is called the “End Bulk Collection Act.” It is like we are in some dystopian future where government calls a bill something that has the opposite affect of what title is.” says Rep. Amash.

The major point brought up by the Congressman is that despite the name “End Bulk Collection”, the bill does not to end collection of data, rather it shifts the responsibility of collection from the NSA to private phone companies.

“They are going to transfer where the phone data is collected so that it is not stored by the government but it is instead stored by the phone companies. Where it is stored is not really the main problem.”

Congressman: President’s Push To End Data Collection, Will Actually Increase Collection

Seems like every bill in Congress now is named exactly opposite what it does.

Dystopian future in deed.

I cry for my country.

reply to post by pianopraze


Did anyone expect anything different from the forked tongue brigade?

reply to post by pianopraze


All laws ultimately produce a result which is contrary to their intent.

Translation.....
Obama =Opposite

It does seem that everything he says is the opposite of what he means . And I don't see any end in sight by the time he leaves office there won't be an America left for us to clean up to start over.

reply to post by pianopraze


Another lie from the biggest liar in D.C.

He wants data collection, especially on those who oppose him or belong to the other party.

-SAP-

just know, if there is a bill called the "affordable care act", know it will not be affordable. if there is a "limited data collections bill", know it will increase data collections. any and every bill passed now a days is the complete opposite of its title.

Now we're just waiting for the " if you like your guns, you can keep your guns" bill.

SloAnPainful
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Another lie from the biggest liar in D.C.

He wants data collection, especially on those who oppose him or belong to the other party.

-SAP-

And he's making a list and checkin it twice

reply to post by JHumm


...and he knows who is naughty and nice?

-SAP-

Amash should have been in office when THe Patriot Act was passed. LOL...."Patriot".

How about the "Affordable Healthcare Act"? that one almost makes me roll on the floor laughing

SloAnPainful
reply to post by JHumm

 

...and he knows who is naughty and nice?

-SAP-

Not nice = drone strike ? That list will probably be pretty long .

reply to post by JHumm


He does like playing with his toy jet fighters...

-SAP-

reply to post by pianopraze


I have noticed the government is coming up with ingenious methods to circumvent the Constitution. So long as something is done by a private individual / company, and they are not acting on orders for law enforcement, the constitutional argument seems to go out the window.

Its along the same lines of federal law enforcement using administrative warrants to bypass that whole pesky probable cause requirement. Luckily a judge came to his sense and ruled against the feds when it comes to the abuse of administrative warrants.

If you want to end government corruption / end runs around the Constitution, get involved and vote.

reply to post by Xcathdra

If you want to end government corruption / end runs around the Constitution, get involved and vote.

Not that I recommend it, but revolution is far quicker and actually targets the scumbags responsible!

And how can you advocate voting when that process is totally borked by the Electoral College?

reply to post by Xcathdra


voting for change in 2014 America is like wearing a condom during your girls 3rd trimester

reply to post by ZonedOut


Because as long as the ability to vote is present and not restricted, trying to make a case for an armed change in government, while it most likely would succeed, would be counterproductive.

Legitimacy in a government that is changed in that fashion could very well backfire.

Secondly, people seem to think in terms of just the Federal Government. There is absolutely nothing stopping the people from starting massive change at the State level first. While I agree that we have issues with the electoral college system, I think its still viable, even more so in states where state laws have been passed requiring the electoral delegates to vote in the same manner the citizens voted for.

States are separate sovereigns and can have a massive impact at the federal level when they work together to stop Washington buffoonery. My position has been the same - identifying a problem and doing nothing to fix it / assuming it wont work is part of the problem. Dismissing an election over apathy is just as bad and does nothing to correct the problem.

We live in a representative republic. It means those we elect to office are representing not just the people who voted for them, but those that did not vote for them.

You want to get your reps attention - start calling them out and publicizing their actions.

The best way to put the government in place is to remind them they answer to the people and not the other way around. If they start realizing people are paying attention things might change.

While I respect the position of armed change in government, I don't think the US has reached that situation....yet (as I am added to the no fly / terrorist watch lists). We must exhaust all possibilities to correct change by participation in all levels of government.

reply to post by pianopraze


The phone companies have always kept the data anyway.

You can see what the big 5 do on this list:

www.aclu.org...

Off to Siberia it is for me!

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I always liked "affordable housing". I mean, who wants to live somewhere where the housing is not affordable. It's just verbal diarrhea.

Of course it will. It's Obama. Everything the man says has to automatically be assumed to mean the exact opposite of what it's supposed to mean.