Who the frak did we elect to the office of President of the United States? I thought that we elected someone who professed to be someone who understood our constitutional rights. Who wanted to end the abuses of the Bush Administration. Who wanted to change how this government acted towards the people it represents.
All those who voted for President Obama forgot to look at a couple of positions he took, some as late as 2008. One of those was to oppose warrantless wiretaps. He took that position in February, however by the summer of 2008, he voted to approve those wiretaps. Now to a degree, I support warrantless wiretaps (for instance I do not think you need to obtain a warrant for a wiretap that is overseas just because it hits an American number. ) But by and large, allowing limitless, warrantless wiretaps in the name of national security is wrong and violates the Constitution of the United States.
Apparently, the Fourth Amendment is some pesky thing that needs to be shredded a little bit more. At least that is what the Administration's latest proposals must be interpreted as.
President Obama's administration, which apparently cannot get a law passed, has now set its sights on something that not even the Bush Administration would have dared do: they want the ability to warrantlessly track people by their cellphones. It is, apparently, the position of Obama Administration that there is no reasonable expectioatn of privacy in one's cellphone.
Huh? Just because it is not attached to the wall, suddenly we have lost the expecation of privacy in our phones?
In case anyone is wondering hwo they will do this, just watch an episode of NCIS. While Mrs. Angrybell loves this show (and I enjoy it), there is almost a nightly example of a Fourth Amendment violation. Basically, your cellphone works by transmitting to a tower which relays it on to its eventualy destination. In many cases, your call is being uploaded through multiple towers, allowing for triangulation. That's the basics.
After 9/11, it was made mandatory that cell phone sold in the US be equipped with GPS chips. The reason for this is in an emergency, rescue crews could use the GPS to narrow down the location of people trapped in rubble who were able to use their phones.
Well, now the conspiracy theorists who warned against this are being proven correct. The Obama administration, seizing on a some district court opinions (including one by Judge William Pauley, a Clinton appointee), want to ensure that you have no privacy right in your cell phone's location. Not that you have much of a choice. According to Judge Pauley's decision (which is not available without a subscription that I can find), it is argued that a person could turn off their cell phone and thereby keep their location a mystery. However, once you turn on the phone, you lose your privacy.
Isn't that nice of the courts. You can have a cellphone but if you turn it on, you forfeit your right to privacy.
We elected this government? What were we thinking?
For a man who claimed he was going to change things in Washington to propose, or allow this to be proposed, is astonishing. To say he is someone who respects civil rights after promoting this policy takes real Chutzpah.
Is it wrong to wish that he would have an affair with an intern so that we can impeach him? Oh wait, then we would have Biden as President and Pelosi and Vice-President.
November 2012 seems so far away.
Debate on the CFPB's arbitration rule
44 minutes ago