9.
 
Re: Morning Safety Dance
Nov 14, 2016, 15:21
9.
Re: Morning Safety Dance Nov 14, 2016, 15:21
Nov 14, 2016, 15:21
 
Bodolza wrote on Nov 14, 2016, 13:04:
Creston wrote on Nov 14, 2016, 11:33:
Why is everyone pretending this is somehow worse under Trump than it would have been under Clinton? Am I missing something?

Because we listened to what Trump said, and we remember what it was like during the last Republican administration. The Repubs are in charge again, which means the moral police will be out in force. Trump has repeatedly said he's very pro "Law and Order". Combine that with legislation that will be out to ban anything on the internet the Repubs don't like, and you're looking at a big crack-down on internet freedom. The Patriot Act was passed under the last Republican administration. Obama has been slowly dismantling it piece-by-piece, but I expect it to come back even harder now.

We've also seen how vindictive Trump is, and with no respect for the Constitution. I'd expect his administration to go after anyone who slights them with all the power they have, including your internet history.

You mean the patriot act. With one dissenting senator and 66 dissenting reps in the house? Being "dismantled" by Obama how? You mean the built in sunset dates put in by a republican? What has he done to dismantle it?

You mean during the last republican administration where tons of people said a whole bunch of things and nothing bad happened to them for it? Much like the Current administration who did nothing.. Oh wait.. who sent the IRS after people who disagreed with him and his party.

And the Morality police? Are these any more numerous or rabid than the social justice warriors?

Hillary has respect for the constitution? The DNC does? We'll crank the censorship time machine dial back, and look at Good old Al and Tipper Gore. Her PMRC campaign and the man himself actually advocated for curtailing the first amendment. Wind it to today, and we have Obama who decided talking about guns on the internet falls under ITAR and thus is regulated trade in arms, no protected speech. You have Hillary, with plans publicly available in via the Clinton library form teh last go round, that wants to repeal the lawful commerce in arms act to use government funded lawsuits to ban the manufacture of most if not all guns. Like or hate the 2nd amendment, there are rules and laws, and that is NOT how it is supposed to work.

I suspect part of the reason for the uptick is that Clinton's email problems underscore that email is very, very vulnerable.

The problems of an increasingly militarized police state administered by an executive branch that has been radically expanding it's powers over the last 30 years is party independent. Who wins just shifts the demographics of who is in peril a bit.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
2.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
3.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
5.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
6.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
13.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
14.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
20.
Nov 15, 2016Nov 15 2016
7.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
8.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
 9.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
  Re: Morning Safety Dance
10.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
11.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
17.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
18.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
12.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
15.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
16.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
4.
Nov 14, 2016Nov 14 2016
19.
Nov 15, 2016Nov 15 2016