"The government is increasingly monitoring Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites for tax delinquents, copyright infringers and political protesters."
So ominously began an editorial in Sunday's New York Times.
Those with accounts at such websites should pay attention, for according to the Times, and other sources, Big Brother is watching you:
The Wall Street Journal reported this summer that state revenue agents have been searching for tax scofflaws by mining information on MySpace and Facebook. In October, the F.B.I. searched the New York home of a man suspected of helping coordinate protests at the Group of 20 meeting in Pittsburgh by sending out messages over Twitter.
The Boston Globe reported on this matter in January:
In an informal survey of 14 departments in this area, officials in half of them said they use social networking websites such as Facebook and MySpace in detective work - particularly in investigations involving young people.
Wired magazine reported in October:
America’s spy agencies want to read your blog posts, keep track of your Twitter updates — even check out your book reviews on Amazon.
In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA and the wider intelligence community, is putting cash into Visible Technologies, a software firm that specializes in monitoring social media. It’s part of a larger movement within the spy services to get better at using ”open source intelligence” — information that’s publicly available, but often hidden in the flood of TV shows, newspaper articles, blog posts, online videos and radio reports generated every day.
The Times continued:
This month the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law sued the Department of Defense, the C.I.A. and other federal agencies under the Freedom of Information Act to learn more about their use of social networking sites.The suit seeks to uncover what guidelines these agencies have about this activity, including information about whether agents are permitted to use fake identities or to engage in subterfuge, such as tricking people into accepting Facebook friend requests.
Privacy law was largely created in the pre-Internet age, and new rules are needed to keep up with the ways people communicate today. Much of what occurs online, like blog posting, is intended to be an open declaration to the world, and law enforcement is within its rights to read and act on what is written. Other kinds of communication, particularly in a closed network, may come with an expectation of privacy. If government agents are joining social networks under false pretenses to spy without a court order, for example, that might be crossing a line.
Scary stuff indeed.
So be careful with your next Tweet or Facebook status, for you never know who's watching.
On the other hand, it will be interesting to see how Obama-loving media follow this story.
After all, the press were constantly bashing the Bush White House concerning electronic surveillance designed to protect the nation from terrorist attacks.
The Times might be pleased with itself by publishing an editorial on this subject in its opinion section, but under the previous administration, this would have resulted in a front page story with thousands of words.
The Times published a piece in its Business section last November that touched on this very subject:
Propelled by new technologies and the Internet’s steady incursion into every nook and cranny of life, collective intelligence offers powerful capabilities, from improving the efficiency of advertising to giving community groups new ways to organize.
But even its practitioners acknowledge that, if misused, collective intelligence tools could create an Orwellian future on a level Big Brother could only dream of.
Collective intelligence could make it possible for insurance companies, for example, to use behavioral data to covertly identify people suffering from a particular disease and deny them insurance coverage. Similarly, the government or law enforcement agencies could identify members of a protest group by tracking social networks revealed by the new technology. “There are so many uses for this technology — from marketing to war fighting — that I can’t imagine it not pervading our lives in just the next few years,” says Steve Steinberg, a computer scientist who works for an investment firm in New York.
In a widely read Web posting, he argued that there were significant chances that it would be misused, “This is one of the most significant technology trends I have seen in years; it may also be one of the most pernicious.”
Twelve months later, and under a new supposedly more open administration, such fears are being realized.
Will the monitoring of social networking sites by government agencies produce similar outrage with a Democrat in the White House?
Stay tuned.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Coming soon: A brand-new NewsBusters design. But we need your help!
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Dang
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:06 ET by obageegeeI better get that overdue library book back....
They're Not Looking for Al Qaeda, Folks
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:17 ET by TenebrousThey're looking for us. My initial reaction is to go on FB and comment on this story and add that Obama sucks and deserves to be impeached. If they had 500,000 people do that, it would overwhelm them, don't you think? Heh.
-----
www.Random-jumbled-thoughts.blogspot.com
Hah!
Thu, 12/17/2009 - 03:21 ET by DoktorFrankenGreat idea!!!
Sarah Palin: The Most Dangerous Conservative In America
More Bias
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:19 ET by slickwillie2001NB beat Rush Limbaugh by 9 minutes.
Another point of liberal bias, -during the administration of President George W. Bush, the headlines would have read 'Bush Monitoring etc'. Now under the Bamster it's 'the government', nicely detached from the Bamster. I can even see the liberal media asking him 'why is the government doing this', rather than 'why are you doing this?'
That's because the Bamster
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:44 ET by misterbee241That's because the Bamster IS the government.
"I dont need to read a newspaper to know the world's been shaved by a drunken barber."
Walter Brennan, The Colonel, Meet John Doe, 1941
Double dang...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:21 ET by buzzyboopThis is quick, Noel. Rush mentioned this post at the top of his show. Massive props to NB.
Cheers, Frank
Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size
when its failures increase. -- DC Circuit Judge Janice Rogers Brown
bb
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:08 ET by Noel Sheppardbb,
Please elaborate. Thanks. ns
Damn, why does Rush always mention NB when I'm not listening?
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 16:19 ET by R D HelmLOL-I'll save you all the trouble: "Well, maybe you should just try turning on your radio, Dave."
___________________________________
"...tax delinquents, copyright infringers and political protesters."
Those three things right there would be enough to at least temporarily detain or incarcerate 99% of the US population at any time the federal government felt like it.
And it isn't just tax delinquents, but anyone who has ever filed a tax return in America beyond a 1040EZ.
I would be willing to guess that 99% of those returns would have at least one mistake the government could make an issue of.
I am not saying that they would necessarily, I am just saying that they could.
-Dave
The IRS should be checking
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 16:42 ET by bigtimerThe IRS should be checking out those in this administration first...from the top on down..let alone the dem party in control and all their ilk...we know nothing happened to Jesse Jackson, Rangel, Geitner, ACORN, Reid, Dodd, Conrad... etc etc etc.
Btw...it would be fun to audit the IRS as well, seems to me they never have explanations for all the fraud and waste within their own entity, let alone the employees themselves....now this would be interesting.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
bt,
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:15 ET by R D HelmAn independent audit of the IRS would be extremely interesting, perticularly if it were run by someone like Neal Boortz.
Speaking of which, Neal has long held that our tax laws are written in gibberish so that, should the government decide they want to go after somebody, all they need do is dig up their tax returns, and they would find a mistake of some description or other.
I didn't buy into that until Herman Cain ran afoul of Billy Jeff on that town hall on national T.V., and shortly thereafter went through one of the most anal IRS audits ever conducted.
Now I am a true believer.
Of course, if we just would pass the FairTax, the instrument of tyranny that has become the IRS would simply disapear.
-Dave
Replacement, not a cure
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:01 ET by UnsaneOf course, if we just would pass the FairTax, the instrument of tyranny that has become the IRS would simply disapear. And just as the Okrana was replaced (eventually) by the KGB, the Unfair Tax (why supporters of that thing have to call a national sales tax, which is the most regressive and thus unfair tax of all a "fair" tax is beyond me) will simply replace the tyranny of the IRS.
To wit: ever seen a place of business shut down by local authorities for tax delinquency for failure to turn over sales tax receipts? I was the last customer of a day at such an establishment and saw what happened some years ago.
Anyways: our tax laws are written in gibberish so that, should the government decide they want to go after somebody, all they need do is dig up their tax returns, and they would find a mistake of some description or other. Try this. Call FIVE IRS offices for an answer to the same question concerning taxes. You will probably get five completely different responses, as difficult as our tax code is.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Dang it, Uns
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:19 ET by R D HelmI'm just trying to find a way to get rid of the hideous boil on America's ass known as the IRS, before another law-abiding American family has to go through what mine did.
Trust me, if Stephen King were to collaborate with John Carpenter, they could not even begin to approach the 15 years of Hell my family endured because of this corrupt federal agency.
It was just that hideous.
An employee of the IRS, who wasn't even born here, and could barely even speak passable English, once stood on my father's property and told him, in a manner most rude, that he was going to federal prison for the rest of his life.
As you know, my father is a Marine who fought in Korea long before that fuzzy foreign puke even came to this country and got his no-doubt affirmative-action job with the IRS.
And never mind that this entire mess was caused by a crooked accountant who is now (lucky for him) deceased.
Sorry, but the "spirit of forgiveness" is just not in me on this one.
-Dave
Good points all, but...
Tue, 12/29/2009 - 18:50 ET by UnsaneHey, thanks to the clowns in Congress who wrote the monstrosity that caused your family so much grief for 15 years, my family must contort themselves and go through the hassle of extra paperwork, and the threat of what happened to your family, over a whopping 13-15 dollars a YEAR in royalty payments.
Naturally we all voted for Forbes in 1996. :-)
I have no love for the IRS either, but I think that they can be pared down to an organization that employs less than 100 people, all of whom work well inside the hideous Beltway, with a radical simplification of the tax code to something that can consist of a paragraph or less. Besides, the IRS can ONLY be what they are thanks to Congress making the tax code so wretchedly complicated and granting them so much authority (like having their own tax courts and so on).
I think we agree on much more here than you realize, but I can never sign on to a national sales tax of any sort, and think that the bright idea of calling such a thing "Fair" is beyond stupid, if because at the very least there is no such thing as fair anything.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
I am confused.
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:35 ET by b4m4wyHow can the gov't monitor these for tax deliquents, when they seem to be the biggest offenders???
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
Ronald Reagan
Don't forget, Little Timmy
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:22 ET by celatorDon't forget, Little Timmy Geithner is an expert on tax delinquency. He knows how to do it very well, while staying out of jail.
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
Taxman
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:41 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsBe aware that the Obama government also has increased monitoring sites such as eBay and Swaptree looking to get tax revenue. They have hired hundreds of new IRS agents for this and for audits.
D
Write your Congress and Senate and tell them what YOU think!
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Is it wrong to monitor
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:46 ET by Another Dead KennedyIs it wrong to monitor auction sites to make sure vendors are paying taxes on the products they're selling? Ebay was a big freebie for a long time, while people can make a steady income while avoiding taxes. I pay my share and more, why shouldn't they?
So you're okay with this
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:50 ET by bigtimerSo you're okay with this outrageous BS Teddy?
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
I keep reading your post
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:03 ET by Another Dead KennedyI keep reading your post looking for a counter-argument. Did I miss something?
Teddy...this isn't just
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:14 ET by bigtimerTeddy...this isn't just about ebay/financial transactions, this is about intimidation to squelch anything, and I do mean anything said/let alone facts that have to do with criticizing Walks on Water and his administration.
You have to be blind to not see this.
Chavez would be proud.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
These opinions of yours
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:42 ET by Another Dead KennedyThese opinions of yours don't make a strong argument. I responded to the claim that the IRS is auditing Ebay to catch people in the act of tax evasion. Explain why this is wrong.
bt, like you once said, some people aren't even smart enough...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 16:50 ET by R D Helm...to cut it as useful idiots.
I bet Teddy here is one of those people who actually believes his employer is matching his Social Security "contribution," too.
ROFL.
-Dave
Dave & BT
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 16:51 ET by MrShyBut Ted trusts that the dainty IRS means only well, and only wants every little man/woman out there to be paying their precise penny, that's all. You know how the pennies mount up, so it's for a very good cause.
Eavesdrop away on all our tweets -- and whatever else needs to be done -- if it's for something noble like this.
Shy, after what the hideous IRS did to my father...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:25 ET by R D Helm...long after they knew he had Alzheimer's, I wouldn't mind seeing a couple of their employee's riding a bench in a federal slammer.
I am hoping to someday make that happen, too, if I can assemble the proof I need in time to make it happen.
If not, it will make one hell of a book.
-Dave
Which I suppose makes you a
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:18 ET by Another Dead KennedyWhich I suppose makes you a useless idiot. See, I work in finance, and as part of my duties I oversee a payroll department, among many other things.
So yes, I know a thing or two about the payroll process and what the employer contributes. Want to talk about it in full? I can give you exact numbers, percentages. Want to talk union contributions as well?
Dave, you may be smart about some things, but this is not your forte. Leave this one to people who know what we're talking about, and pick yourself up off your cheetos-covered floor and dust yourself off - be a man for god's sake.
what kind of finance?
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:25 ET by Candance MooreDo you work with payroll finance primarily, or do you do corporate finance like determining betas and NPVs?
Kind of in between. I'm a
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:45 ET by Another Dead KennedyKind of in between. I'm a production accountant for a TV series, so I oversee every penny that's spent in the actual production of a show.
I see
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:34 ET by Candance MooreSo you don't actually work in finance, you work in accounting. And I'm sure that your team is totally on the straight-and-narrow with no one dabbling in any of that good old fashioned Hollywood Accounting.
You just inadvertently drew attention to RD Helm's whole point: companies who cheat on their tax obligations without having to sneak onto Craigs List or ebay.
Next you'll be saying federal agents should patrol garage sales and church thrift stores. Can't have anyone get away without paying retail taxes.
Are you suggesting I run
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:16 ET by Another Dead KennedyAre you suggesting I run anything but a completely honorable accounting department? What do you know about Hollywood accounting? Please share. I know you're well liked around here, but surely you must have some substance to back up such a blatant accusation. Perhaps you feel the need to cheat your company, but I like my job. I spend my days looking out for others who are being cheated by the system. I forced the company to follow the rules, and I serve as a liaison between the production and network. Nothing suspect about what I do.
Now read below for my thoughts on garage sales.
no accusation ADK
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:44 ET by Candance MooreYou say you're honest, I believe you. My prior comment was tongue in cheek.
But please don't pretend that everyone in Hollywood is as virtuous about "patriotic taxes" as they say. Hollywood has more than its own share of Enrons.
Trust me on this too: I know
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:51 ET by Another Dead KennedyTrust me on this too: I know my share of Hollywood creeps, I can't stand actors (even those who are just wannabes), most directors and producers (even some who are my "friends"). I find it insulting that even my closest friends who are in the business write off movie tickets and rentals as "research" and consider it justifiable. There are many horrible people who run this industry, but you'd be amazed by how many honest, decent people ACTUALLY make these shows happen.
by the same token
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:55 ET by Candance MooreI'm sure you would be amazed by the honest and decent people who work for Fox News, talk radio, health insurance companies, Exxon, and Big Tobacco.
Hahahahahaha
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:01 ET by Another Dead KennedyNo Way!!!
If I really hated you guys, do you think I'd really spend so much time on this site? As I said above, just as there are many good people who work in this industry, there are good people who work for the companies you mentioned. My sister's kids are going to have their college paid for by the oil company based in her town. I don't think Fox News requires party loyalty in their interview process, and I used to be a helluva smoker. I loved those things.
Dead Teddy, People like you should have their voter-registration
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:33 ET by R D Helm...cards confiscated the next time they get pulled over by the cops.
No joke.
What the federal government is doing here is a form of tyranny. They are attempting to impose a chilling effect on Internet discourse, and other activities, particularly in the area of government criticism.
It may be a "soft" one for now, but as history has shown, soft tyrannies have an amazing tendency to grow into hard ones, and often hideously so.
Honestly, did you even bother to read Noel's post?
So, the FBI raids a man's home for coordinating a protest???
Since when was coordinating a protest illegal in the United States of America?
Gee, ya think that one of the reasons the fibbies might have done it was to strongly discourage others from doing the same thing?
Is that Okay with you? I mean, after all, it wasn't your home the fibbies invaded and searched, now, was it? It was the "other guy's" so, I guess that makes it okay, right?
Remember what Father Niemoller once said (and prophetically so), ...when they came for me, there was no one left.
Shortly thereafter, six million Jews among a few million other "undesirables," were marched, trucked and trained off to Hitler's death camps.
I wonder, when the government turns it's tyrannical attentions in your direction, will there be anyone left to speak-up for you?
-Dave
Ditto that Dave....although
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:48 ET by bigtimerDitto that Dave....although I'm sure it's a waste if time regarding Teddy...reminds me so much of Leon, always has, always will.
Got to get Christmas Cards finished...later.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
bt, I don't think Teddy "get's it."
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:57 ET by R D HelmEven when just a few among us are having their rights trampled upon by government, be it federal, state and local, even when it is happening to people who we may not like or agree with, it endangers the rights of all of us.
And Teddy's. too.
Funny how among so many, things of this nature are okay as long as they are happening to the "other guy."
-Dave
Dave, Please stop in at
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:01 ET by Clear thinkerDave,
Please stop in at Gio'sWorld and let everyone know you are ok. We have a few worried people asking for you.
Gio aka Clear thinker
http://iamnotaracist.wordpress.com/
Fear not, Gio, I shall be along shortly. Tommorrow, even.
Tue, 12/15/2009 - 05:37 ET by R D HelmFamily issues, you must understand.
Please let Eowyn and everyone else over your way know that I am Okay.
Just busy re-working the Notepad, that's all.
And I promise, we who love freedom and liberty aren't finished yet.
Trust me.
Dave.
Dave, just like every other
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:54 ET by Another Dead KennedyDave, just like every other poster who conveniently changed the subject, I'll have to point out the not-so-obvious for you too: my comments were regarding the subject of the IRS monitoring Ebay, not Twitter.
But speaking of tyranny, what exactly have I done that is deserving of having my voting rights revoked? Is it because you and I have differing opinions? Surely you have some argument here that you can provide.
Why are you concerned with the government monitoring the internet? Isn't that how they catch terrorists? You don't mind them monitoring your phone line, as long as they're catching bad guys, so why not the interwebs?
As far as Noel's post and your ultimate lead-in to the holocaust, I don't even know what to say, other than you have a questionable sense of history. Enough melodrama already.
→ Drupal
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:00 ET by Cool ArrowAnd I was questioning your understanding of online auctions. From your original post:
How is the Federal Government involved in collecting tax on sales?
Sales across State lines are free from Federal tax.
Income taxes for retail
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:06 ET by Another Dead KennedyIncome taxes for retail businesses operating on the site. Obviously the IRS does not collect state sales tax - my error if it was implied.
ADK... Remember this when
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:12 ET by Clear thinkerADK...
Remember this when they start knocking on your door.
"We asked for freedom of the press, thought, and civil liberties in the past because we were in the opposition and needed these liberties to conquer. Now that we have conquered, there is no longer any need for such civil liberties."
Bukharin, 1917 (one bad-ass commie)
http://iamnotaracist.wordpress.com/
Dead teddy, based on this, I now know I have read more history
Tue, 12/15/2009 - 05:55 ET by R D Helm...by mere accident than you and yours have read on purpose.
And there was no subject change, as bt asked you a decidedly direct question, and you chose to evade it.
Face it, you screwed the pooch on this one - not that anyone here at NB is all that surprised.
-Dave
R D - Cudos and Point well taken.
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 23:57 ET by IndyAdamHistory shows that all it takes is the proverbial "foot in the door" for the Govt and all hell breaks loose. All supposedly well-intentioned, single-purpose ideas, policies, laws, etc. seem to morph into some very ugly monster that cannot be controlled. Take Germany under Hitler and his ilk, for example: Step 1: Pass law requiring the registration of all firearms. Step 2: Declare all firearms illegal... and confiscate them. Step 3: Force all jews to register. Step 4: Round 'em all up and kill as many as you can.
Another example would be the federal income tax. It was intended as a "temporary" stop-gap. In federal speak, temporary must mean "permanent".
I wish there were an organization the likes of the NRA to look after the taxpayer, as well as the NRA defends the 2nd Amendment. Now, THAT would be nifty.
Oh please...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:02 ET by SickofLibsWhen you buy something online when you not required to pay state tax on it, do you automatically fire off a check to your state?
Oh sure, every time. That's
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:06 ET by Another Dead KennedyOh sure, every time.
That's not the point. The government knows people are avoiding paying their taxes by running their businesses through auction websites. I have no problem with the IRS going after them.
→ Drupal
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:09 ET by Cool ArrowWhat kind of financial transactions are taking place over Twitter?
I admit I don't know.
And did they drop the tax-free transaction protection on interstate sales?
Not sure. I've never been
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:13 ET by Another Dead KennedyNot sure. I've never been on Twitter. And I find the people who do Tweet to often be attention starved and pathetic.
Teddy...if you've never
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:17 ET by bigtimerTeddy...if you've never been there how the heck do you even know what you're talking about...hmmm?
Btw...You seem to need attention here all the time, kind of like pot calling kettle.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
You're not very bright, are
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:46 ET by Another Dead KennedyYou're not very bright, are you? I am quite familiar with Twitter. I live in LA, the land of attention starved creative types who feel the need to tell everyone publicly what they're doing at every moment. That is pathetic to me.
Teddy... You stated you
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:52 ET by bigtimerTeddy...
You stated you have never been on Twitter.
Either you have or you haven't.
Now you say you're quite familiar with it...which is it?
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
I'll use the easiest words
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:56 ET by Another Dead KennedyI'll use the easiest words possible:
I have never been on Twitter, but I know what it is. I hear about it every day. I have friends who Twitter. I have co-workers who Twitter. I don't have to use the service to know what it is.
Well you're friends and you
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:14 ET by bigtimerWell you're friends and you don't know everything now do you?
When I go there, it's strictly political info., same as others I associate with for the most part, same as here.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
Our stupid local weather
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:18 ET by Another Dead KennedyOur stupid local weather girl uses Twitter.
A friend of mine who runs a baking business Twitters.
Miley Cyrus uses Twitter (okay, not anymore).
Many, many people use Twitter who aren't involved in politics. If you enjoy it, have fun with it. I don't need to know what my baking friend is up to, where the weather girl is shopping, or what Miley is eating for breakfast on set of her show.
→ Drupal
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:48 ET by Cool ArrowWhat I meant to say above was that I'm pretty sure internet interstate sales are exempt from sales tax.
Ted
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:18 ET by MrShyIt's more big-brother infringement on people's privacy.
Hmm... So let's try this one, circa '08 and before:
"The government knows people are making calls who might be terrorists, coordinating plots using every communications medium out there. I have no problem with the CIA/FBI/(any agency) going after them by wiretapping and surveilling phone calls."
Sounds good to you, right?
* Just politics here, nothing personal (is my new disclaimer. :))
Shy, with all due respect,
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:51 ET by Another Dead KennedyShy, with all due respect, I'm only commenting on the Ebay claim. I have no problem with the IRS investigating an auction website where people are doing business while avoiding paying their taxes.
Wiretapping is an entirely different issue, and I doubt we'll ever have all the facts as to who had been surveilled and for what reasons. That's why I always make sure to use stolen internet connections and cloned cell phones to do all communication related business.
...and with all due respect
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:54 ET by bigtimer...and with all due respect Teddy, I asked you earlier if you were A-Ok with all of this?
Are you OR not?
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
I have no problem with the
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:58 ET by Another Dead KennedyI have no problem with the Ebay auditing.
Warrantless wiretapping pisses me off, but I understand the purpose.
For all I care monitor the hell out of Twitter.
Ted
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:01 ET by MrShyHow is it an entirely different issue?
I consider a government tax
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:09 ET by Another Dead KennedyI consider a government tax audit a different issue from illegal wiretapping.
Ted 2.1
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:34 ET by MrShyHow was it "illegal"? If it was, then when the IRS starts surveilling purchases on the internet, I'm going to call that illegal.
If the CIA, or IRS, or any alphabet soup, is conducting some exercise, I'm presuming it's "legal".
"Illegal wiretapping" sounds like the same say-it-enough-and-it-is tactic as that "illegal war" Bush waged. He got the Congress to sign-off on it. It was never illegal. Same for wiretapping. It's all legal. You may not like it, but I don't know where you get "illegal".
Re IRS Surveillance
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 16:54 ET by slickwillie2001We are dreadfully close to IRS monitoring of everything. The original Obamacare House bill required federal government access to all of your financial records, meaning all bank accounts, investment accounts, credit card records, state records, and of course tax records, for purposes of determining what healthcare premiums you would pay, and if you would qualify for a subsidy. Also includes automatic deposit/withdrawal powers.
The IRS will be locked into any government healthcare machinery because the IRS is to handle the fines for those that don't have insurance, and presumably that means verifying evidence that someone has health insurance. Now unless you think a brick wall can be erected between different departments of the federal government healthcare apparatus, the IRS will have access to credit card records.
slick
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:01 ET by MrShyIt all seems rather obvious to many of us.
Some just whistle on right past the graveyard that is their impending socialist-governed lives, where their freedoms and privacy are almost thoroughly stripped away. Some just continue on with "sure, sounds like [yet again another-] good idea..."
What is socialist in what
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:22 ET by Another Dead KennedyWhat is socialist in what the IRS does by following the law? What is socialist in collecting taxes and auditing a website known for helping people avoid taxes? Don't just throw out "socialism" as if it's some magic word that can automatically discredit an argument. If you can point out that this is beyond the call of the IRS, then you win.
Ted 2.3
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:33 ET by MrShyNow I'm vindicated for thinking, as I wrote that, "Oh no, don't use that word, he'll flip." :p
Yes, when a government-run bureaucracy is increasingly -- with no apparent ceiling/limit -- putting so much of it's energy and resources toward checking and cross-checking, re-checking, etc., on every citizen, using one method after another, to be sure we're all abiding by the rules (all the while, corruption and "disappearing" money in DC and with like-bureaucracies is astounding), absolutely I see socialism.
I was, by no means, using that word lightly.
So in short, you believe
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 18:01 ET by Another Dead KennedySo in short, you believe Ebay should be off limits from IRS laws. Ebay users should be exempt from paying sales tax because they're using an auction website rather than a mail order system or store front operation. Is this what you're suggesting, because that's how I'm interpreting it?
Ted 2.4
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 18:36 ET by MrShyWhy do you keep mentioning Ebay? Because they have to monitor Twitter and facebook, et al, to weed out Ebay users and, hence, those tax-evaders?
I'm talking about the forest here, not the trees. The forest.
The sum is greater... you know? They need to monitor Twitter and facebook, correct? All to keep on top of us all to keep the money flowing into them.
Yes, I agree it goes well
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:08 ET by Another Dead KennedyYes, I agree it goes well beyond the IRS monitoring Ebay. However, that's what my initial post was in response to, and that's what I've been arguing this entire time.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/12/14/government-monitoring-facebook-twitter#comment-1112415
slick... You couldn't be
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:50 ET by bigtimerslick...
You couldn't be more right, unfortunately people let this go in one ear and out the other, or else it's okey-dokey with them.
It's past pathetic, let alone spooky...
I hope in '10 the retaliation shows...we want some semblance of what our country is back. ..if we don't in '10 I fear for the outcome.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
Ted 2.0
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:10 ET by MrShyWiretapping is an entirely different issue, and I doubt we'll ever have all the facts as to who had been surveilled and for what reasons.
So you had/have a distrust of what the government has really been up to in surveilling these phone calls? But with this issue -- surveilling the internet -- you don't have this concern?
Yes, I have a general
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:15 ET by Another Dead KennedyYes, I have a general distrust of the government when it comes to pretty much anything. But the job of the IRS is collecting taxes. When people don't pay, the IRS must investigate. I don't believe the IRS should just ignore the fact that people buying and selling massive amounts of goods on an auction website while not paying their share of taxes. As someone in finance, I get hit up every day by those people who want to cheat the system. Good luck with that, but I'm not interested in helping you out.
Ted 2.2
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:34 ET by MrShyWhen people don't pay, the IRS must investigate...
Well how are you so sure the IRS isn't, in the process, investigating "other things" for who-knows what reasons?
Most of the government is your enemy, but suddenly the bureaucratic behemoth that is the gov't-run IRS is your efficiently-run, always-well-meaning friend?
Your concern that we pay our fair share of taxes and play by the rules is honorable. Isn't, say, my concern that we go after terrorists by all the means at our disposal equally as honorable?
None of this is simple, I know, but yes, I'm pinning you on this double-speak because the left DOES seem to pick and choose what's infringing and what isn't based on just ideology and not on what's necessary.
What is the IRS doing here
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:46 ET by Another Dead KennedyWhat is the IRS doing here that isn't legal? They collect taxes. They can audit whomever, whenever they like. We've all know for a very long time that ebay is awesome because we don't have to pay sales tax. Several years back I bought a classice JCM 800 for just $600, no tax. I saved $50!!! Did I get away with something? Sure. But the IRS knows better now, and that's why they're auditing the website. Remember back when I could download Mr Shy tracks for free on Napster? It was super-duper, but I bet it pissed you off that no laws were in place for your protection. Now there are, and Napster is gone.
Individual privacy protection laws were in place long before I got to decide which were legit, and which should be ignored. Historically, for law enforcement to surveil someone, they would require proof of wrongdoing and obtain a warrant from a judge. The last administration admitted to doing this without following such a law. We have a general knowledge as to why they did this (to catch terrorists), but it was still illegal.
Now answer me this: If they mistook Mr Shy for a terrorist and began monitoring your every move, how would you feel if you were arrested for tax evasion? Granted, you were being monitored for your terrorist ties, but in the end you were caught for something completely non-related. Is it justified?
(By the way, in no way am I calling you a terrorist or even implicating you have terrorist ties.)
Now answer me this: If they
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:55 ET by MrShyNow answer me this: If they mistook Mr Shy for a terrorist and began monitoring your every move, how would you feel if you were arrested for tax evasion? Granted, you were being monitored for your terrorist ties, but in the end you were caught for something completely non-related. Is it justified?
Not sure where you're going with this. Personally, yes, I won't hold a grudge that they found something unlawful on my part, regardless of the means. I'm to blame, really.
Double Speak
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 17:03 ET by quimperThe problem with this argument is there should be no expectation of privacy once one posts information on the internet. When applying for membership on any internet website, the terms and conditions section clearly states this. They may not sell your information to a third party, but you cannot go on Twitter or Facebook and tell all of your followers and friends that you are on vacation for the next two weeks and then be shocked when your house is broken into. If you put yourself out there, you need to be prepared for the consequences.
There should, however, be an expectation of privacy in one's own home, and one should not be wiretapped without a warrant. Warrants are quite easy to obtain in most circumstances.
Isn't, say, my concern that we go after terrorists by all the means at our disposal equally as honorable?
Yes. Absolutely. However, it should be done legally. But then, the government could be monitoring me right now and be wasting a lot of time. If you aren't doing anything illegal, i.e., planning a terrorist attack or hiding income from the IRS, you don't have anything to worry about.
~And the problem
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 18:12 ET by choselife4xWith that argument..
if you aren't doing anything illegal, i.e., planning a terrorist attack
or hiding income from the IRS, you don't have anything to worry about.
..is that the parameters of what is 'illegal' can change.
my solution is to destroy children--mamabear 12/08/09
I disagree
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:59 ET by quimperYou can't possibly be trying to say that tax evasion and planning a terrorist attack will someday be legal, so I'll just assume you meant something else.
We have a brilliantly written Constitution that is able to be amended and open to wide interpretation for both the good and the bad. Laws change every day, out of necessity, both for the good and the bad. But if you put yourself out there on the internet, where you have no expectation of privacy, you open yourself up to be taken down by your own words and actions. For example, even though you have a screen name, any average hacker could find you. The IRS, FBI, and CIA all have way better hackers than that. You put it online, it can all be traced to you.
so quimper
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:03 ET by Candance MooreI'm sure you also feel the same way about cell phones, paper correspondence, and anything that leaves a trail?
Cover your tracks
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 22:01 ET by quimperIf you want privacy, complete privacy, you correspond in an intelligent way. Cell phones can be intercepted and text messages can be subpoenaed. Paper correspondence? Burn it or shred it if you don't want anyone to read it. But if you want to live a private life, don't put it out on the internet. Making a twitter or facebook entry about going out and getting wasted when you are 17 and your friend's parent happens to be a cop and sees it is going to land you in a heap of trouble.
I'm simply saying to be smart about what you put out there because the internet is not private.
~I'm saying
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:11 ET by choselife4xThat with the current Administration you can't assume that something that is legal now won't be illegal in the future.
"my solution is to destroy children"--mamabear 12/08/09
on target choose
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:06 ET by cajun2Look at this new health care bill. If you dont have insurance, the government can penalize with a tax or jail. Redefining legal and illegal already in action.
True
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 22:04 ET by quimperI agree with you. For example, if the government takes over healthcare, the whole "privacy" issue that was argued during Roe v. Wade would be thrown out the window now that the government has a hand in everything medical. Kind of opens it up to be repealed, doesn't it?
~Repealed?
Tue, 12/15/2009 - 12:11 ET by choselife4xNot with the current SCOTUS makeup.
"my solution is to destroy children"--mamabear 12/08/09
Are we unitary?
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:17 ET by UnsaneBut the job of the IRS is collecting taxes. When people don't pay, the IRS must investigate. I don't believe the IRS should just ignore the fact that people buying and selling massive amounts of goods on an auction website while not paying their share of taxes. From the looks of things it seems that the IRS, and ONLY the IRS, should be doing this. You seem to have an obsessive devotion to them which is quite disturbing.
I don't think the IRS has any business here; the only people who legitimately should be charging taxes for sales are state and local authorities.
Or perhaps you think the United States has a unitary, rather than a federal, government?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Let me ask you the same
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:25 ET by Another Dead KennedyLet me ask you the same question I posted earlier: If a Ford dealership is selling vehicles through Ebay, should the agency responsible for regulating federal tax law ignore the operation?
Not again!
Tue, 12/29/2009 - 18:59 ET by UnsaneLet me ask you the same question I posted earlier: If a Ford dealership is selling vehicles through Ebay, should the agency responsible for regulating federal tax law ignore the operation? So you DO think the government of the United States is unitary!!!
Sorry, but your example does NOT fall under "federal tax law". This is not a unitary nation and why so many Leftists think so is beyond me. If a Ford dealership is selling vehicles through your hated ebay, the question of taxation falls to the local authorities.
When I bought a truck many years ago, I did not pay the federal government anything. I paid the TT&L to state and local authorities, though.
Before you cite this example again, you may want to brush up on the differences between a unitary government (France is a very good example) and a federal one.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Let me get this straight.
Tue, 12/15/2009 - 00:03 ET by IndyAdamLet me get this straight. So going after people who may or may not be tax dodgers is okay with you, but NOT the security of the country?
Didn't say anything was
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:08 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsDidn't say anything was right or wrong, just pointed out the increased scrutiny and increased IRS audits. That includes the IRS sending out letters with blanket denials of deductions for charitable contributions, challenging EIC claims, and just plain fishing for revenue.
P.S. How does one pay his share, 'and more'? Do you have an IRS form number for that?
D
Write your Congress and Senate and tell them what YOU think!
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
ADK...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:09 ET by UnsaneADK, note that on iTunes, whenever I buy music from there, as I do often, I am charged local sales taxes. The State of Texas gets that money.
If any entity should get anything for sales on eBay, methinks it should be state and local governments.
If you still are in favor of the feds taxing sales on eBay as income, do you likewise favor IRS agents patrolling neighborhoods looking for garage and yard sales?
This statement is telling: I pay my share and more, why shouldn't they? I view taxation as a way the government funds operations that voters agree should be funded at a rate that voters likewise agree on. With this comment of yours, it seems you view taxation as a way for the government to "get even" with people on your behalf and thus is there to steal from people you don't like or want to get even with. Is this a fair assessment, and if it is not, can you explain yourself?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
You make a good point about
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:28 ET by Another Dead KennedyYou make a good point about garage sales, and for the most part I agree with you. I don't think the IRS should bother with an operation as small as a yard sale, but think about this: what happens when the yard sale professional moves on to the swap meet, flea market, or simply opens s retail space selling antiques? As the operation becomes more than a simple hobby and turns to a full fledged business, the owner should be responsible for paying his taxes.
Most Ebayers use it sparingly, but there are many businesses who operate on the site. Ford sells cars on the site. Should they be exempt from paying taxes because they're using the site, or should the buyer be exempt? Check out the seller's rating and history. Some have tens of thousands of transactions. As a small business owner operating a legal business, wouldn't it anger you to know that someone is operating the same kind of business as you, but doesn't have to pay any taxes because it's operated on the auction site?
You know how I really feel about taxes? I think if everyone paid their share, and didn't take advantage of and cheat the system, we'd all be paying a whole lot less. I'm not quite understanding the wording of that last bit of yours, but I'm not looking for a handout. I pay plenty in taxes.
Ebay and taxes
Tue, 12/29/2009 - 19:07 ET by UnsaneMost Ebayers use it sparingly, but there are many businesses who operate on the site. Ford sells cars on the site. Should they be exempt from paying taxes because they're using the site, or should the buyer be exempt? Check out the seller's rating and history. Some have tens of thousands of transactions. As a small business owner operating a legal business, wouldn't it anger you to know that someone is operating the same kind of business as you, but doesn't have to pay any taxes because it's operated on the auction site? No, and if it angers you that much, I would suggest writing Sacramento about it. My point is that there is no reason for the federal government to get involved here.
It doesn't anger me just as much as the existence of an underground economy in the United States does not anger me. In fact it makes sense to me, and as taxation gets more wretchedly complicated and onerous, I would hope the underground economy grows in size. Because it is a sign of just how wretchedly complicated and onerous taxation is. If you want the taxing entities of America to generate more revenue, all they really need to do is to cut their taxes and make them easy-as-apple-pie to follow.
My last bit was not about you looking for a handout. Quite the contrary. It has to do with how you see taxes. Are taxes a way for the government on whatever level to pay for operations or are they to be used as a "get-even" mechanism from which the more successful are punished and the less successful babied?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Are you really this bored
Tue, 12/29/2009 - 19:15 ET by Another Dead KennedyAre you really this bored that you're digging up 2 week old threads?
ADK---
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:45 ET by matthewdeanIn your 16:18 ET post, you managed to look down your nose at and talk down to Dave at the same time---
"See, I work in finance---"
Wow.
See if you can get your figure-fogged brain around this selfish logic:
In the last sentence of your 12:46 ET post, "I pay my share and more, why should'nt they?", put the word "work" in place of pay, and "the welfare class" in place of they.
Reread the sentence with those changes and you might get an inkling why those of us who are not Liberals or Democrats do not much care for those among us who are.
Tax 'em all. Let no one escape the might of the IRS. The government needs that money to support and protect the worthless pieces of shit that feed off of our society.
IMO, that is an incredibly stupid outlook, even for a mathematical maven.
MD
"There is no distinctly American criminal class - except Congress."
Mark Twain (1835-1910)
Heaven forbid...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:47 ET by aeroveloThese guys actually direct their efforts at tracking domestic and international terror suspects.
If the shit hits the fan to the point the government needs to go after people like me and my mother for posting anti Obama stories and images, they will have far more to fear from the US Armed Forces as they are the most heavily armed group of conservatives in the country.
---
Ask yourself: Do I want a good paying job, or do I want a government hand out. Its that simple!
World Around
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:09 ET by okiehawk44Dictators have used standing armies for generations to defend their actions against the people.
This also goes for law enforcement.
Soldiers and policemen need jobs and sometimes the best jobs are these paid for by the dictator.
Don't rely on either of these groups coming to the defense of the average citizen.
Prove me wrong by losing evidence in gun control cases or stopping illegal immigration into this country or making it a moot point to have a Gitmo or a Thomson prison or allowing an obvious Islamist like Major Hasan from existing within the Army until he can kill Americans.
Soldiers or policemen will do the "in my best interest" thing I fear.
Think about this:
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:23 ET by UnsaneYou forget that soldiers, sailors, Airmen and Marines take an oath to the Constitution, not a single person.
On the cops I am mixed. While there are professionals in their ranks, there are way too many of them who think they are God and that they have the inalienable right to lord it over their fellow citizens because they have a gun and a badge. In their view, WE work for THEM and not the other way around (a lot like our Volkskammer reps and Senators, now that I think about it). Cops are essentially mercenaries that will work for whoever pays them. Don't believe me? I don't think many of the Vopos lost their jobs after the reunification of Germany...
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Unsane---
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:04 ET by matthewdeanIt is ok to be of "mixed" feelings about cops.
We all can think of an occasion where a brush with law enforcement ended with the thought, "not exactly a stellar performance by John Law, there."
No one is forced to enter into the field, granted.
Having said that, I will tell you that it seems to be the most under appreciated profession in the world, followed very closely by the military.
I was on the law enforcement side of the Fire Service for twenty years, I was a Reserve Deputy Sheriff for twenty years. I was an instructor at the Sheriffs' academy for twenty years. My son was a police officer for 17 years before his untimely passing.
I know law enforcement.
Yes, some police may think they are "godlike', but these individuals tend to be the younger ones who are just getting comfortable with patrol work; and may have a sense of "job" command experience that is problematical, much like a "hundred-hour" pilot.
Yes, a gun and a badge can, and does, give some of them a big head.
For a while.
The godlike, or the big head syndrome, is either grown out of by the individual with the accumulation of experience, cut out by the razor sharp put-downs of that syndrome by fellow officers, or removed by administrative action through receipt of citizen complaints. Said action may be either further specialized training, or termination.
"In their view, WE work for THEM and not the other way around."
That is true in a way, Unsane, but better said would be -
"Law Enforcement is in place to enforce the laws that we, as a society, put in place to keep us safe. While we should all strive to be law abiding, we are human. If we err, the officers are there to help us get back on the right track. We should realize that this is their job and is not done with malice aforethought. If malice raises its' ugly head, it is near a certain thing that it did not originate with the officer."
Cops are essentially mercenaries that will work for whoever pays them.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary -
1. mercenary - n. one that serves merely for wages
2. mercenary - adj. serving merely for pay or sordid advantage
In your sentence, "mercenaries" is a noun.
That would cover just about any occupation, no?
MD
"There is no distinctly American criminal class - except Congress."
Mark Twain (1835-1910)
Law enforcement
Tue, 12/29/2009 - 19:21 ET by UnsaneI have worked with law enforcement many times, I know law enforcement as well. My feelings on them are mixed because THEY - the people who work in that field - are.
If cops behaved with me the same way the first cop who wrote me a ticket did, I'd be a huge backer of law enforcement. I broke the speed limit, the cop pulled me over, he told me why he pulled me over, he asked for my license and insurance, I gave it to him, he gave it back, wrote my ticket, I signed it, and that was it. He did his job as a professional, and to me, then as now, it was a clean kill on his part, so no bitching or whining on my part.
Unfortunately this is not the experience I have had with others. In fact, that first experience was and is a minority. And, oddly enough, I found that federal law enforcement was much more professional and better to deal with on the occasions I worked with them than either state or local law enforcement. But those I have since talked to on the federal side of things tell me that the last thing I should be is surprised.
This is an unfortunate thing but it is what it is.
As for the comment I made on "mercenaries" that sees to have miffed you - this is because, as I often do, take a view from the pages of history. I do not often see cases where the cops are so morally opposed to a regime that hires them that they all walk away and force said regime to hire new cops from the ground up. I suppose the one time I heard of this happening was when the division of Berlin was becoming more painfully obvious, and some Berlin cops split with their Eastern brethren and went over to the West and formed the core of what would later be the West Berlin police. But from what I see this is the exception rather than the rule. Meaning that by and large, law enforcement does not care who pays their bills as long as the bills are paid. Again, whenever I see regime changes occur in the world, I don't see the massive layoffs of cops. I don't think the Vopos who worked for the vile East German regime were necessarily all told to take a hike after reunification, for example...
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
~Not all of them
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:37 ET by choselife4xHonor is still alive.
"my solution is to destroy children"--mamabear 12/08/09
People had better start
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:47 ET by bigtimerPeople had better start calling their congress-critters, soon.
Intimidation to squelch free speech is outrageous...to say the least.
Fairness Doctrine at work, one way or the other.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
This doesn't surprise me a bit...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:02 ET by PrairieSkyThe Obama administration is a past master at saying one thing and then doing another...
We heard ad nauseum from "O" and Co. all through last year's campaign how open, honest, and transparent his administration would be and how much integrity it would have...As the last 11 months have shown, those claims have all turned out to be complete crap, and this "monitoring" of social networking sites is further proof of that.
If Bush (or any other Repub) took the same actions, we all know what the media reaction would be...They would be apoplectic. I wonder, with Obama in the WH, how this bit of news will be handled by most in the media? Crickets....
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Sky... Exctly right...if
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:06 ET by bigtimerSky...
Exctly right...if this was reversed the msm would be screaming at the top of their lungs 24/7, demand an investigation as well as congress as well.
Btw..I'm not surprised, I'm surprised it has come out.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
bt...I am surprised too that...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:25 ET by PrairieSkyan editorial such as this came from the NYT...Maybe Obama has gone too far even for someone at the Times to be able to stomach...If so, it's about freakin' time...As for most of the rest of the media, I doubt we'll hear much, if anything, about this. Hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Sky...you would really
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:29 ET by bigtimerSky...you would really think at least Fox would be all over this already...I don't know anymore, the hypocrisy is blatant.
I'll hope I hear some more about it on Talk Radio today, maybe some shows on Fox tonight, it should be a HUGE deal in my opinion.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
bt...I'm waiting to see...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:38 ET by PrairieSkythis mentioned on Fox, too. Maybe I've missed it, but so far I haven't seen anything about this. I imagine that O'Reilly, Beck and/or Hannity will have something about it. We'll see.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Hey Sky...if there is, will
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:42 ET by bigtimerHey Sky...if there is, will you do me a favor in case I miss the repeat of Hannity tonight (I'm going to be watching the football game) and let me know?
It would be much appreciated. ;-)
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
bt...I plan to watch...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:45 ET by PrairieSkyfootball too, and catch Hannity later, but I'll probably go back and forth during the game...If I see or hear anything, I'll let you know. :)
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Thank you gal. (I'm going
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:48 ET by bigtimerThank you gal.
(I'm going to try to click back and forth as well, just don't think I'll get much of a chance tho during that time period with other things I have to get done around here)
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
You betcha! And if...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:05 ET by PrairieSkyyou hear something, give me a heads-up, too. :)
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
The left wants to stop dissent
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:20 ET by MozillaThe left wants to stop dissent. The same dissent they encouraged under Bush. The Democrat party has become a church in search of heretics. They think that they have the ability to make everyone think the same. That is outrageous.That will only encourage more dissent as people continue question them.
Mozilla...Yep...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:33 ET by PrairieSkyThe left loves dissent and protest, as long as it's not directed at any of them or their causes. Under Bush, all they did was criticize, find fault (real or imagined), and harass him and his administration with all manner of nonsensical bs...But...Under Obamessiah, there can be no criticism, and all those that dare to deviate from or find fault with the libnut party line, are attacked.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
"We asked for freedom of
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:15 ET by Clear thinker"We asked for freedom of the press, thought, and civil liberties in the past because we were in the opposition and needed these liberties to conquer. Now that we have conquered, there is no longer any need for such civil liberties."
Bukharin, 1917 (one bad ass commie)
The Leftist History Channel
http://iamnotaracist.wordpress.com/
Sky -
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:41 ET by panzerakc"I wonder, with Obama in the WH, how this bit of news will be handled by most in the media? Crickets.... "
It won't be totally crickets. They'll do another story on Tiger Woods.
panzer...No doubt...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 22:32 ET by PrairieSkyWhile the Tiger Woods story is sad and it is news, on a scale of importance, it hardly compares with this.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
obummer and henchmen are making
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:10 ET by larry on LInixon look like a boy scout .
larry... Bingo! 'Doublin
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:19 ET by bigtimerlarry...
Bingo!
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
I know for a fact
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:18 ET by CCsteelcitythat big brother is watching on FB! I have already gotten two emails stating "concern" from Washington about my statements on FB. I have a couple other friends on there that have gotten the same emails.
Be forwarned... if you ever get an email from the WH or anywhere close to that... you better not open it up. If you do, you will be forfitting your privacy to your computer. Feds can look in through your IP addy and see everything you have and do.
THIS IS FACT
"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers
That is outrageous...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:42 ET by PrairieSkyWhere did these emails come from? You said Washington...Where and who? That is just scary.
This is yet another reason why I don't and never will have an account with Facebook or Twitter...More and more we are relinquishing our privacy. Thanks anyway, but count me out.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
CC&Sky.... I've heard of
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:46 ET by bigtimerCC&Sky....
I've heard of this tactic being used about a month or two back now, either via email from others or read about it somewhere else...it's down-right chilling what this administration is doing...Shrillster&Co. had nothing compared to what the OSoros team is doing.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
This whole thing started
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:02 ET by CCsteelcityduring the "Cash for Clunkers" thing over the summer. If you went into the C4C "website"... in the fine print, it said if you go into the site then you were "allowing" the gooberment access to your computer. Most people didn't even know it until after it happened.
I have heard from several people that after going into some of the sites through the government they have had viruses, trojans and/or "pop-ups" occuring.
So be very careful searching anything pertaining to the WH or congressmen/women.
"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers
bt...This is the first I've heard...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:11 ET by PrairieSkyof this email business, beyond what we heard this summer about people receving a message from the administration that they didn't sign up for, and who never contacted the administration by email.
I think "O" and Co. are involved in all kinds of "big brother" activities...They have all the power and resources of the US government at their disposal to do whatever they want to. "Scary" barely covers it.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
not sure who
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:04 ET by CCsteelcitythe actual emails were coming from... probably "WH cyber police". Obummer is wanting this to happen as it is.
"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers
I hope you saved...
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:13 ET by PrairieSkythose messages, in case this ever hits the fan, and they can be some proof of inappropriate, and possibly an illegal abuse of the administration's power.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
You know this for a fact, ccsteel???
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:16 ET by 007memo"I know for a fact that big brother is watching on FB! I have already gotten two emails stating "concern" from Washington about my statements on FB."
Wow, that's a sensational story!
Forgive me though, but I find your story preposterous. But if it was true, the grand majority of the media would be camping at your doorstep to get your story. They'd readily move their reporters off of Tiger's doorstep and send them to your home.
Illegal surveillance, whether by the Bush Adminstration or Obama Administration should be of grave concern to all Americans. Heck, even the government's monitoring of public sites without constraint, which is likely perfectly legal, should be of grave concern to all Americans as well.
As far as I can see this would simply be a continuation of the Bush/Cheney antics by the Obama Administration. Unfortunately, many Americans seem to have the attitude that when their guys are in charge it's okay, but when the other guys are in charge it's scandalous.
Please
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:30 ET by UnsaneAs far as I can see this would simply be a continuation of the Bush/Cheney antics by the Obama Administration. Unfortunately, many Americans seem to have the attitude that when their guys are in charge it's okay, but when the other guys are in charge it's scandalous. Right. You have this exact same attitude. All I kept hearing from Statist/Socialists was this incessant stream of whining about how much our freedoms were being taken away by the evil Bush, yet when I prompt the same crowd to name a freedom he has taken, I can then begin searching for crickets here at home for the silence I receive is always deafening.
I didn't lose any freedoms under Bush, so save it. You don't care about anything His Majesty The Shahinshah does, because you have made it plain here and your other posts here on NB that you want to be RULED, not governed. If He were to personally abolish the Constitution, you would cheer for Him the loudest, as long as you got something out of it, like total government babying of your every need.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Crickets for Unsane... because you defy logic.
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:07 ET by 007memoCrickets for Unsane... because you defy logic.
To quote me: "Unfortunately, many Americans seem to have the attitude that when their guys are in charge it's okay, but when the other guys are in charge it's scandalous."
To quote you: "Right. You have this exact same attitude."
You misinterpret my crystal clear position on this; that trampling on the Constitution is not acceptable from any administration - but that's because your irrational ideology clouds your understanding of clear composition.
You also miss the irony that you make my case for me when you say: "I didn't lose any freedoms under Bush, so save it." See, it's A-okay when your guys do it.
→ 007
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:09 ET by Cool ArrowAre you still selling AMWAY?
Go take a civics class already
Tue, 12/29/2009 - 20:48 ET by UnsaneCrickets for Unsane... because you defy logic. Really? This coming from one who doesn't know what is and what is not a right; what the difference is between a unitary and federal government is, what the difference is between a political party and a political philosophy, who doesn't know (nor care) what science is or what a "consensus" is.
You lecturing me on defying logic is not unlike a whore lecturing me on the virtues of chastity.
You misinterpret my crystal clear position on this; that trampling on the Constitution is not acceptable from any administration - but that's because your irrational ideology clouds your understanding of clear composition. The portion after the hyphen is a self-description. And your position is not crystal clear; unless you consider, say, obsidian crystal clear. You are a Statist/Socialist who does not understand the Constitution - as your history here demonstrates over and over and over. If you DID understand the Constitution, you would have long since understood the difference between unitary and federal governments. But you do not.
Not to mention you would understand what the government can and cannot do. For instance, your insistance that the federal government is your Personal Pampering Agency; a massive charity; a big United Way. Not to mention your total rage at the government purchasing military hardware and training - something you have derided as "killing machines" - in spite of the fact that the funding of a military is an explicit power of government in the Constitution.
Maybe before you wag your finger in my face as to what the Constitution is, and before you lecture me further, you might want to read the Constitution sometime.
See, I do not see where it says that the government is to provide for auto manufacturing in this country - something you doubtless slavishly applaud your God for intervening in. That right there is trampling of the Constitution, yet you so cheerfully embrace that, among other acts that are at the very least questionable under the Constitution.
You also miss the irony that you make my case for me when you say: "I didn't lose any freedoms under Bush, so save it." See, it's A-okay when your guys do it. I did not lose any freedoms under Bush and have yet to see a case where he trampled the Constitution. On the other hand, when your God does it, it is great, something to be applauded, and something which you cheerfully support His Majesty The Shahinshah in doing, and become absolutely unhinged beyond reason when yhou see that there are those who dare disagree with him or you.
I would suggest not posting to me or anyone else here on NB for a long time. This weak post of yours tells me you haev a LOT of work, and learning, to do.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
NYT may have an agenda
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 14:47 ET by gmonsenIt is convenient that creating fear over the incursion of the government into our lives via social media and networking may serendipitously cause more people to rely on traditional news, such as the Times. If the Times can make everyone afraid of the internet, maybe they will be able to remain in business. My tongue is embedded in my cheek.
G
I suspect they're using
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:02 ET by sharkeyI suspect they're using "going after tax cheats" as a ruse and is an attempt to seek legitimate cause before the American public for their Big Brother activities. I would think they're major concern would be in tracking the VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY that they're delusional thinking (think Hillary Clinton) tries to conjurer up. Anybody who disagrees with Barack Obama or who holds an opposing view point to this Administration's policies and/or actions, is labeled as either a racist or un-American or as a right wing conspirator, or all the above. Such as Harry Reid saying that any American who opposes the Health Care bill is a 'racist' likening it, and the persons who oppose it, to the continuance of slavery. Or now Barack Hussein Obama telling the CIA to spy on fellow Americans all in the name of going after tax scofflaws who supposedly have accounts with Facebook or Twitter, etc.. Nice try Barack! I think the American people have caught on to the "real" reason.
Color me (not so) shocked!
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:14 ET by dmntd1I do this to find people. Cops do this to find people. Debt collectors do this to find people. Know your rights, and exercise them. There ARE certain things the the Federal Fair Debt Collection Act WON'T allow, even via FB/Myspace/Twitter.
If people are silly/stupid/irresponsible enough to put that much information out there, they're generally silly/stupid/irresponsible enough to be caught.
WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare,
No secrets to conceal.
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:22 ET by dukasObama suffers from being a psychotic narcissist, scars that are left over from cocaine abuse. He is a teleprompter Marxist who has not revealed his true birthplace, and having no life achievements, has failed to substantiate any educational scores. Obama is a con artist who ought to be impeached, and the sooner the better. And any F.B.I. agent doesn’t recognize this observation as justified and based in fact, should hand in their badge and get another job..
There is no comparing the
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 15:40 ET by 24enakThere is no comparing the wiretapping of private phone conversations to a tweet. That would be like saying if the government reads what I am writing now to reading my email. What people write on their twitter and other open source networks is free for the whole world to so why would it be shocking to think that government officials look at it too.
What "fears" are being realized? Isn't it common knowledge that what you write on twitter is open for the world to see. If government agents are hacking into a closed network, or hacking someones private online accounts, or deceiving people to become a 'friend' then that would be shady, but that is yet to be seen.
Whining
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 19:33 ET by UnsaneThere is no comparing the wiretapping of private phone conversations to a tweet. That would be like saying if the government reads what I am writing now to reading my email. What people write on their twitter and other open source networks is free for the whole world to so why would it be shocking to think that government officials look at it too. Apparently it doesn't bother you then that yes, while tweets and FB postings are (generally) public, that if the government were to monitor them all, that it would take up a great deal of manpower to do. Welcome to Ceaucescu's Romania - which is something that you doubtless relish.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Much of what occurs online,
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 20:20 ET by RR GOPMuch of what occurs online, like blog posting, is intended to be an
open declaration to the world, and law enforcement is within its rights
to read and act on what is written.
Law enforcement has been overstepping their bounds for years. These LEOs size you up pretty quick and determine whether or not you're the type who has a lawyer on speed dial or may be well connected to someone who is important.
If not, they'll decide your guilt on the spot-otherwise there would be no arrest. It's BS to say that being arrested for any of a variety of pretenses and cleared later is quite OK...in the meantime you've had to make bail, get a lawyer, have your name printed in the paper, lost time from work, and will have an arrest record permanently...
Why we Conservatives have had no problem with this over the decades is beyond me. Guess we figured it was just hippies and guys with mohawks so they probably deserve whatever they get.
And, no...I've never been arrested.
"Under Capitalism, man exploits man. Under Communism it's just the opposite."
"All that Communism needs to make it successful is for someone to feed and clothe it."
RR,
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:24 ET by R D HelmWhy we Conservatives have had no problem with this over the decades is beyond me.
I have had a major problem with it for a couple of decades now.
-Dave
E-mails
Mon, 12/14/2009 - 21:17 ET by jaywlI don't know if this has been covered elsewhere, but FOX just reported the missing e-mails that so upset the Dems and anti-war, Bush hating leftist SOBs in the middle of Pres. Bush's term Have Been Found! No evil Cheney conspiracy, no CIA black op, they were simply mislabeled. Gee, what a disappointment for the jerks who raise this kind of BS without a shred of evidence that anyone did anything. I can't wait for the NYT to run a front page story and an apology on the editorial page. This real kicker, to me, is that now that they have been found the projected release date is 2014. I would have thought some federal prosecutor was waiting to get the goods on Pres. Bush and then indict a whole bunch of evil, conspiring, right wing assassins. Guess not.
If
Tue, 12/15/2009 - 10:42 ET by jessieHIf I had known they were monitoring twitter, I would have been there telling them exactly what I thought about their inteligence. I know, what inteligence.
Government monitoring Facebook and Twitter
Thu, 12/17/2009 - 11:46 ET by Ruler4YouIf this is 'news' to you then you are truly ignorant. Social networking sites are and have been monitored by the government since their inception. The internet was designed for that purpose, among others. Ask Al Gore.