It is always just a little interesting the facts which Republican’s choose to highlight or remember. Looks like Obama is actually keeping people more safe by these counts. Facts suck! I guess that’s why so many are omitted from Fox News stories.
With the election over and a resounding “Nah, we don’t want to go backward” asserted in the voting, I look forward to the country to moving forward and supporting the intent of the electorate by getting some work done. While a nice thing to ponder – I’m not sure compromise and getting things done is what is going to happen based on the lack of a new narrative from the conservatives. It is interesting to see how the conversation is moving forward or not so much in the conservative political narrative with no real discussions beyond Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi!
Perhaps the challenge for the Republican’s is the absolute lack of meaningful things to talk about which won’t get themselves into trouble. Core platform considerations and beliefs seem to bring ire for the party of late from one faction or another inside the party, the conservative media complex or the general population. That makes Benghazi relevant and safe.
So since Benghazi is safe, it continues to monopolize the right wing discussion and it’s not a bad idea. So here is a list which examines why it might be better to stretch out Benghazi as long as possible, even when key party members are confirming that nothing of note really happened.
Why Republican’s Should Keep Talking about Benghazi
Net-Net: It’s a whole lot safer to blame the President for some type of clerical error or purposeful edit in talking points around a terrorism event and creating potential scandal where one doesn’t exists than talking about their stance on issues.
Net-neutrality, privacy and security continue to be at odds as the house looks to update how access is granted to the government from our personal electronic communications. The recent Petraeus scandal rightly brings up the discussion around privacy of our electronic content just in time for a senate update of privacy legislation.
Sen. Patrick Leahy’s refresh of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act – originally written in 1986 has some interesting implications which ought to be highlighted. Chiefly, frictionless and warrantless search and seizure of your private email communications/files may just be around the corner with should this get passed.
Here are the key changes with this legislation which risks privacy via C|Net:
- Grants warrantless access to Americans’ electronic correspondence to over 22 federal agencies. Only a subpoena is required, not a search warrant signed by a judge based on probable cause.
- Permits state and local law enforcement to warrantlessly access Americans’ correspondence stored on systems not offered “to the public,” including university networks.
- Authorizes any law enforcement agency to access accounts without a warrant — or subsequent court review — if they claim “emergency” situations exist.
- Says providers “shall notify” law enforcement in advance of any plans to tell their customers that they’ve been the target of a warrant, order, or subpoena.
- Delays notification of customers whose accounts have been accessed from 3 days to “10 business days.” This notification can be postponed by up to 360 days.
Gain an understanding of the pending fiscal cliff with 5 key facts YOU need to understand. $1 out of all $5 tax dollars that come into the Federal Government is for the military.
Kevin shared this link. Ron Paul farewell validates the urgent issue around dependency.