Republicans and Democrats andswer me this.?

Question

I read a couple of questions regarding the country being under surveilance. What I don't understand is this, those who are Republican always say, "I don't got anything to hide, so I'm ok with it", or "If it makes you uncomfortable, maybe you got something to hide". What sense does that make? Are they saying that if they got into the shower and then saw a group of people looking at them, they would not mind at all? If you did mind then you got something to hide? Maybe some of us just like to have privacy.

Answer 1

What you're forgetting is, that those who support the crimes of this administration, are guilty of a lot of things, but, having indepentant thought is NOT one of them!!!! ~ They are only "Parroting" their talking points, received from their hero, Rush "Limpballs" Limbaugh!!!! ~ If any of these overzealous "Sheeple" ever did stop to think, perhaps, they just might remember a skeleton or two, in thier own closets!!!! (Like that talk with their tax accountant, or something of similar ilk!!) LOL!!!

Doc

• "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin

Answer 2

Once again, like with everything else, it's all politics and one-sided Lies.

I hardly believe that republicans feel any less threatened by invasions to their privacy than most anybody else. But they follow perfect, unyielding paths down straight and narrow party lines, and never dare they waver. But it's THEIR party in the White House, Congress, the Senate, and even the Supreme Court. And with virtually every essential category in the Country going down the crapper nonstop for six straight years, only a few brave republicans have broken from the Party Consensus to voice an opinion of their own on anything.

And then they wonder why people compare Bush and them to Hitler and the Nazis...

Don't get me wrong... there is no person dead or alive I'll ever despise as much individually as I do Hitler.

But without his legion of mindless followers, Hitler would have been naught but a failed painter, drinking himself slowly to death in a beer hall, barely surviving on selling a few shoddy paintings of landscapes and ducks and old windmills.

So, collectively, it's the nazis I really loathe. If not for them, Hitler would have been a total failure, a nobody, as Nature had intended.

I'm sure there's a lesson to be learned in there somewhere.

The "Patriot" Act is anything but. And every damned one of us knows it, whether our Party Line will ever admit to it or not.

If we give up our true freedom and redefine it as mister Bush does, the terrorists have already won.

And I'm a helluva lot more scared of what Bush and his kind have already done to this Country (and what they will do) than what those other bozos could ever do. Or even what they have already done.

Answer 3

I have nothing to hide but do I want to open the door to letting any future employers knowing every detail about my life? Perhaps because I'm getting a little older these problems become clearer. I also worry if the government runs any better the any company I have ever worked for. I doubt it and fact is we all make mistakes so if somebody is asleep at the wheel when they are processing your information how much can that mess up your life. Ask anybody who has ever had a problem with the IRS.

Answer 4

There is too much misinformation about Government surveillance. The Government is not and cannot listen to your phone calls, read your email, or search your house without a warrant. The government has wiretapped and recorded international phone calls. However, the government has been doing that for years, by merely doing it from the overseas location. A call made from France to the US, or the US to Pakistan, can be legally tapped, if the tap takes place outside US borders. The only difference now, is they are doing it from virginia, instead of Europe.
I am much more concerned about the universal placement of cameras on highways, sidewalks, malls, and every public location, than I am about listening in on international phone calls.

Answer 5

As it typical with politics, too much is made of the surveillance issue on both sides of the aisle. Of COURSE government should be keeping a close eye on those it determines have ties to terrorist networks. The sticky part comes in HOW they determine who has such connections.
Given this unprecedented scenario, it would see that the best course of action would be for the government to implement a plan and have the Supreme Court rule on its constitutionality. ... Which, BTW, is what's about to happen with the wiretapping program.

Answer 6

This I don't have anything to hide argument is always the one but how about 'There but for the grace of God am I and one day they might stick me in Guantanamo.'

The real baddies get around all this stuff, they are professionals and the government knows this so who is it aimed at? Who will suffer?

You yanks are turning into an international joke, you go on about how you are the protectors of freedom (enough to make a cat laugh) and look at what Bush is doing in America!!!

Stand up and fight for your rights or you will lose them (the ones you have left that is).

Answer 7

No, they're not saying that. At least I don't feel that way. I don't want people watching me in the shower! However, I am not horribly against someone listening to my phonecalls to the middle-east. You have to weigh what's important. Stopping terrorist cells or having Agent Smith listen to you discuss the weather. It's just not that important to me. I think this harping on our freedoms is a smoke screen as well. This isn't a "free" country, this is a nation of laws. I am not free to walk naked down the street. I am not free to hit people that cut in front of me in line. If the law ultimately decides its legal for the Prez. to listen into INTERNATIONAL calls, than that's the law.

Answer 8

The people who say they don't mind the wholesale wiretapping, data mining, and database compiling don't understand the implications of this or how even relatively innocuous information can be gathered used against them. They don't get that it's easy to lose privacy and civil rights but very difficult to regain them.

Answer 9

I feel unless you are using your bank account to funnel large sums of money to terrorist cells, or are speaking about bombs and federal building schematics on your cell phone than none of that really pertains to you. The federal government has to much to worry about with "real" terrorist cells living and operating in America to worry about what the average American is up too. I say if it is going to prevent another 9-11 than invade my privacy and listen to me "go over my shopping list or plan what to have for dinner," just make sure that America remains a safe place to raise my children in.

Answer 10

Republicans do not want our privacy violated any more than you do.

However, we are able to rationalize that in some cases, we must be willing to make exceptions for the safety of the nation. For instance, if I buy a virtually untraceable prepaid cell phone, and call afghanastan during a time of war, I should not be offended if the gov't is listening in on that call, considering they don't know who is making it (because its a prepaid cell phone).