Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to Surfinusa
Re: [POLL] Immunity or not; what say you? said by Surfinusa:it might be a little dramatic to say those opposed to immunity could be called frantic. Read the subject lines. "Immunity: No!" Or, the obviously biased editorialism directing people to an activist org. Misquoting founders.
It looks much more frantic to me than those who support immunity.
Mark |
|
| said by amigo_boy:said by Surfinusa:it might be a little dramatic to say those opposed to immunity could be called frantic. Misquoting founders. It looks much more frantic to me than those who support immunity. Mark Misquoting founders?
Explain a little more what you mean?
I understand your concern though. EFF can be zealous about what they do but the check and balance doesn't always balance. Sometimes the scale gets tipped in all democracies.
No form of Government operates perfectly.
Would you agree with that? |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by Surfinusa:Misquoting founders? Explain a little more what you mean? The Franklin quote which usually omits the qualifiers "essential" and "temporary." Or, just quoting the founders on matters of rights and limited government while ignoring that the founders rejected the most minimal government (Articles of Confederation) after just *eleven* year in favor of a relatively gigantic government, with exceptions like "reasonable" searches, etc.
The founding generation embraced vastly more intrusion of government (relatively speaking) than any other generation since. Why? Because they were pragmatic. Just like modern society. But, you'd never get that from the way self-styled freedom fighters depict those events in absolute terms.
said by Surfinusa:No form of Government operates perfectly. Would you agree with that? I agree completely. That's why I'm not too worked up about what happened. Nothing's been perfect. We've survived. The system worked this time. It's the ones who can't accept this which the telcos should be protected from. (IMO).
Mark |
|
