[privacy] Fuck Bush

[Larry Seltzer]

What the hell is all this doing on a privacy mailing list?  Take it
Full-Disclosure where chaos reigns

Larry Seltzer
eWEEK.com Security Center Editor
http://security.eweek.com/
http://blogs.pcmag.com/securitywatch/
Contributing Editor, PC Magazine
larry.seltzer at ziffdavisenterprise.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Dude VanWinkle [mailto:dudevanwinkle at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 7:23 PM
To: Brian Loe
Cc: privacy digest mailing list
Subject: Re: [privacy] Fuck Bush

On Dec 20, 2007 5:50 PM, Brian Loe <knobdy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 20, 2007 4:44 PM, Dude VanWinkle <dudevanwinkle at gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Keyes isn't listed either - and he's probably my favorite, now 
> > > that he's joined.
> >
> > I will have to check him out, as this is the first I have heard of
him..
> >
> > -JP
> >
>
> You won't like him. Well, maybe you will. While he states as fact that

> he's the most conservative Republican candidate in the race, which he 
> is, that makes him pretty libertarian. Think Ron Paul + religion - 
> conspiracy theories - POSSIBLE white trash ties - POSSIBLE antisemite.
>
> BUT, if you can find video of the debate he was in - I believe in SC -

> where he argued why the states should KEEP their confederate 
> flags...wow, inspiring.

Well, I instantly don't like anyone who believes that humans are
"special" and have a omnipotent and omniscient deity who cares about
what whether I shit or get off the pot (see douglas adams), but I will
still give it a try..

You gotta admit, from a science standpoint, the following would be a
good thing:

a.) Will work to "Restore scientific integrity by supporting the
independent work of government scientists, promoting innovation and
medical research, and by returning to evidence-based decision making."

b.) Ban "political appointees from altering or removing scientific
conclusions in government publications without any legitimate basis for
doing so."

c.) Prohibit "unwarranted suppression of public statements by government
scientists."

<removed>

e.) Restore "the science advisor's direct access to the President."

f.) Re-establish the Office of Technology Assessment.

g.) Strengthen "whistle blower protections for those who disclose
potential instances of political interference with science."

h.) Direct "department and agency heads to safeguard against political
pressure that threatens scientific integrity and to promote transparency
in decision making."

The person saying them may be a douchebag and a liar, but they are good
ideas..

-JP
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
privacy at whitestar.linuxbox.org
http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy