~ Featuring ~
Americans Should Demand 
Control Over Their Personal Data 
by Arnold Ahlert
Can't Stand Her 
~The Patriot Post 
Monuments To Failure – NO TRUMP BORDER WALL In SWAMP Sellout Budget Agreement 
{ } ~ There is nothing artful in the two-year budget deal that the sellout Senate is patting themselves on the back for coddling together in a “bipartisan” fashion... Bipartisan deals translate into those where Democrats win and Republicans cave under the weak protection of some face-saving component upon which to declare they got everything they could. McConnell is the master of bipartisan surrender. The current bill being shoved down the throats of the American people by the reckless, duplicitous swamp rats, clown-Schumer and turncoat-McConnell, increases spending by $296 billion but has not a cent for the border wall. That big, beautiful protective structure remains a figment of President Trump’s imagination and our own. If Congress wants to be reckless and irresponsible with our money, what’s another twenty billion or so to finance the wall? Then the savings would start to pile up. But they’re not going to let us secure our country. Our military is being funded but the invasion is still ongoing and won’t be stopped. Our military is, effectively, securing this plot of ground for foreigners who haven’t arrived yet, our replacements... https:///trump-border-wall-sellout/ 
Why is the Media Ignoring 
the Real Bombshell FISA Memo? 
by Guy Benson 
{ } ~ We'll bring you Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel's tweetstorm in a moment... but I'll take a stab at answering her question about the media right out of the gate.  Three possibilities:  (1) The GOP hyped the Nunes memo, which quickly became the center of this whole firestorm -- replete with counter-memos, FBI objections, etc. The press followed the spotlight. (2) As we've been saying, there are so many complex pieces of this larger puzzle, following the plot is difficult.  It's not just news consumers wondering, "which memo is this now?" -- it's many of the people trying to cover this drama, too. The document in question here is a second, less redacted, version of a Senate  memo that few people have even heard of. (3) The Senate memo, produced by non-bomb-throwers Chuck Grassley and RINO-Lindsey Graham, is substantially more disruptive to the Democrats' narrative than the Nunes document. And the press generally prefers Democratic narratives to Republican ones because most journalists are liberals...
Deal to avoid government shutdown by 
midnight hits snag in Congress
by Alex Pappas, Joseph Weber

{ } ~ A bipartisan deal to keep the government funded past midnight hit a major snag Thursday... 
as a last-minute maneuver in the Senate by Kentucky Republican Rand Paul to protest spending hikes raised the specter of another shutdown. Meanwhile, the legislation faces uncertainty in the House, where liberals, led by House Minority Leader Nancy Pulosi, are protesting a lack of protections for illegal immigrants brought to the United States as children and the conservative House Freedom Caucus is lining up against provisions ending spending caps. The Senate on Thursday afternoon had been scheduled to vote on a budget deal struck by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Paul's fellow Kentucky Republican, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck clown-Schumer, D-N.Y...
Rand Paul – Borrowing a MILLION a MINUTE 
Is a ROTTEN Trillion Dollar Deficit Deal 
{ } ~ Senator Rand Paul opposes the Senate Budget deal, telling Neal Cavuto it’s because “It spends too much money... borrows too much money and, actually, we’re going to bring back liar-nObama-era deficits. I was elected to combat liar-nObama-era deficits.” He says, “I remember running for office and saying we’re going to have trillion dollar annual deficits. That’s what we’re going to have this year. So now it’s Republicans in charge, busting all of the spending caps. The Democrats are complicit. Both parties, the establishment, want to spend more money. And I think part of the reason the markets are so jittery is they worry about the long-term imbalance of government debt.” Paul reminds Cavuto that we have a twenty trillion dollar debt and we’re adding another trillion to it. He says, “This is a rotten deal and not good for any of those of us who believe that you can get too much debt for a country to bear.”...

Assad-Backed Forces Poked U.S. Forces, Get Destroyed 
Paul Ryan To Dems: DON’T Use Our Troops As Bargaining Chips
The Battle for Andrew McCabe’s Text Messages
Sid Vicious and the liar-Clintons
Dem Julian Castro Attacks commie-Bernie Sanders & loose lips-Joe Biden As Too Old For 2020
In 2014 Chuck clown-Schumer Called For A Military Parade

Americans Should Demand Control Over Their Personal Data 

by Arnold Ahlert:  By now, most Americans are familiar with the experience of searching for something on the Internet, and then seeing a plethora of ads for that something on virtually every other website they visit. Whether they realize it or not — or worse, think it’s great — such data sharing represents a massive invasion of privacy. And yet a fundamental question remains unanswered: Why are tech titans allowed to share our data — without our permission?

          With an exception for “fair use” that permits one to copy small portions of an original work for certain purposes such as scholarship or commentary, when one creates that work, copyright law protects one from having that work shared or exploited without specific permission. Yet despite the fact that we are all unique individuals, “data brokers” glean and sell personal information, not only without our permission, but without our knowledge.
          Unsurprisingly, Congress has failed to adequately address the issue. The “Data Broker Accountability and Transparency Act” was introduced by the Senate — in 201420152016 and 2017 — but has yet to go anywhere other than the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Moreover, it is the essence of toothless legislation, requiring only that data brokers obtain and disseminate accurate information and “provide individuals a cost-free means to review their personal or identifying information.” Requiring permission to disseminate that data? Nowhere to be found.
          In 2016, the FCC adopted privacy rules that required Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Comcast and Verizon to get customers’ permission to sell their data to marketers. That adoption followed a 3-2 vote along party lines, and it was Democrats, not Republicans, who opted to protect consumers. The rules would have required the ISPs to not only notify their customers about what information is collected and how it is shared, but require opt-in consent rather than opt-out consent. The distinction is important because the latter option automatically defaults to the companies’ interests, not those of the consumer.
          Unfortunately, the FCC’s ruling never went into effect. In March 2017, both the Republican-controlled Senate and House voted to nullify the FCC’s proposal. President Donald Trump signed that nullification into law last April.
          The GOP’s rationale? ISP providers convinced them the regulation would put them at a competitive disadvantage with companies like Google and Facebook, which are regulated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Republicans insisted the FCC overstepped its authority and that it was up to the FTC to keep those so-called edge providers — as in companies that provide content, application or service over the Internet as opposed to those who provide Internet service itself — in line. Republicans further asserted that having the FCC and the FTC regulate different aspects of Internet use by consumers would “create confusion within the Internet ecosystem and end up harming consumers,” as Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) put it.
          In terms of personal privacy, that distinction is specious nonsense, and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) asked the essential question: “How much privacy are people in this country entitled to?
          Not much, apparently. Not when ISPs and edge providers can sell our data without our permission.
          What data? The FCC sought user permission before tech giants could share the following: precise geolocation; children’s information; health and financial information; Social Security numbers; web browsing and app usage histories; and the content of communication.
          Craig Aron, CEO of Free Press, a public advocacy group, hammered the legislation prior to the its passage. “There is literally no public support for this bill,” he stated. “Its only advocates are the nation’s biggest phone, cable and Internet companies. There’s no longer any question — if there ever was — whose needs this administration intends to serve. But people everywhere are on high alert to the serious threat to the free and open Internet. And they will fight back.”
          Will they? A 2016 survey conducted by Pew Research reveals that while 74% of Americans insist it is “very important” to them to be in control of their data, only half expressed confidence that they understood how that data might be used.
          Moreover, their “risk-benefit calculations,” as in what data they’re willing to release to obtain services, products, etc., are all over the map. For example, a 52% majority would willingly share health information, but only 27% would opt for installing a “smart” thermostat in their homes.
          Yet most telling, those surveyed used words such as “resigned,” “inevitable,” “hopeless” and a “way of life” to describe how they felt about the possibility of resisting the collection of their personal data.
          More disturbing, experts canvassed by Pew “argued that privacy was no longer a ‘condition’ of American life. Rather, they asserted that it was becoming a commodity to be purchased,” the website stated.
          In short, reality bites. “An average Facebook user has no way of knowing or appreciating the mountain of data the company has collected on them,” columnist Kevin Carty explains.
          Even worse? “America’s biggest tech giants have at least as much power as John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan did in the early 20th century; it is just much harder to see,” he adds.
          Carty advocates using anti-trust laws to “go after the biggest tech platforms” and “resume the trust-busting that freed Americans from companies like Standard Oil and plutocrats like J.P. Morgan.
          Given the predatory business practices many of these tech giants engage in, as well as their use of “instituted algorithms that allow for the suppression of opinions with which their highly opinionated management disagrees,” as columnist Angelo Codevilla aptly states, that is a noble goal. But it will do nothing to protect Americans’ personal data.
          The European Union is addressing the problem. On May 25, 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will take effect following three years of negotiations among member nations. While it still allows entities like Google and Amazon to process data to provide their services, GDPR will prevent them from using that data for any other purposes without user permission. This “purpose limitation” requires personal data to be “collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes.
          The law further notes that broad, non-specific consent doesn’t cut it. “A purpose that is vague or general, such as for instance ‘Improving users’ experience’, ‘marketing purposes’, or ‘future research’ will — without further detail — usually not meet the criteria of being ‘specific,’” it states.
          The law also requires data collecting entities to appoint a data protection officer, and companies that fail to do so can be fined as much as 4% of their global annual turnover.
          American should demand similar, or even more stringent legislation. With a possible exception for criminal records, there is no reason whatsoever why Americans must resign themselves to living in a world where something as precious as personal privacy becomes “a commodity to be purchased.” The alternative? Living in a society that would make George Orwell blush.   

~The Patriot Post

Views: 38


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson


Obama Lies Again: – Ignores That The Year After Signing The Stimulus More Than (4) Million Jobs Were Lost

Former President Obama, the only President in US history who had his FBI and other Intel agencies spy on the opposition party candidate, claims that he created the great economy that Americans are enjoying today. The only thing Obama created was debt and massive job losses with his horrible economic recovery.

Yesterday the former President tweeted an effort to take credit for President Trump’s successful economy:

Joe Hoft@joehoft

Of course another @BarackObama lie. He can’t open his mouth without lying. 11 years ago the US lost (4.3) million jobs over the next 12 months. Horrible liar. 

Barack Obama  @BarackObama

Eleven years ago today, near the bottom of the worst recession in generations, I signed the Recovery Act, paving the way for more than a decade of economic growth and the longest streak of job creation in American history.

President Obama’s policies were a disgrace and a failure. He doubled the national debt in spite of zero interest rates from the Fed. His recovery was the worst in US history.

Also, Obama’s assertion is just plain false. The ‘Stimulus’ was passed in February 2009 right after Obama took over the Presidency. He promised to not pass any bills for at least a week to allow for the bills to be read by the people but lied as soon as he was sworn in. The Stimulus was hundreds and hundreds of pages of government handouts to Democrat districts and it was close to $1 million. This was not what America needed and it led to the Tea Party.

Far-left Wikipedia has this to say about the Stimulus:

Note that in his infinite wisdom, NYT economist Paul Krugman is credited with arguing that “the stimulus was far smaller than the economic crisis warranted”. (He also said the markets would crash and burn if President Trump was elected President.)

The data shows that the 12 months after Obama’s stimulus, the US lost 4.3 million jobs:

In Obama’s first three years he netted a loss of 1.5 million jobs compared to President Trump who has added more than 6.7 million jobs.

When it comes to the economy, the billionaire schools the community organizer every time.

Tucker: Bloomberg is trying to buy the election

© 2020   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service