It is now legal for Verizon, Comcast, AT&T, et. al. to collect whatever personal data about you that they can glean from your online presence. Then they can sell it to whomever they please for whatever purpose. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
- Information about your finances
- Information about your health
- Information about your spouse and children
- Your home address and phone number
- Your social security number
- The web sites you visit
- The content of your online communications
You should particularly note the item in bold: Your social security number is for sale. Let me rephrase that: Your identity is for sale. There is no single item of information about you that is more critical to protect than your SS number. That is the Holy Grail of identity thieves. With your SS number, they can potentially access your bank account, acquire credit cards in your name, open lines of credit, make purchases, get loans … I’m sure there are things they know of that I can’t even imagine.
Congress has given away your identity. More precisely, they have sold your identity to Comcast, et. al. for job security — that is, the money to finance their next campaign. Let me be even more precise: The vote to overturn the relevant privacy regulation was strictly along party lines. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine which party voted to favor corporations over your privacy.
What’s the rationale behind this reprehensible decision? To level the playing field so that AT&T and friends have access to the same info as Google, Facebook, etc. OK, how about this possibility — level the playing field in the other direction, towards more protection for your privacy than less.
I’m betting that question never came up.
The new regime in Washington has promised to make America safe again. Here’s what has been done or proposed so far:
The regime’s proposals and actions are worse than useless in making American safe again — they’re downright antithetical to that goal. If a president were genuinely concerned about making America safe, she or he would focus on research in cures for diseases, research in self-driving cars, and gun control. That’s where we could save lives.
I have often recently read letters to our local paper (the Oregonian) that we who protest the policies and actions of the Trump regime are crybabies who just can’t stand to lose an election without balling our fists, stomping our feet, and wailing like bereft toddlers. “You lost. Get over it.” we’re told. “Deal with it. Stop whining.”
You mean like the Tea Party, formed after Obama’s election in 2008? Formed in response to the Obama administration’s plans to provide financial aid to bankrupt homeowners? Who held up signs at highway overpasses saying “Hands off my Medicare” in their demands for small government? Who arranged protests across more than 40 cities in February, 2009? Those quiet, tolerant folks?
Or maybe you mean the Republican Party? The party that never got over Obama’s election, that declared from day one that they would oppose anything — anything — that Obama put forward. And then they did, for eight years. That’s certainly an example of dealing with it. Not to mention a shining example of good governance.
Here’s the thing. It’s our right — no, it’s our obligation — as citizens of the United States to make our voices heard. Sure, we voted (in greater numbers than the “winners” as it turns out), but that’s not the end of it. We write letters, we march, we rally our friends, we make placards, we yell, we donate, we attend town halls, we sign petitions, we call our Congressfolks, we do whatever is legally available to us to make our opposition to the Trump regime clear.
You’re going to be hearing from us for as long as it takes. Get over it.
It’s time to ditch the Electoral College, or at least fix it. It’s a profoundly undemocratic institution, conceived in the days when the only voters were white, male property owners and intended to placate the small states so that they’d join the United States in the first place. It is particularly undemocratic in its modern form, in which electors for a state are all legally bound to cast their votes for the winner in that state.
In our recent election, approximately 77,000 votes gave Trump victory in 3 battleground states and victory in the Electoral College. Meanwhile, the popular vote went 3+ million votes the other way. Proportionally divided Electoral College votes would obviously have changed the outcome. The same can be said of the 2000 election, in which Al Gore won the popular vote, albeit more narrowly. But even if only Florida’s EC votes had been divided proportionally, Gore would have won — and, incidentally, Nader wouldn’t have been a spoiler (a fact for which I’ve never forgiven him, but that’s another topic).
In the abstract, I imagine every person-in-the-street sees one-person-one-vote as the fairest way to decide elections. Why then do we persist in this anachronistic, flawed institution?
Among the first to be deported in our new war on immigrants:
- Guadalupe García de Rayos, a working mother of two US-born children, who reported to US Immigration authorities this year as she has every six months or year since 2009
- An undocumented woman in El Paso who was seeking a protective order against the boyfriend she accused of abusing her
I certainly feel safer now. And I’m sure this will convince other undocumented immigrants that they can continue to trust the courts, schools, and hospitals.
- The crime rate of undocumented immigrants is lower than that of US citizens (AKA sons and daughters of previous immigrants).
- In recent years, more Mexicans have been leaving the U.S. to return home than have been arriving.
Mass deportation of undocumented immigrants will break up families, send them underground, and actually increase our per-capita crime rate.