Bush jumps into privacy fight, backs controversial NSA program

[Warlord]

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is putting his weight behind controversial spying programs at the National Security Agency, setting up a battle within the Republican Party ahead of the 2016 presidential race.

In a major foreign policy address at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on Wednesday, the likely presidential candidate praised the NSA’s bulk collection of Americans’ phone data, which critics call a massive invasion of privacy.

“This is a hugely important program to use these technologies to keep us safe,” Bush said.

“For the life of me, I don’t understand [how] the debate has gotten off-track,” he added, while maintaining that program rules “do protect our civil liberties.”

The defense of the program puts Bush at odds with the libertarian wing of the Republican Party, including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

more:
http://thehill.com/policy/technolog...cy-fight-by-backing-controversial-nsa-program

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

Given the amount of people who want Snowden's head on a pike, it's not unrealistic to expect him to get a lot of backing from voters on this.

 

[Warlord]

Given the amount of people who want Snowden's head on a pike, it's not unrealistic to expect him to get a lot of backing from voters on this.

He's going to collide with Rand Paul on this and the tech world. This is a perfect issue for us.

 

[eleganz]

He's doubling down, there can't be two Rands on this issue on the debate stage.

 

[devil21]

Pretty much all of Bush's positions are more of the same. GHWB and GWB have been good for the family business. Why would John Ellis Bush change anything?

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

Doesn't Bush realize that Republicans don't like the NSA anymore because Obama's President. They'll return to unquestioning support of its tactics when a Republican gets elected though.

 

[devil21]

I'm watching the speech on CSPAN now. He's not even close to ready for prime time. He's a bad orator.

jeeez he's a downright terrible speaker. no wonder his coverage is all polls and text articles and no video.

 

[cindy25]

perfect issue for a general election. but I'm not so sure about a primary dominated by older , security obsessed voters. maybe in NH but IA and SC?

 

[Stratovarious]

Jeb ....“For the life of me, I don’t understand [how] the debate has gotten off-track,” he added, while maintaining that program rules “do protect our civil liberties.”





..
Civil liberties are protected by taking them away.



..
I get it !




..

 

[limequat]

Jeb ....“For the life of me, I don’t understand [how] the debate has gotten off-track,” he added, while maintaining that program rules “do protect our civil liberties.”




..
Civil liberties are protected by taking them away.



..
I get it !




..

No when he says "our" he means them. The Bushes, Clintons, etc. The NSA protects their civil liberties while trampling on ours (you and me).

 

[Lucille]

Jeb Bush: "I don't understand the debate" Over the NSA's Bulk Phone Records Collection Program
It doesn't work. It's unconstitutional. And it intrudes deeply into the privacy of millions.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/19/jeb-bush-i-dont-understand-the-debate-ov

It's a short remark, but it says a lot—both about Bush and the current way that the program is defended.

What Bush offered is a classic non-defense defense. Not only does it signal support for the program, a favorite of Bush administration hawks, it suggests surprise at the idea that anyone would find the program controversial or worthy of discussion. It's not so much an attempt to defend the program as it is an attempt to minimize, and arguably to entirely dismiss, debate about the program.

How could anyone be bothered by the program? After all, it doesn't collect call content, and, as the Journal notes, "supporters say it helps the U.S. government prevent terrorist attacks."

For one thing, there is, at minimum, disagreement over whether it actually prevents attacks. As a task force created by the Obama administration to review the program found in 2013, "the information contributed to terrorist investigations by the use of section 215 telephony meta-data was not essential to preventing attacks and could readily have been obtained in a timely manner using conventional section 215 orders."

As Cato Institute scholar Julian Sanchez noted in The Atlantic, the report's authors concluded that, contrary to assertions by defenders that the program was vital in dozens of cases, the metadata program "generated relevant information in only a small number of cases, and there has been no instance in which NSA could say with confidence that the outcome would have been different without the section 215 telephony meta-data program."

And then there are the significant constitutional concerns. The indiscriminate program affects millions, most of whom have no connection to terror, but it was started in secret and operates with little oversight.

A little more than a year ago, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, a judge appointed by President George W. Bush, wrote in a ruling that he could not "imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval. Surely," he said, "such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the Founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment."

So it probably doesn't work, and there's a strong argument that it violates the Constitution. Those both sound to me like pretty good reasons for a debate.

But forget all that for a moment. Does Jeb Bush truly not understand that some people—indeed, quite a lot of people—might find a vast, secret, program to spy on millions of citizens to be a little bit creepy? That many in the public might understandably find this to be a potential government overreach, or an abuse of federal power?

Perhaps he really doesn't. If so, that should disqualify him from the GOP's presidential nomination before his run even officially starts. But I doubt that he is truly as flummoxed by concerns about the program as his dismissive remark suggests.

Instead, I suspect he knows all too well what the program entails, what its critics argue, and why it has remained a topic of controversy for so long. But Jeb Bush does not want to defend the particulars of the initiative so much as he wants to publicly stand by his brother's administration and then settle the issue by declaring that it is not one. Despite his declaration yesterday that he is his "own man," and not his brother or father, he would not even broach the possibility that his brother's program might be deserving of any critique.

Put another way: Jeb Bush claims he doesn't understand the debate because he doesn't want there to be a debate. But there is one, and if he is to run for president, he will have to take part in it.

 

[Brett85]

He's doubling down, there can't be two Rands on this issue on the debate stage.

There will be, because Cruz opposes the NSA surveillance program as well.

 

[William Tell]

Nobody is surprised by this.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

There will be, because Cruz opposes the NSA surveillance program as well.

He's better than average, but not as good as Rand. But still, I'd gladly take Cruz over Bush.

 

[Stratovarious]

No when he says "our" he means them. The Bushes, Clintons, etc. The NSA protects their civil liberties while trampling on ours (you and me).

No politician left behind.

 

[CaptUSA]

When speaking about the practice of opening and reviewing mail, door-to-door searches, and examining the private papers of merchants and other colonists, King George said:

“This is a hugely important program to use these practices to keep the colonists safe,” King George said.

“For the life of me, I don’t understand [how] the debate has gotten off-track,” he added, while maintaining that program rules “do protect their silly little civil liberties.”