montecarlo1

Here is where the eternal dilemma of "the government knows whats best for its citizens" versus " the government is seeking whats in the best interest for its citizens" comes into play. Having worked in the federal government, i don't think this dilemma will ever be solved for the same reasons you stated.

But every event (terrorist or other) that occurs pushes us to a more surveillance state and flexes the muscles of these policies further and further to the point where we find ourselves today.

How old are you? let me guess 28?

What has been the relationship between the AP and Venezuelan officials? At least from the outside looking in, most of the media has been persecuted if they dared to go against the local government.

Its almost the only thing that we as citizens don't vote on. No political candidate ever puts less privacy as a campaign issue. No nobody runs for expansion of FISA or more surveillance. No candidate says we're gonna collect more data to protect our citizens. Yet, in every administration surveillance within intelligence agencies increase and its fueled by congressional support. We don't punish companies for mega private data breaches, we even let them profit off them.

Which goes back to my original thesis.

How do you from the state legislature plan to get money out of politics? Alot of people on both sides (liberals and conservatives) think that a systematic change like this needs to happen for us to truly start progressing as a society.