Obama Administration Wants Your Old Email 639
Nemesisghost wrote to us with a story about attempts to reform the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Under the act, messages left on a server are considered abandoned after six months and are trivially subpoenaed by law enforcement. A group of ISPs is lobbying to extend the protections afforded to locally stored messages to messages stored on third party servers, but the Obama administration is urging Congress not to reform the law.
Cloud Computing (Score:5, Interesting)
Not totally against this. (Score:4, Interesting)
However I disagree with the consideration that emails on a web server that are 6 months old on are abandoned.. i have 6 year old emails on the web that i still refer to occasionally, with a push to the more efficient cloud computing its important to recognize this, a web based email account should be considered the same as a PO box as far as privacy is concerned.
Abandonment Term (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's increase this term to Life + 95 years for e-mails sent by people, 120 years for those sent by corporations (including works for hire). For e-mails that are in the outbox, drafts, or any other unsent mail, it's life + 95 years, or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever is shorter.
Because he ain't BUSH!!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
Really it seems to be what most of it turns into. Far too many were willing to take anything "but Bush"; and many true conservatives were in the camp of anyone but McCain yet we still had our senses and would never vote for Obama; that as soon as the press piled on no one else in the Democratic party had a chance. Sorry, but Hillary would have made a much better President. This guy really comes off as someone who could step outside in the rain and not decide that its raining.
We have near record prices at the pump, we have very high unemployment, we have the Libyan issue, Gitmo, the Bush started wars, and we have deficit spending at a level I don't even think Bush would have tried. Yet what we don't have is a press willing to take Obama on. They seem to still be enamored with him. At least when we had Bush in office we could count on the press to constantly ride his ass over every little thing. While it got tiresome on some fronts it kept people informed as to what was going on and what was being done. Hell, where are all the Democrats screaming about gasoline prices now? Can you imagine the outrage if Bush had said "get used to it?"
The last thing America needs is a President the press likes, the worst possible outcome is a President they are essentially in love with. Obama comes of as Bush Squared. Meaning, if it was bad under Bush it is just as bad under Obama if not worse. Hell, I think he managed to pick an AG worse than than Bush.
With the Republicans in charge of Congress I was hoping that Obama would wake up and try to lead. Before the losses in 10 he was overly willing to allow Democratic leadership to run amok in Congress and lead on any idea he wanted. He would not make decisions, define the goal, or even try to compromise. As such we got abominations of bills and no clear leadership. We had a Congress which REFUSED to submit a budget for consideration simply because the Democratic leadership at the time did not want to deal with it during an election year and suddenly if you asked the press it is all the Republican's fault for not passing what should have been passed LAST YEAR under Pelosi.
No, we need to get back to Presidents the press don't like. I know it sounds like a negative but the point is, the very people that many Americans need to provide them the truth about their government apparently need incentive to investigate it.
This Presidency is more about Wall Street and big money than Bush ever was. There are rumors of a BILLION dollar reelection campaign. Tell me how that is representative of main street and the American people.
As for accomplishments. I find them all neutered simply because of the deficit and the his lack of trying to fix it. We cannot tax our way out of it, we could take 100% of the earnings above 250k per year for those who earn it and still not reduce it by half. We simply spend too much and very few on either side of the aisle are even trying to do anything about it.