Not a single mention of Rand Paul by EFF. Is EFF stingy with credit, or do they just whitewash any mention of Paul out of Patriot Act subversion stories because he's not a Democrat?
Still a Twitter mention is hardly the same as mentioning it prominently in the announcement. If it were Rand Paul fighting the EFF, it's almost certain that he would be mentioned above the fold. I am also interested in why Hillary's pro-NSA position hasn't been discussed more by EFF. Have they ever criticized a prominent Democrat? Hillary has been a big NSA supporter as well as a customer during her time as Secretary of State. Obama is obviously a huge NSA advocate given he signed Patriot Act extensions.. Not a single word from the Hillary campaign about privacy. Of course, privacy and transparency aren't exactly Clintonian. What's sad is that large numbers of the tech community are still going to raise money and vote for her, regardless of the issues.
Rand Paul is a declared candidate for President, and the EFF does not make political endorsements, so they're probably trying to avoid discussing Rand Paul too much.
Even if that candidate directly helped to accomplish an EFF goal and the other candidates didn't? The EFF has a long history of calling out Republicans that oppose them, thus providing a tacit endorsement of Democrats.
Also EFF Executive Directory Cindy Cohn is a Democrat campaign contributor, supporting John Kerry in 2004. This there is no way they'll do anything to support a Republican. The EFF claims to be non partisan, but when their leadership financially supports political candidates, the logic of being non-partisan is somewhat thin.
If you invested $500 in a company, wouldn't you want that company to succeed? Thus it's impossible to be Jon partisan when you are actually partisan.
Perhaps the EFF is critical of the Republican party because by and large the Republican party has a far worse record on technological freedoms than the Democratic party, whose record is also abysmal.
And I think you must have a very short and selective memory if you think the EFF has not been taking Democrat leadership (especially Obama) to task over mass surveillance.
Additionally, I believe it is possible for individuals within organizations to hold personal opinions and not use those personal opinions to drive organizational policy. Thinking that everyone must subvert their own honest efforts with some sort of underlying agenda is cynical at best and paranoid at worst.
Well, when you're a political organization that doesn't make political endorsements as a matter of policy, there are all kinds of judgment calls that you make that reasonable people can disagree with.
Since the EFF is "neutral" towards the "FREEDOM Act", why should they be giving him props?
Then again, I'm still dumbfounded that the EFF is taking a neutral stance on this act. It really, really looks like a trojan horse at this point, "reforms" dressed up to keep the status quo chugging along for another five years.
There are a lot of liberal Democrats on the EFF's staff but they also have a lot of libertarians. Many libertarians support Rand Paul so I'd guess there are people on staff who support him. That said, they may not be the ones writing blog articles.
That's actually pretty sad. The bill didn't get renewed because one politician talked for hours, not because a majority think it's wrong to spy on your own citizens. Now the politicians that didn't get to vote to renew the bill can blame Rand Paul next time there's a terrorist attack in the US and not take any responsibility themselves.
