Who is listening-in on your phone calls? Probably nobody. Right now, there is huge interest in phone tapping in the United States because the Bush Administration (through the National Security Agency) was caught listening in without appropriate court orders. What I have noticed is that, for all the talking and writing on this subject, there seems to be very little real information being presented. So this column is my attempt to share what I've learned about the topic. It might surprise you.

Gold star

[ Whatever. Cringley has never impressed me overmuch, and he hasn't changed my mind with this. He equivocates on the legality issue by arguing that these warrantless taps would have been disapproved by the FISA process, so Bush did it anyway.

That sounds a little bit like arguing that a glaucoma sufferer knew they weren't gonna get approved for medical marijuana, so they bought some on the street, and when caught, said "But it's medical!" The substantial error in my analogy is that the Administration isn't suffering from some crippling ailment, other than it's egomaniacal passion for centralized power.

I'm as fond of life as the next guy and I don't want it vaporized by a terrorist, but I'm completely unwilling to accept that this permanent war we've gotten ourselves into gives the Executive free reign to do whatever occurs to him. -k]

Cringley on phone tapping

For four generations, our family has worked hard to serve this country we love. I enlisted as a young man of seventeen into the United States Navy, so I could serve my nation in WWII. My brother did the same, and we both served in South Pacific. My son dedicated his life to patriotic and religious causes, which have made this nation great. He gave unsparingly of his time and resources to help those in need.

An open reply to Frank Abramoff:

Mr. Abramoff, I am sorry to say I did not watch the event of which you speak, and I would doubt that the intention of Mr. Clooney was to insult your father, or to insult the service you gave this country. The comment was the sort of sophomoric humor found in high schools across the country, and certainly not in the best of taste.

That being said, your son has pled guilty to working to destroy those very same things that you fought for 65 years ago. He has turned the good name of your father into a curse for all that wrong about politics, and specifically the Republican Party, in America.

Abraham Lincoln said at Gettysburg, "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Your son has worked vigorously to eliminate the "of the people, by the people, for the people" part from that statement, and that statement IS America. It is what separates us from the rest of the world, and makes this a country worthy of the service you gave it.

I am sorry that your family and family name is being dragged down by the actions of your son, but he did it, he admitted doing it, and those actions are against everything that this coutry stands for. Mr. Clooney's insults pale in comparison to the damage done to all of us by Jack's actions.

USATODAY.com - Abramoff's dad bashes Clooney's 'ridiculous attack'

ibenez wrote:

What is the problem here? Can someone tell me what the problem is with beating the f@#$king shit out of people?

As long as they don't dismember or kill the prisoners, they are enemy - treat them as such. I'm sorry but the first HEAD they chopped off threw the Geneva conventions right out the fucking window.

There are many problems here, my bloodthirsty friend.

The first of which is that the Geneva conventions don't apply to loosely bound terrorists with no national affiliation. They *do* apply to signatory nations who agreed to abide by certain rules for some minimal civility in the conduct of military actions. They apply to us, or should, because we believe that certain actions are morally reprehensible and that performing them reduces us to the same base level as the butchers we're fighting. It may be that you belive that the end justifies the means, and that anyone's actions justify an equal, or even more severe, reaction, in which case, feel free to continue believing so... just don't make the assumption that the rest of America agrees with you.

Second, you describe torture as "beating the fucking shit out of people", which I think minimizes the reality of the situation. We're not talking about a beating. We're talking about long term physical and mental anguish. These are not the same, and if a person is not cabable of facing the reality of what we mean when we say "torture" then they're in no position to advocate for it. I don't say that's your situation, mind you... I have no trouble believing you both know and favor exactly the kinds of duress implied by torture. This at least makes you not hypocritical.

The most serious problem, though, with this particular case, is the secrecy of it all. McCain has some knowledge of POW camps, and believes that America should not the kind of place that condones or engages in similar activity. Likewise, I imagine, he feels that the American public agree, and regard torture as a repugnant and immoral activity. We can't really know, of course, because most of the public doesn't bother to face up to the issue. They have some vague notion of what torture is and base an opinion on that knowledge. The administration well knows that the american public, who *ought* to be in charge of this country, wouldn't stand for it if they knew the details, so the details are classified and tacked onto the Army field manual so as to comply with the letter of the law, but completely defeat the spirit of it.

My fundamental belief is that we shouldn't be afraid to be honest about our practices. America is the greatest and strongest nation on earth... if the people of this country support torture, then lets say so, and tell our enemies exactly what they can expect if they're so foolish as to fall into our hands. If the people *don't* support it, then we shouldn't do it. But lets not tuck it away and feed everyone more pabulum about "achieving victory". We were founded on the notion that humans are capable of applying Reason to their own self-governance. Transparency is freedom's best friend... without it we are lost.

I think McCain believes that America should be a nation that leads by example and, as such, doesn't engage in the same horrific activities as it's enemies. To do so requires more strenth and more resolve than acting on animal urges. Meeting torture with torture, hate with hate, and rage with rage ought to be below us. Rather than accepting this, the administration gave McCain a patronizing nod and then subverted his efforts without a blink. *That's* why McCain should be pissed.

RE: New Army Rules May Snarl Talks With McCain on Detainee Issue - New York Times

Walgreen Co. said it has put four Illinois pharmacists in the St. Louis area on unpaid leave for refusing to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception in violation of a state rule.

The four cited religious or moral objections to filling prescriptions for the morning-after pill and "have said they would like to maintain their right to refuse to dispense, and in Illinois that is not an option," Walgreen spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce said.

Good for Walgreen's and good for Illinois. If you have a "religious or moral" reason for not doing your job, that means you're doing the wrong job.

[ Precisely. Those pharmacists have every right to refuse to dispense contraceptives. If, in high school, I had been a strict Straightedge, and, on the basis of my morality, refused to sell people alcohol or cigarettes in my job as a grocery store cashier, that would have been my right too. And I'd have gotten fired for it. And that would have been correct. Every employee has the *right* to refuse to do their job for any reason whatsoever, but they certainly don't have the right to keep their job after doing so. -k]

Ill. Pharmacists Withhold Emergency Pill - Yahoo! News

Ah yes, it is that time again. The smell of roasting turkey and cigar smoke and Polo cologne, perfume like florid gasoline. Copious forced laughter that sounds like geese mating in a broom closet. It is Thanksgiving dinner at the Bush White House, where the guests mingle as though their genitals were being squeezed by manic elves, as if they were all coated in vanilla pudding being licked off by Pat Robertson. Which, truth be told, some of them seem to enjoy. A lot.

[ Wow. I'm not too mature to enjoy crass mocking from time to time, so that part was entertaining, but the last paragraph is where the meat is. Thanks be given indeed. -k]

Scenes From A Bush Thanksgiving / Dubya pouts, Cheney scowls, no one brings pie -- and why is Rove looking at Barb that way?

Drawing the distinction even further between a liberal religious believer and the Religious Right, Yoffie continued, saying that the former believe that “’family values’ requires providing health care to every child and that God cares about the 12 million children without health insurance.

“It means valuing a child with diabetes over a frozen embryo in a fertility clinic, and seeing the teaching of science as a primary social good.

And it means reserving the right for each person to prayerfully make decisions for herself about when she dies.”

And, he said, “it means believing in legal protection for gay couples,” noting that there is room for disagreement about gay marriage, “but there is no excuse for hateful rhetoric that fuels the hellfires of anti-gay bigotry.”

Yoffie accused the Religious Right of refusing to acknowledge that there are religious perspectives different from its own, and of misreading religious texts sacred to both Christians and Jews. He noted that “the Bible, both Hebrew and Christian, has far more to say about caring for the poor than about eradicating sexual sin.”

hear fucking hear.

Union for Reform Judaism - Leader Criticizes Religious Right for Intolerance

1 Some electronic voting systems did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, thus making it possible to alter them without detection.

2 It is easy to alter a file defining how a ballot appears, making it possible for someone to vote for one candidate and actually be recorded as voting for an entirely different candidate.

3 Falsifying election results without leaving any evidence of such an action by using altered memory cards.

4 Access to the voting network was easily compromised because not all digital recording electronic voting systems (DREs) had supervisory functions password-protected, so access to one machine provided access to the whole network.

5 Supervisory across to the voting network was also compromised by repeated use of the same user IDs combined with easily guessed passwords.

6 The locks protecting access to the system were easily picked and keys were simple to copy.

7 One DRE model was shown to have been networked in such a rudimentary fashion that a power failure on one machine would cause the entire network to fail.

8 GAO identified further problems with the security protocols and background screening practices for vendor personnel.

Holy shit!

Daily Kos: Nonpartisan GAO Confirms Security Flaws in Voting Machines

Its worse than we could have every imagined.

Legal experts consider the 55-year-old Alito so ideologically similar to Justice Antonin Scalia that he has earned the nickname "Scalito." (Profile of his legal resume)

In 1991, in one of his more well-known decisions, he was the only dissenting voice in a 3rd Circuit ruling striking down a Pennsylvania law that required women to notify their husbands if they planned to get an abortion.

He also wrote the opinion in 1999 in a case that said a Christmas display on city property did not violate separation of church and state doctrines because it included a large plastic Santa Claus as well as religious symbols.

Oh, wait, no...that's about what I imagined.

Regrettably, I was not able to meme the original version of this story in which poll results about American's desires for the next justice were explained. 46% said that overturning Roe V Wade was a bad idea. Here's a guy that thinks Mormons are living the good life, and he can't possibly represent the 46% of people who don't want to chuck Roe V Wade.

[ Is there any more doubt that Miers was a sacrifice nominataion? A bright, flashing, distracting, well-orchestrated diversion? This is the candidate that was always going to be nominated... they just needed to play with the news cycles a bit first.

And yes, he's not so great. -k]

CNN.com - Bush nominates Alito to Supreme Court - Oct 31, 2005

Decius wrote:
Technically, these two exceptions exist in U.S. law as well, despite the fact that they aren't spelled out in the Constitution. You can be charged inciting a riot (public order) or with obsenity (immoral speech).

...

In many ways Iraq represents exactly the sort of state Conservative Christians in America would like to build. If it is successful, even for a time, look for it to be held up not just as a model for the middle east, but as a model for us as well...

I thought obscenity laws were left to the states? Is there a federal law against obscenity? The riots, yes, but that arguably has a basis in the constitution because large scale disturbances often result in dead innocents, which tends to go against the "life, liberty and pursuit" thing.

As for that last, I agree completely, and I find it disturbing as hell.

RE: Text of the draft Iraqi Constitution

President George W. Bush took responsibility on Tuesday for any failures in the federal response to Hurricane Katrina and acknowledged the storm exposed serious deficiencies at all levels of government four years after the September 11 attacks.

I don't want to meme CNN's homepage so I'm linking a different copy of this story. This is important. It means the Administration has acknowledged that the federal response wasn't rapid enough and will work to address the problem going forward. Its the best sort of answer you could expect.

[ And more than I expected, in truth. Just the day before, the administration official line was "It's no one's fault...", while subtly insinuating that, in fact, it was the fault of the mayor and governor. I've got to admit, it's actually refreshing to see the president sac up for this one. You know, a little.

That being said, I'm not certain that the "my bad" will necessarily lead to the administration working to address the problem. I'd like to think it will, but I'll hold off on praise until I see for myself. As someone said in the other thread, if i run over your foot and then say "Sorry, dude, that was me." and then do nothing more, it's a pretty meaningless gesture. -k]

Bush - I am responsible.