Sixty-three percent of Americans find the National Security Agency program tracking domestic phone calls acceptable, a Washington Post-ABC News poll last week revealed. But columnist Eugene Robinson argues that it is the administration’s “bald-faced lie” about the program — not the program itself — that should be Americans’ biggest concern:
“The big deal is that now we know that the administration — I’ll say ‘apparently,’ although if the report were untrue I think the president would have denied it — is keeping track of the phone calls of millions of citizens who have nothing at all to do with terrorism. Bush has tried to convince us that the overwhelming majority of Americans are not affected by domestic surveillance, but now we know that the opposite is true: The overwhelming majority of us are.
“The president’s claim, in his brief statement on the report, that the government isn’t ‘trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans’ is as disingenuous as Bill Clinton’s claim that he ‘didn’t inhale.’”
Posted by Melissa Cooley
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
64 Comments
In and of its self the collecting of the numbers called by Americans is Not spying, if it is left to only that.If I call 555-1234, whom have I called? Not unless a known terrorist calls 555-1234 should that fact I called that number be of any interest…..If that is all that happens. The problem of course is the trust factor, once you feel lied to you have little reason to feel trust for the persons that lied to you. Of course how can they know whom is calling who unless they have the name of the caller, maybe terrorists like pizza and I do too!
So now am I calling in an order or am I calling to set a meeting with the next Attu so we can hijack a Greyhound bus and drive it into the Washington monument. If they do not go beyond the number how can they know who is calling and for what reason. I trust they are not doing something illegal, I trust they are only using this to track the phone calls of terrorists. There seems to be a lot of trust involved for a group that mislead this country into an invasion that has cost this country more then some of our best and bravest.A lot of trust for a President that said a warrant would be gotten and the laws followed. Then it is found out that is not the case. Trust, trust, trust….Trust be verify!
Dear Mel,
After reading Eugene’s column its hard to determine if he is a willing tool of the DNC or just stupid. I would guess both.
However, I’m pretty sure that you are both. Your comments on the NSA’s efforts to determine communication patterns offically put you on the extreme edge.
Hank
Hank Price,
And what edge would THAT be, Hank? Your attempts to denounce people who oppose the Bush Administration’s unconstitutional power grab actually put YOU in the minority. The May 13 Newsweek poll has 57% of those surveyed saying that domestic phone surveillance ‘goes too far,’ while only 38% find the Administration to be acting appropriately.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12771821/site/newsweek/from/RSS/
Seems to me that you aren’t any more near an edge than is writerdog. He’s solidly in the middle of majority sentiment, and you’re huddled with all the other Bush-bots.
Those dang, traitorous facts.
“‘In God We Trust’ – all others we verify.”
Old CIA saying . . .
Isn’t it amazing how polls vary? Some might argue that they are fixed. Here is a reference to one that shows 63% favor the program.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/12/AR2006051200375.html?referrer=email
I think that posting poll results is a poor substitute for logical argument. Poll results are always suspect, and since when did we start taking a poll to determine what is right and wrong?
The problem is the “six degrees of separation” syndrome. I call someone, who calls someone, who calls someone, who calls the Middle Eastern bakery for some tabouli, and the bakery is actually a terrorist front operation. In spite of the fact that I didn’t have any DIRECT contact with the bakery, I was in the CHAIN of contacts…and that will undoubtedly leave me open to possible investigation. Depending upon how far an organization is willing to take things, every one of us is, I’m sure, in the chain of contacts for terrorists or terrorist suspects.
Very respectfully, these poll numbers are now a tad old.
Both Newsweek and USA Today are now reporting polls that show a majority of those surveyed are not happy with the NSA program.
See details at:http://hopeandpolitics.blogspot.com/2006/05/not-such-good-idea-after-all-new-polls.html
Some of the Newsweek numbers were reported above. Meanwhile, USA Today is reporting that a majority of those surveyed think the latest NSA disclosure is just the tip of the iceberg.
The problem with the Post poll was that it was taken immediately after the story broke, before many people had much time to think about the program. The sample size was also small.
Diane Silver
New nic to me.
Welcome to the forum.
Hank–
For the vast majority of folks who cruise through without posting, thanks for your NAZI perspective.
“Anyone who even discusses these issues is ’stupid’ and ‘a tool of the DNC.’”
If you haven’t figured it out yet, Americans are no longer clicking their heels together and saluting every time one of you propoganda ministers shouts “heil.”
That doesn’t make them “tools” Hank, it makes them thinking Americans.
The tool is what you see when you look in the mirror, the “last throes” of the Bushistas.
*****
BTW, I just got done watching the LONG German film, “Downfall” about the fall of Berlin in May of 1945.
You should watch it–Hitler is ranting and raving down in his bunker about “treason” and “traitors,” completely disassociative from reality.
The parallels are unmistakable . . .
DianeS–
Thanks for the real numbers. As one of us in the “reality-based community,” I welcome you . . .
The real problem, as I see it, is Bush has either lied, or misdirected the American people on just about everything he has undertaken. From the war in Afghanistan to the “Medicare plans” to the use of intelligence organizations, can he be trusted to tell us the truth on anything? I, for one, have a problem with believing anything he says. The man is as bad a liar as Clinton, only his lies kill people.
With the distinct possibility of Rove being indicted, and the apparent involvement of Cheney in the Plume affair, we may be looking at a different President before the next election. One can only hope so. One can also hope that congress has the huevos to do what has to be done: impeach this idiot.
DD,”There is no God, therefore varification is always necessary.”
New CIA saying.
OMG… Diane Silver. Hello! Have you been reading here and not posting, or are you a complete newby here? Nice to see you again. I am pretty sure you remember me too.
I actually know Diane, and MOST of you are gonna love her posts. She is brilliant and insightful and a great writer. Tough cookie too!
Hehheh. Diane meets hank. Diane meets Ian. Cant wait.
Welome Diane, and I hope you keep posting here.
How is this related to the “war on terror?” It’s not, but perhaps BushCo hopes it can stop the downward plunge in the poll numbers if they can stanch the bad news . . .
Federal Source to ABC News: We Know Who You’re CallingMay 15, 2006 10:33 AM
Brian Ross and Richard Esposito Report:
A senior federal law enforcement official tells ABC News the government is tracking the phone numbers we call in an effort to root out confidential sources.
“It’s time for you to get some new cell phones, quick,” the source told us in an in-person conversation.
ABC News does not know how the government determined who we are calling, or whether our phone records were provided to the government as part of the recently-disclosed NSA collection of domestic phone calls.
Other sources have told us that phone calls and contacts by reporters for ABC News, along with the New York Times and the Washington Post, are being examined as part of a widespread CIA leak investigation.
One former official was asked to sign a document stating he was not a confidential source for New York Times reporter James Risen.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html
Diane,Another fellow member of the “reality-based community” welcomes you. KFG’s recommendation is noted with extreme interest.
See?It pays to welcome new posters.
I especially like when they come in swinging with facts.
Ditto what Rage said Diane. Kfg gets ya “street cred” paid forward.
Polls. I love them. they are merely a lazy way to fabricate news rather than report the news.
The MSM floats out a phoney story like the NSA data collection then they immediately do a poll. Bad news, people don’t care. Then they follow up with a bunch of phoney sound bites and take another poll. Ah, that’s better! We’ve got ‘em scared now!
No substance. No facts.
So I wonder, are all you left-wing nitwits going to believe the poll numbers when they start coming back up? They are you know.
Hank
I’ll try again: it didn’t post.
Folks . . . I’ll get this out of the way and the fallout may begin. But . . .
Assuming there is no federal statute specifically barring the practice (and I’m no expert on federal law in this area), and assuming the “datemining” program by the NSA is as revealed, it’s not illegal. It’s not unconstitutional. It needs no warrant (even by a FISA court).
Who says so? The US Supreme Court. Read it for yourself.
SMITH v. MARYLAND, 442 U.S. 735 (1979).
Frankly, I would be shocked if this sort of thing WASN’T being done; not to do so would be incompetence of the highest order. The last thing gov’t wants to happen is that after the next attack (and there will be a next time, sooner or later) the gov’t is again faulted for not “connecting the dots” and not using the capabilities they have to prevent the attack.
We live in a world where none of us are truly private, as much as we’d like to be. Cameras in public places are routine. Your credit card purchases are tracked for patterns so you can be marketed by businesses. We all leave footprints everywhere we go, available for anyone (including gov’t) to use for commercial or other purposes.
The alternative is to go to Montana, build a compound, have no phone, no utilities, no papers or magazines delivered, use only cash (or better yet barter), no contact with the world. You will be private. You will also be irrelevent.
On second thought, that might not be a bad idea; I just don’t think I have enough guns yet (and there is no such thing as enough guns!!!).
Hank,
“So I wonder, are all you left-wing nitwits going to believe the poll numbers when they start coming back up? They are you know.”
Uhh . . . no thay ain’t. Latest (phony) poll: Bush down to 29% approval rating: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200605/s1637620.htm
But even if that one is off, out of a total of ALL the polls taken, only one shows a Bush approval rating higher than the disapproval rating. Even a Fox poll shows a disapproval rating 9% higher than the approval rating:http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
Hank, you’re living in a glass house, and even the Republicans are throwing stones at it. Bush is a liar, and the people of this country are not ignoring that any more.
I dont know about the “do you care if the government rapes your civil liberties” polls… but….
When bush’s approval ratings rise above those of tom cruise, gay marriage, and bill clinton, give me a call, will ya?
Heheh. I saw that former president clinton’s numbers for TRUTHFULLNESS were higher than shrub’s.
But take heart kookaide lovers. I am sure that if there were a “truthiness” question, the preznit’s numbers would have beaten clinton significantly.
As RD would say hee hee.
And it looks like Fitzmas this week….
…and the dark side of impeachment?
Only Paris Hilton has lower approval numbers than darth cheney.
“Where have you gone, Joe Dimaggio a nation turns it’s lonely eyes to you…. woo woo woo….”
If Bush is impeached then what?Will he leave office? Will Cheney resign (or get impeached) also?Will an impeachment do any good?
GMC70,It is illegal for the phone companies to turn over data to the federal government without specific warrents. THAT IS A FEDERAL LAW! The phone companies who turned over the information just opened themselves up to fines of as much as $1000 per phone number turned over. That is enough, if the numbers reported are correct, to come close to bankrupting every phone company who complied with the NSA’a request.
There are laws in place for doing what the Bush administration asked the NSA to do. The problem is, Bush did not follow those laws. He has placed himself above the law. That is something totally against the Constitution of the United States. It puts him in the realm of dictator, something we, the people (remember us?), neither want nor need.
GMC may have actually achieved some relevance with that last…….”no newspapers or magazines delivered” ……”no contact with the world”…
He would seem to be describing Hank, who must live in a glass house at the bottom of a mineshaft on the far side of Mars.
GMC this thread isn’t about the legality of bush nsa activity. It is about whether it is right or wrong.
You make valid examples of how we everyday surrender more of our privacy to technology and government GMC. Maybe you should stop and think if this is a good thing.
I know I know….you don’t stop to imagine or ponder or worry.
Julie,”Will an impeachment do any good?”Probably not, but it could keep the admistration so tied up, they wouldn’t have time to screw up anything else.
Julie I do not look forward to the return of “our long national nightmare” of investigations, hearings, and the airing of, as the Eagles might say, our democracy’s extremely dirty laundry.
It will be a world class embarassment to us, but if we ever want to have our national integrity back, we have to do it.
We have to hold our noses and look deep into the corrupt and stinking abyss that our elected (and non elected) government has become.
I think we have to look back, at the risk of turning to pillars of salt, at how far behind we left our constitution in general and the bill of rights in particular.
And we have to look forward, NOW, at how close we are to stepping off the edge, over the line, like wylie coyote with that look of doom as he goes over the cliff, to know how close we have come to bush’s dream of dictatorship and unlimited executive power. Gives new meaning to “hail to the chief”.
And no matter how frightning the sight, how freddie kruger it might be, we better take a long hard look at how we use our military and how close we are to marshall law. We might want to look now so we can remember and tell our grandchildren the tales of how we used to be.
You know, before we were so divided into little groups that we killed each other off in a giant game of highlander.
In the end, there can be only one.
I know, I need better drugs this morning….
That last very good kfg and true.
As we surrender willingly more and more liberties with an uninterested shrug, as the power of the Executive is increased, there are those out there who rub their hands with eager anticipation.
Bush is no tyrant. He isn’t smart or interested enough to be. He did’t even want his job. He is just the window dressing mannequin in front of those who I described in that last paragraph. So we are still one step removed from tyranny. The puppet masters still must go through their sock puppet.
This is much the same way that Hitler came to power. He was to be the pawn of industry and commerce. He wasn’t content with that role.
Make no mistake that in America too there are charismatic and coldly ambitious folks out there. I’d say we best err on checking their potential power over us before they get the job.
Diane,Meet ID. Appreciate your participating in debate, but facts, figures and perspectives are not often built into the objectives of a poll. Often times, a poll is commissioned by one side of the debate (for/against; we/them; etc…) to spin their reality. Which is why I had to laugh at the frequent liberal bloggers who are self-described ‘reality-based’. If the poll results align with your position, it somehow has built-in credibility? Sorry, dudes and dudettes, polls are a lazy armchair political-hacks decision making framework.
Indeed Diane, meet ID, one of the pioneers of the “one’s too many and a hundred’s not enough” club here when it concerns that ever elusive “proof”.
I have given up on the polls and proof and just ask “who ya gonna believe, bushco, or those lyin’ eyes of yours?”
It has about as much effect.
JR
“You make valid examples of how we everyday surrender more of our privacy to technology and government GMC. Maybe you should stop and think if this is a good thing.”
Is it a good thing? I’m not sure. All of us sure like the conveniences that this electronic interdependance gives us; but we trade away at least some of our privacy to get it. We know that when we participate in this very blog, as a poster reminded me on an earlier post.
Personally, I bristle when the grocery store wants my loyalty card so they can track my purchases. I so want to answer “none of your &%#$ business.” But they toss benefits to me to get me to go along. Of course, I also bristle when the state tells me I have to fasten my seat belt (it’s my head, and my windshield, and none of their ^$#@ business. They are not my nanny, nor my momma). But then, I also bristle when I have to fill out the paperwork to buy a gun, but I understand that is the price of preventing ownership by those who can’t legally buy (as if it does any good). Cost, benefit.
The reality is we are there, and we’re not going back. Does the 4th am. bar gov’t from using cameras in public places? Absolutely not; but I don’t want to live in a society where we are watched constantly by Big Brother. We ARE, of course, watched constantly. But generally it is by businesses, who watch us so they can sell us stuff.
Ya know, that Montana compound is looking better and better . . .
JM Walker: Show me the law. Even if so, the remedy appears to be a civil one against the phone companies rather than restraining gov’t from asking. That’s a knock against the phone co’s rather than evidence that the NSA violated the law by asking.
ID writes that “Sorry, dudes and dudettes, polls are a lazy armchair political-hacks decision making framework.”
As opposed to what, pure ideology that never changes no matter what evidence mounts up against it?
Since this is what we see in the Bush administration–witness the tax breaks to “stimulate” the economy or invading Iraq for “freedom”–I guess your answer is “yes.”
“As opposed to what, pure ideology that never changes no matter what evidence mounts up against it?”
In Texas they say “that’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it!”
That’s great LH. We missed you this weekend. Maybe next time.
See that’s the difference between you neo-cons and us in the “reality-based” community (RBC for short).
I making abortion illegal actually stopped abortion, a lot of us in the RBC would be for it. It doesn’t. There were over a million abortions before Roe v Wade made abortion legal. Last year, there were only some 800,000, still a lot but 20 percent lower than when abortion was illegal.
If tax cuts for the rich stimulated the economy and produced more tax revenue (like it was claimed it would), we in the RBC would support it.
Tax cuts didn’t do this under Reagan, and they damn sure didn’t do it under BushToo. We’re running historic deficits and historical high nat’l debt as a percentage of GDP. Also job growth was extremely poor in GW’s first four years and none too good since then either.
If outsourcing is “good for the economy,” we in the RBC would support it. I don’t see how it can be good that we run the highest trade imbalance of any mature economy in the world, that real wages continue to fall for six years in a row, that the wealth INequality continues to grow since Clinton left office, and a greater and greater percentage of middle-class wealth flows to health-care and gasoline.
The real tragedy is that a middle-class schmo like you, ID, would buy the crap the neo-cons sell because you think it makes it possible for you to Dick Cheney someday.
Snap out of your fantasy world, ID, and join the reality based community.
We want to produce real benefits for real people.
should be “to BE Dick Cheney someday.”
Yup, KSFGrrl, I didn’t know YOU were gonna be there. I probably would have gone . . . :(
So, apparently government officials feel emboldened enough to actually TELL reporters from ABC that their phone traffic is being recorded in order to root out confidential sources.
**********************************
“Federal Source to ABC News: We Know Who You’re CallingMay 15, 2006 10:33 AM
Brian Ross and Richard Esposito Report:
A senior federal law enforcement official tells ABC News the government is tracking the phone numbers we (Brian Ross and Richard Esposito) call in an effort to root out confidential sources.
“It’s time for you to get some new cell phones, quick,” the source told us in an in-person conversation.
ABC News does not know how the government determined who we are calling, or whether our phone records were provided to the government as part of the recently-disclosed NSA collection of domestic phone calls.
Other sources have told us that phone calls and contacts by reporters for ABC News, along with the New York Times and the Washington Post, are being examined as part of a widespread CIA leak investigation.
One former official was asked to sign a document stating he was not a confidential source for New York Times reporter James Risen.
Our reports on the CIA’s secret prisons in Romania and Poland were known to have upset CIA officials. The CIA asked for an FBI investigation of leaks of classified information following those reports.
People questioned by the FBI about leaks of intelligence information say the CIA was also disturbed by ABC News reports that revealed the use of CIA predator missiles inside Pakistan.
Under Bush Administration guidelines, it is not considered illegal for the government to keep track of numbers dialed by phone customers.
The official who warned ABC News said there was no indication our phones were being tapped so the content of the conversation could be recorded.
A pattern of phone calls from a reporter, however, could provide valuable clues for leak investigators.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html
**********************************
Shades of Stalin/SS/Stasi. I can’t wait to hear you Wingnuts defend THIS.
NOW can we impeach the motherfucker?
Heh, I already beat you to this one (for once) upthread, CF.
But it’s worth posting again, no doubt about it.
So, where’s Raptor to tell us how this doesn’t hurt him at all?
Stifling open reporting of the news . . . nah, that doesn’t hurt anybody.
That’s good, if you’re a loyal Nazi.
Doh! TOTAL breach of ettiquite on my part–I mean, I read your stuff and everything! Oh, the shame.
But you’re right: the silence of GMC70, Hank Price, and ID on this topic is both deafening and damning.
Hey CF, how do you know:1.it’s true?2.it isn’t part of legit investigation with a court order?
Maybe ABC News is caught doing something illegal. Surely you’ve thought through all that, fair-minded person that you are… ahem.
Ann Coulter said she’d wished the terrorists had hit “The New York Times” building.
But then she said she was just kidding.
Oh man, crack my sides with laughter! Who knew that the he-she could be such a laugh-riot, huh? Mark Twain’s got nothing on her (uh, him?).
I’m still chuckling over that one.
Outlander–
Going for the desperate Nathan defense . . . “got any proof? other than a respected main-stream news source, I mean.”
Like for instance did Rush Limbaugh or Bush say it? Because then it’s automatically true and everybody else has the burden of proof to show why they’re wrong, even if the evidence already shows they’re wrong (WMD’s for instance).
Aw come on Left everybody knew kfg was gonna be at the picnic. People weren’t coming for my potato salad. We missed you.
And OUTLANDER. Another bushy that didn’t show. What did you guys have your own meet up in a bathroom stall somewhere?
This latest about ABC reporters is troubling, but not surprising. The REAL surprise would be if anyone was paying enough attention to care. An even bigger shock would be if that mattered to bush and company.
And ID………
Props guy. Your last DIDN’T quote Rush directly! But you still channel him real good.
Lefthook: Actually, if this is true and it is not part of a legitimate investigation, then I have a real problem with it too.
Even assuming it is true (I don’t see corroberation), how can we be sure that it is not part of a legit investigation?
Hank Price:*****************************”So I wonder, are all you left-wing nitwits going to believe the poll numbers when they start coming back up? They are you know.”******************************
Karl Rove during a speech to the AEI:********************************“I look at these polls all the time,” he allowed. “The American people like this president. His personal approval ratings are in the 60s. His job approval is lower. What that says to me is that people like him, they respect him. They’re just sour right now, and that’s the way it’s going to be. And we will fight our way through it. The polls will go up. The polls will go down… If you want to govern by waking up and saying, ‘How am I doing in the polls?’ and adjusting thereby, you’re going to find yourself in one heck of a problem. So we’re going to stay focused on good policy, confident that that will ultimately take care of the politics.”*********************************
I thought Hank’s source was Rush, but I guess it must be TurdBlossem himself.
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/05/karl_rove_on_ou.html
P.S. let’s hope the indictment is real and that keeps the fat fuck from focusing on all that good policy he has in mind.
JR: It was not due to any lack of effort on your part. Maybe in addition to you, a conservative coordinator could improve attendance from our end. (I’m not volunteering)
I was out of town Saturday but will definitely try to make the next one.
Missed ya at the picnic DD. Lotsa new people.
Yeah Out. Nathan was lamenting that if he had known just how bad his side would be represented he would have gotten after you guys. He’s been busy though and didn’t see. Don’t feel bad.Poor Joe got lost.
JR,
Sorry I missed it. Will have to come to the next one.
TEE HEE
May 13, 2006 — 04:38 PM EST // http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008454.php)
From Isikoff http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12774274/site/newsweek/...
The role of Vice President Dick Cheney in the criminal case stemming from the outing of White House critic Joseph Wilson’s CIA wife is likely to get fresh attention as a result of newly disclosed notes showing that Cheney personally asked whether Wilson had been sent by his wife on a “junket” to Africa.Cheney’s notes, written on the margins of a July 6, 2003 New York Times op-ed column by former ambassador Joseph Wilson, were included as part of a filing Friday night by prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in the perjury and obstruction case against ex-Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.
The notes, Fitzgerald said in his filing, show that Cheney and Libby were “acutely focused” on the Wilson column and on rebutting his criticisms of the White House’s handling of pre-Iraq war intelligence.
…
In the margins of the op-ed, Cheney jotted out a series of questions that seemed to challenge many of Wilson’s assertions as well as the legitimacy of his CIA sponsored trip to Africa: “Have they done this sort of thing before? Send an Amb. [sic] to answer a question? Do we ordinarily send people out pro bono to work for us? Or did his wife send him on a junket?”
Puts Cheney right in the center of it. No doubt, directing the whole effort, which many of us have long suspected. Right there down to the ridiculousness of his ‘wife send[ing] him on a junket’. Did he come up with it? Was he the first one to slip that slop into the rightwing media stream?
Late Update: You can see a copy of Cheney’s scribblings here http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/cheney-notes/.
– Josh Marshall http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com
Welcome, Diane! Julie, KFG, and I need another X chromosome among all these XY’s.
A republican (Joe) got lost. Go figure.
Outlander:”Maybe in addition to you, a conservative coordinator could improve attendance from our end. (I’m not volunteering)”
The first meet up was coordinated by Hank. Conservative gentleman I’d say. (he did a damn fine job by the way). I think that just blows your fairness issue clean away. And the meet ups aren’t a political function. It’s just a bunch of friends getting together. We can argue politics here; picnics are for fun.
Making new friends and having a good time.
Maybe that’s not a conservative value?
I’m glad so many people showed for the picnic, sorry I missed it.
However, the boy did bring home some ksfarmgrrl chicken and tater salad. Enough for our dinner last night!
So, even though I wasn’t there, I did get to partake of the groceries!
Hopefully, I’ll get to come to the next one!
Hank
XXX: I wasn’t trying to make a fairness issue. It was just a suggestion on getting someone to put pressure on conservatives to come. But you’re right, liberals showed up when Hank organized and when JR organized, so never mind. It appears y’all are just more sociable!
Slate has a good brief nontechnical desription of social network analysis (what the NSA is supposedly doing with the phone data):
http://www.slate.com/id/2141801/
They repeat some of what I said on an earlier thread.
“It appears y’all are just more sociable!”
And don’t forget “socialistic” – that was for Joe, who showed that libertarians can’t ask for directions – it would be contrary to their rhetoric.
DD, as I said, they must have some sort of basis to work from, i.e. information on terrorists, to know what or who to look for.
The sensible thing to do would be to check all communications eminating from known terrorists numbers. They could work out from there by checking all calls made from or to terrorists, then on to the next “degree.” Checking ALL available phone numbers would be nothing more than a looking for a needle in a haystack. A quagmire. But hey, they’re familiar with quagmires already.
Sad, but Bushytail and his tail waggers have lied to us SO much. It just seems to be accepted without the outrage that should be comeing from the good people.
On Saturday I posted on the weird Trent Lott face thread the possibility that the phone record analysis could be used to connect investigative journalists’ calls to government whistleblowers. Then came the ABC report, and Joe Scarborough (former Republican congressman) talking about the issue tonight.
The reason I mentioned it two days ago before the press revealed it was that it was just a logical deduction.
Good deduction, DD.
Now, anybody who thinks BushCo isn’t using this against its political enemies (Kerry, Pelosi, Dean, Boxer, Feingold, etc.) is living in a fantasy land . . .
Oops, I meant good deduction, HEARTLANDER.
It’s gotten to the point that if you think of the worst possible administration of any situation, it sums up what Bush is doing.
I’ve gotten kudos from both the left and the right in the WE Blog. Then condemnation from the same folks. That’s because I’m not a politician. I could send messages to cultivate a constituency, but that’s not my goal. I just want to move people to THINK and NOT BE AFRAID. Or more accurately, it’s okay to be afraid. But have faith, and overcome fear. You learn things. Like I’d like to see GWB, Cheney and Rumsfeld spend a month in Iraq “imbedded” with troops fighting in dangerous parts of Iraq. They’d be scared shitless. But they’d LEARN important lessons. These would be peak experiences, life-changing experiences.
KFG, after reading the post…The drugs you are taking seem to be working just fine!
LOL writerdog, it is my good spring water…the only drug I need is caffine to put into it in the mornings. Heheh. Nice to meet you and the mrs. this weekend.
GMC is on a different thread lamenting. Maybe we should help him rend his garments and heap ashes on his head.
GFUN, you need to post more often. I dont always agree, but we need you too. Anyone who whips X’s butt in golf is IN!
And RD, I agree about more posts from the distaff side. Damoon… please come back from the Rockies NOW…I have the tater salad.
I read something yesterday that nationally, a little over 30% of those who read political blogs are women, but they are the fastest growing group of bloggers.
Sorry for more picnic stuff but…
I could write an enitire “Ode to CF” after meeting him. I thought he was awesome in the virtual world, but he is even more awesome in person. Thanks for letting me talk CF. I hope to continue the conversation at the next meetup.
Genius. Pure genius.