Following up on a previous post, I just invited Geov Parrish to blog here on HA. Geov was an editorial board member and regular columnist at the Seattle Weekly before that publication imploded under new management. Apparently, he’d rather write for free here, than prostitute himself there. I guess that’s why they call it a “free press.”
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
It’s like a freakin’ blogger jamberoo around here.
(And, yes, I intend to great all our new columnists with a Simpsons reference; that’s just how I roll.)
Hey Geov, I’m a big fan of yours! The new SW sucks. I used to read SW all the time. Notice to SW advertisers: Nobody reads that rag anymore, so you’re throwing your money away. Even the Seattle Times is better for wrapping fish guts in.
Too bad all the good 21st century journalists are working for free, while political propagandists are drawing salaries. That’s backwards. It should be the other way around.
42 posts in 6 hours, 20 min by 19 posters.
Imagine passing up an opportunity like that.
LMAO
Aunte Liberal @4…
Man… the only thing more pathetic than that, is you wasting your time counting my comments.
The 3 min it took to harass an ass?… worth every second.
My how the mighty have fallen. Oh wait, you already admitted that!
LMAO
ANTI-LIBERAL:
TWO WORDS: NOVEMBER SEVENTH
TWO MORE: SPEAKER PELOSI
OH EXCUSE ME! IT’S AUNTIE LIBERAL!
SORRY. HE HE!
Well folks let’s get ready for a ride now that the Socialist Democrats are now showing their real colors. Today there is 51 personnel claiming to be Democrats, but we know the real numbers are about half of that amount. The Democrat Party is spilt due to the Socialist, Communist, and other fringe groups trying to buy influence for their causes. Now the big money really starts to flow into the many party members pockets. Yes the Democrats (Socialist) are the wealthiest chaps in town, not the many ferry tells that they impose on the public. Halliburton Co. received less money and profits than Hollywood film makers like Michael Moore and his crowd of war critics. Goldy and Gang where is the War Plans that the Socialist Democrats want to present to the Public? There is none and they plan to wing it until the end of the conflict. Then blame the Republicans for their failures.
‘Socialist’ Sen. Sanders: Wealth Has Limits
From pressing for hearings on Iraq to probing no-bid contracts awarded to Halliburton Co., America’s first socialist senator aims to give Congress a hard tilt to the left.
Bernie Sanders, a 16-year veteran of the House of Representatives who swept 65 percent of the vote in Vermont running as an independent in the November 7 elections, says Congress owes voters an exhaustive probe into the White House.
“It is time to ask some hard questions. Why did we go into Iraq and what did the president know and when did he know it,” Sanders said in an interview in his Burlington office on a hillside above Lake Champlain near Canada’s border.
“The war in Iraq has been an absolute disaster and it’s absolutely imperative that America never again goes that route. That’s why we have to ask those questions,” he said.
Sanders has voted with Democrats in the House since his first election in 1990 and plans to continue to do so in the Senate, where his vote is needed for Democrats to keep its slim 51-49 majority. Democrats ran no candidate against him in this year’s election.
Geov is good people, it’s good to hear he’ll be writting again.
I’ve been reading Geov’s work on other leftie blogs since he resigned from what used to be the Seattle Weekly. It’ll be good to see him here too.
8
Yes, Bernie Sanders is a Socialist. He has never claimed otherwise.
Yes, he is going to caucus with the Democrats.
And yes, he is going to do his best to nail your heroes’ nuts to the wall.
You have to work harder on your posting. Those three facts spoiled the completely content-free nature of the rest of the post.
Yes Flakey Klakey we will show our true colors – red white and blue – you know, the colors of the flag that you and your cowardly buddies on the right tried to shit on every time you went about trying to destroy our Constitution? Well America spoke and they bitch slapped inbred asswipes like you.
In case you forgot this punk – here’s the tally.
We TOOK the motherfucking House from you traitors.
We TOOK the motherfucking US Senate from you cowards.
We TOOK a net gain of SIX Governors from you inbred assholes.
We TOOK control of 12 state legislatures from you punk ass chickenhawks.
It was an utterly devistating repudiation of your attempts to destroy America and now our REAL agenda is to find all you cowards and treat you like the traitors you really are. Better hope we don’t come knocking coward. HE HE!
By the way Mrs. Klake told me to tell you hello.
I’ve boned Mrs. Klake so many times she’s startin’ to call me Pokeman.
“Family and Medical Leave Act Under Review”
“By JEANNINE AVERSA
“AP
“WASHINGTON (Nov. 30) – The Bush administration is examining regulations that give workers unpaid leave to deal with family or medical emergencies, making some supporters of the rules wary that worker protections might be scaled back. …
“The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act grants eligible workers up to a total of 12 weeks of unpaid leave during any 12-month period for such things as caring for a newborn or a sick family member, or because the employee has a serious health condition. …
“The department is seeking feedback on a range of issues. They include matters related to eligibility standards for employees, what constitutes a serious health condition … Victoria Lipnic, assistant secretary for the Labor Department’s Employment Standards Administration, said ‘we really needed some fresh thinking on this.’ …
“Debra Ness … president of … a nonprofit advocacy group that promotes fairness in the workplace … does not want to see sweeping changes ‘that could seriously undermine the protections that people now have, and our worry is that this is a step toward doing that[.]’ …
http://tinyurl.com/yc22up
Roger Rabbit Commentary: The sequel to this story will be another Saturday afternoon announcement by CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVES of the worker-hating Bush administration.
Let me ask you CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVE wingfuck trolls this question: If owners of capital get all the economy’s output and tax breaks, and we continue to make working more difficult and less rewarding, why the fuck should anyone work? What incentive is there for people to take jobs and do the work that makes the capital-owning class rich? I say screw work! American culture under Republican leadership punishes work. It’s obvious that CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVES don’t want people to work. So — we won’t work!
Roger Rabbit Announces National Moratorium on Work!
General strike General strike General strike General strike!
Hey wingfucks, look at the bright side … I don’t have political demands. All I want is money. You should be able to understand that. After all, you want money too! I’m just like you. In fact, I used to be a CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVE Goldwater Republican! That’s how I learned to be a greedy cocksucker like you wingnut Republicans! Get used to it — Roger Rabbit is just like you.
Meanwhile, on the sucky little jihad blog, Stefan continues his voting fraud crusade:
“Mail Ballot Horror Show (XXXII): Coerced voting
“Election Administration News
“by Stefan Sharkansky, 12:59 PM
“KING-5 has an investigative report on a frightening assisted living facility for mentally ill adults. According to the report, the ‘therapist’ who runs the place is … an abusive control freak (who) makes her dependent clients vote per her instructions:
“The clients’ mail is opened and read, all phone calls are monitored. At election time, Dr. Greff even gathers the clients in a group and tells them for whom to vote.
“Investigators: ‘Are you saying people didn’t have a choice in who they voted for?’
“Lariva: ‘No.’
“Investigators: ‘They had to vote for who she wanted in the positions?’
“Lariva: ‘Right.’
“Of course that sort of coercion only works when you vote by mail.”
http://www.soundpolitics.com/
Roger Rabbit Commentary: King 5 News, not Stefan, exposed this voting fraud. Stefan’s only “contribution” was to pick up a MSM news report and milk it to propagansize his anti-mail-voting agenda.
The reason Stefan doesn’t like mail voting, of course, is because it makes voting easier — and therefore increases voter turnout among elderly and disabled voters who are more likely to vote Democratic than Republican. Stefan is a Republican, and his objective is partisan advantage for the GOP, not prevention of voting fraud.
It goes without saying that wingnuts who post comments on Stefan’s blog hoping for terrorist attacks on U.S. airline passengers because they believe the GOP will get a partisan advantage from the deaths of their fellow Americans all will assume Dr. Greff made her charges vote for Democrats. That’s quite a leap of faith. It’s been my experience in life that control freaks are almost always rightwing Republicans. But no, I’m not saying Dr. Greff is a Republican; I don’t know what she is.
I’ll give Stefan credit for not asserting that Dr. Greff is making her patients vote for Democrats. Even he isn’t THAT stupid — like me, he doesn’t know which party she manipulates votes for. But some of the posters on his sucky little terrorism-promoting blog ARE that stupid. I mean, what can you expect from brain-dead fucks who post comments like this:
“Congratulations Speaker Pelosi, now let the bombs fall where they may. My prediction: terror attack on domestic soil passenger aircraft within the next six months. Casualties in the 2-300 range. And, unfortunately, maybe that’s just what we need. It’s obvious people don’t remember what happened 5 years ago. Posted by FullContactPolitics at November 8, 2006 10:52 AM”
But, even though Stefan isn’t claiming that Dr. Greff is bullying her patients into voting for one party or the other, he IS claiming that mail voting enables bullies like her.
Yeah, well, if we didn’t have mail voting those folks couldn’t vote at all. So, if someone is stealing your vote, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote? Is that how Stefan wants it to work? Stefan doesn’t want to enforce the law against people who commit voting crimes, he wants to disenfranchise the victims. Yeah, Stefan, you ARE that stupid.
Bush is on the defensive. He’s very aware that daddy and daddy’s friends are out there trying to bail out the young’n. But, he’s a big boy now. Damned if he isn’t going to have his way. I can just imagine what he’ll try to do. Bullies are like that . . .
5 ARMY RANGERS ARRESTED FOR BANK ROBBERY
A Fort Lewis soldier is accused of masterminding a bank robbery to raise money for starting a “crime family” in Kelowna B.C. http://tinyurl.com/ya25yl
Roger Rabbit Commentary: When GOP warmongers brow-beat us to “support the troops,” they really mean “support the war” — i.e., their illegal, bungled war based on lies.
I supported the troops by donating to http://www.operation-helmet.org/ which is more than any of the wingfuck warmongers on this board have done.
I’m also supporting the troops who commit atrocities, rob banks, etc. — by paying taxes for prisons.
Why are so many of the troops low-life criminals? Because, even as GOP congressmen mock Rep. Rangel’s proposal to reinstate the draft, the Pentagon is granting thousands of “morality waivers” that allow people with criminal records to join the military. That’s in addition to other steps the Pentagon has taken to get enough recruits, including lowering mental and physical standards and raising age limits on enlistments. Kind of reminds you of a desperate Adolf Hitler sending 14-year-old boys to the Russian front, doesn’t it? And these guys — the GOP idiots running our government and military — are laughing at Rangel? No wonder the voters fired those clowns.
9 klake says: Well folks let’s get ready for a ride now that the Socialist Democrats are now showing their real colors.
Roger Rabbit Replies: click here to see our true colors. http://tinyurl.com/ya6fw8
17 It appears Bush is repudiating the Iraq commission report even before it’s released. Bush said today our troops are staying in Iraq.
From today’s fish wrapper:
“I’m waiting for someone to point at the arrival of snow in the Northwest as proof that global warming doesn’t exist. — Samuel White, Redmond”
http://tinyurl.com/ycu9rp
I’m wondering that myself. Where is Redneck? Did Goldy finally toss him into Puget Sound wearing cement flippers for not paying his gambling debt?
wow roger, without you this blog wouldn’t exist, would it?
now you are quoting sound politics to fill the dead air?
now that’s funny……really.
http://www.opednews.com/articl.....stream.htm
Why isn’t Mainstream Media Skewering GIngrich for Anti Free-Speech Remarks?
“Bottom line, if a Dem said what Gingrich said, they’d be tearing him or her a new piece of anatomy. But a repug said it, so he gets a pass.
The media are broken and in need of repair.”
No, Ghost, what’s funny is this:
“Clowns who abuse free speech by attacking other people for no good reason will be dealt with promptly”
Interesting how many of the comments you post here wouldn’t pass muster on your own blog.
http://www.geraldplessner.com/.....1214011224
Newt Gingrich
SERIAL ADULTERER
SEX ADDICT
“Newt Gingrich is certainly not the only Republican who has cheated on more wives than Bill Clinton, but he has to be at the top of the list. Newt’s brazen serial adultery and pathetic sexual addiction are almost beyond belief. Here’s the full story in chronological order, perhaps for the first time.
Newt’s callousness is legendary. Like telling his first wife that he was dumping her as she lay in a hospital bed recovering from cancer surgery. It is also absolutely true. But it is only one example of Gingrich’s self-centered arrogance and his rampant sexual addiction. There is a long string of stories about how he has used women over the years.”
http://www.buzzflash.com/store/items/417
“By revisiting public statements, official documents and journalistic reports from the months leading up to the Iraq invasion, de la Vega builds a legal case that President Bush and top members of his administration engaged in a conspiracy to “deceive the American public and Congress into supporting the war.” Drawing on her experience as a federal prosecutor, as well as the work of scholars and legal experts, she brings a well-honed legal perspective to the issue.”
Jesus Christ, Klake, if you’re going to ramble incoherently at least learn to spell and use grammar.
And by the way, Michael Moore and the Hollywood types aren’t funded by taxpayer dollars like Haliburton is (no-bid government contracts that WE pay for)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....35174.html
This planet cannot survive two more years of a President and administration so stubbornly–insanely–oblivious to reality. The Constitution provides that when such a state of affairs comes to pass, there is a solution: Impeachment.
Democrats Reject Key 9/11 Panel Suggestion
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....17_pf.html
Oh well what’s another lie during a campaign among liberals?
Republicans suck!
This is just a lull in the action, wingnuts. Wait ’til we get the reins of power back. We will investigate you into oblivion for now and all time to come.
You are the current equivalent of the miserable Whig Party.
Goodbye and Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish.
22 christmasghost says: wow roger, … now you are quoting sound politics …? … 11/30/2006 at 7:40 pm
Only to mock them.
re 29: How apropos: A wingnut named “ROB”.
Hey ghost, are you gonna defend that wingnut jerk who hopes terrorists hijack a plan and kill Americans to help the GOP win elections? Go ahead … do it … I dare you. No, I DOUBLE DARE you!!!
erratum
plane not plan
We need to get rid of Bush as soon as possible.
IMPEACH BUSH
Oh boy, here we go again campers!
From http://www.komoradio.com/news/4795006.html
Great suffering cats, is EV-ry SING-le ONE of THESE re-PUB-li-CANS a PERVERT??
36
From your lips to God’s ears.
29 “… Democratic leaders have decided for now against … a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation’s intelligence agencies.”
Any reason why you Republicans didn’t do this during the 12 years you controlled the House of Representatives and had the chance?
Great suffering cats, is EV-ry SING-le ONE of THESE re-PUB-li-CANS a PERVERT??
11/30/2006 at 8:12 pm
Hey you forgot racist.
37 Great suffering cats, is EV-ry SING-le ONE of THESE re-PUB-li-CANS a PERVERT??
Do you need to ask?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....35244.html
Sociopaths Have Taken Over the Op-Ed Pages
“Is it me, or in the last year have we seen a shocking rise in the number of major pundits who have acknowledged (perhaps inadvertently) their own sociopathic tendencies? I ask this after reading this from the Washington Post’s Richard Cohen: ………”
41
No, not really.
re: 33, you screen name seem appropriate though harry poon. We have known all along that you liberal women don’t shave.
40
I don’t know about the racism charge. I bet he would do black 15-year-old girls or Asian 15-year-old girls just as readily as he’d do white 15-year-old girls.
Aaargh, I got caught by Goldy’s spam filters.
Anyway . . .
40
I doubt he’s racist. I’ll bet you just about anything the race of his prey didn’t enter into his decisions.
40
I doubt he’s racist. I’ll bet you just about anything the race of his prey didn’t enter into his decisions.
11/30/2006 at 8:22 pm
I know race never mattered to me. I would drown a black woman just as fast as I would a white woman. You tell em killin.
Harry Poon,
President Bush has to do something wrong before you impeach him………
Treasonous pickle says:
Jesus Christ, Klake, if you’re going to ramble incoherently at least learn to spell and use grammar.
And by the way, Michael Moore and the Hollywood types aren’t funded by taxpayer dollars like Halliburton is (no-bid government contracts that WE pay for)
11/30/2006 at 8:05 pm
Mr. Treasonous prick talk about Halliburton you with your great wealth could also be awarded the government contracts. Now all you have to do get off your dead ass and bid on the contracts. When I was in South West Asia there were many companies biding on the many construction projects, now could you name just three? You would have to pay taxes in order to make a contribution for the War effort. Now that would require you to have a paying job above the table.
Mr. Treasonous prick talk about Halliburton you with your great wealth could also be awarded the government contracts. Now all you have to do get off your dead ass and bid on the contracts. When I was in South West Asia there were many companies biding on the many construction projects, now could you name just three? You would have to pay taxes in order to make a contribution for the War effort. Now that would require you to have a paying job above the table.
Uh, could you talk in an English that the rest of us understand?
Don’t drink and post, man.
don joe@24………EXCEPT, i have never blocked anyone’s opinion. ever. never will.
spam yes……opinion? no.
my point was ‘if you just attack other people for their opinions without really having one of your own ,and you are vulgar or threatening…then i will deal with you’.
i didn’t say HOW i would deal with you…now did i?
i have never deleted an opposing opinion….and i won’t. i don’t think goldy does either does he?
that would be idiocy wouldn’t it? and pretty unamerican too.
and BTW….i have never posted anything here or elsewhere that i wouldn’t allow on my own blog…so it’s pretty silly of you to make that statement don’t you think?
i may dislike his opinions but you have just got to love that nickname “treasonous pickle”
it’s funny as hell………
The best show that George Clooney played in check it out folks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4znAqNYB1s
Roger here is your funny little friend was he talking while intoxicated?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....38;search=
We’re coming for you Flakey Klakey – we’re coming for you!!!
Ghost,
“i didn’t say HOW i would deal with you…now did i?”
How you would deal with it is irrelevant. You haven’t argued that you wouldn’t “deal with” a liberal who came to your blog and did exactly what you’ve done here. Or, are you going to pretend for us that the whole “dhimmicrat” shtick was not intended to question the fundamental patriotism and citizenship of every Democrat?
Should Companies Be Allowed To Fire Smokers?
I saw in today’s news that a Massachusetts man was fired for his off-the-job private behavior, namely smoking. The article mentions that Alaska Air, one of our local employers, has a policy of not hiring smokers. http://tinyurl.com/ymq4a9
Employers argue that smokers drive up their employee health care costs, and that managing labor costs is a legitimate business interest. But employers’ anti-smoking policies raise questions about how much power society should give employers to intrude into the private lives of their employees. For example, I’ve seen comments posted by small business owner on rightwing blogs saying they would never employ a liberal. Well, how would they know, unless they ask? Which raises the question, should asking a job applicant or employee who he votes for be against the law? I say yes — absolutely yes. That is not tolerable in a democratic society.
Getting back to anti-smoking policies, absent an employment contract, employment usually is “at will” which means the employer can fire for a good reason, bad reason, or no reason, as long as it’s not a prohibited reason. And in many states, firing employees for off-duty smoking IS a prohibited reason — because public pressure has led legislatures to enact laws prohibiting employers from discriminating against smokers.
Does government have the right to do that? even though smokers cost employers money in health care costs? Damn right it does! Whether such laws are good policy is another question, but the power of government to regulate how employers treat job applicants and employees is not debatable. This is a democracy and we, as voters, have a right to collectively pass laws to keep certain groups or individuals in society from interfering with our private lives. The rationale behind these laws is that the individual’s right to privacy off the job outweighs any employer interest in the employee’s off-duty behavior.
But that depends on what the behavior is, of course. If the employee’s off-duty behavior consists of soliciting minors for sex, then the scale should tip the other way. No employer should be forced to employ people who sexually exploit children! (In case you’re wondering why all those perverts aren’t in jail, the answer is Republicans refuse to prosecute their own, but when we Democrats take over that’s going to change!)
While I sympathize with employers to some extent on the smoking issue, I think policies that make off-duty smoking a firing offense — and require employees to submit to urine tests to check for nicotine in their system — is too fucking intrusive. I just don’t want employers to have that much power over our private lives. And I don’t even smoke; for me, it’s the principle.
But there’s another problem with anti-smoking policies, and that’s their punitive effect on people who were victimized by Big Tobacco. Yes, victimized. The legal basis of the tobacco litigation was not that smoking is harmful, but that tobacco companies lied to consumers about the dangers of smoking and — even worse — deliberately made their products addictive in order to hook smokers. It’s too facile to simply say, “just quit smoking, and if you can’t, it’s because you lack character.” I’m not going to go into a medical discussion here, I just think that argument is bullshit, because I’ve known too many people who would have quit smoking if they could, but they couldn’t. I don’t see any difference between Big Tobacco and a crack dealer.
I’m a reasonable bunny, though, and willing to compromise. If you free-market types feel strongly about letting employers fire smokers, then let’s do this. Okay, they can fire smokers, but the tobacco companies have to reimburse every fired smoker for his financial loss including lost earnings, the costs of seeking other employment, moving costs necessary to become reemployed, and all other expenses associated with the job loss, including attorney fees. Not reasonable attorney fees, but actual attorney fees. That only seems fair, because the tobacco companies caused the guy to lose his job under circumstances amounting to intentional tort. And if that bleeds the tobacco companies dry and puts them all out of business, we won’t have employers firing smokers in the future, will we? And if the tobacco companies run out of money before all the fired smokers are reimbursed, then let’s impose a special income tax on all employers in an amount necessary to fully fund the fired smokers’ reimbursement fund.
So you see, I’m not against letting employers fire whoever they want to fire. They just have to pay to play, that’s all.
Anti Liberal @ 4:
1. Your side lost. How sad is that?
2. You actually counted and logged the posts. How sad is that?
3. Go fuck yourself!
Respectfully,
Carl Grossman
Liberal, Democrat, Jew and voting member of the winning side.
re 48: You are an airhead.
Impeach Bush
48 10,000 violations of FISA should do it
oops that should be 10,000,000
59
Oh, so now you attack the messenger! Don’t agree with someone else’s opinion – attack them!
Roger,
10,000,000 FISA violations? I don’t think the NSA has enough employees for all of that…… You must have missed the recent article that praised the NSA for the high security and high level of protections for our civil rights!
Sarge,
“10,000,000 FISA violations? I don’t think the NSA has enough employees for all of that…”
When you say stuff like the above, the comment at 59 becomes an observation, not an attack.
Klake says we can all be rich if we just bid on a government contract.
He “neglects” to mention that most of the money being spent on Iraq and Katrina was paid under “no-bid, emergency contracts”. In New Orleans, prospective contractors were just told to try to get sub-contracts under the big guys who were already awarded contracts. When some local contractors showed up thinking they were attending a pre-bid meeting and were instead merely informed that the government was just passing out names and contact numbers for Halliburton subsidiaries who already had the contracts, they were booted out of the building when they tried to protest. I’m looking forward to some Congressional investigations on contracting in New Orleans.
But for the less visable contracts, here is how it works. The local government procurement agent has a relationship with the contractor they want to work on the project. Sometimes it is friendship, sometimes a long working relationship, sometimes its sex, sometimes its money. But for whatever reason, they want this one particular contractor to win the bid.
So the government procurement agent doesn’t have any say in the bidding process, except at the first crucial stage, where they outline who is a “qualified contractor”. They take the brochure or resume of the favored contractor in hand, and then write the qualifications so that only one contractor meets them in all respects – the one who’s resume/brochure forms is in front of them.
Other companies can place cheaper bids to perform the services, arguing that although they don’t meet the specific qualifications that their skills or experience is just as good or better, but in the end the favored contractor always gets the job. As long as they are not too greedy, they can survive most bid challenges.
I used to see this when I was working on environmental remediation projects. In some cases our firm would be rejected as not meeting the qualifications by the government agency, then the winning bidder would turn around and sub-contract most of the work to us. They would take our reports, put their own cover on it, and collect the lion’s share of the profit.
You can see the same thing in effect when you see advertisements for hiring a government position, when the requirements are suspiciously detailed. Usually they already have someone at the agency already that they want to promote into the new position, but because it is a new position they have to send it out for hire first. But sometimes, someone in the process has a friend they want to get the job.
Of course, in “local governments” around the country, you can sometimes find somebody in the county clerk’s office who will cooperate with a contractor. Bids from competitors can be “lost in the mail”. The favored bidder will be waiting until the last minute to file their bid, waiting for the call from the clerk telling them the amount of the competing bids.
But for the most part, this only applies to services contracts, which incidentally where most of the money is. For actual “things”, whether it be vehicles, equipment, furniture, or office supplies, there is a lot less bid-rigging, simply because the actual item being purchased is more easily identified and available from multiple bidders.
You must have missed the recent article that praised the NSA for the high security and high level of protections for our civil rights!
I didn’t miss it. Neither did Glenn Greenwald. The questions is, why should we reject the rule of law? Congress passed FISA; the president signed it into law. It clearly governs the warrantless wiretapping program at issue here. The law clearly enumerates criminal penalties for violating the law. The president has admitted to violating the law. Does it really matter if they were careful in breaking the law? It’s like saying, sure, my house was burglarized, but at least they didn’t break the things they didn’t steal.
Also, the “protections” you tout were in place while violations were occurring in the 60s and 70s. What makes you think administrative procedures are more effective than a court authorized by Congress and the president?
And, of course, you neglect to mention that the praise for the program came from a hand-picked group of people who already favored the program.
don joe@56………” Or, are you going to pretend for us that the whole “dhimmicrat” shtick ”
so…..now that your little theory blows up in your face here you change direction? are you trying to say that there aren’t democrats so far to the left that they have actually left the “building” and your support? just like there are alot of far right republicans that i don’t consider republicans…they are just way out there nutjobs.
are you trying to say there are no “dhimmicrats”? you know….those people that wear the palestinian headscarf while protesting those “evil zionists”?
you agree with those people?
you consider them democrats just like yourself?
now…this should be interesting.
and as for your snarky opinion that i wouldn’t “allow” people to publish comments like mine are here on my site…..where is your evidence? it should be easy to find, right????
or are you just another whiner with no point?
and by the way….HOW i deal with it is to strike up a conversation. ask kevin from preemptive karma…the oxymoronic blog.
Don Joe,
NSA has NOT listened into 10 million phone conversations illegally. Gimme me a fucking break!
Another TJ,
Quite simply because communications are traveling at light speed these days compared to the 60’s and 70’s……
Every Administration since the 60’s and 70’s has broken the FISA laws to some extent. It’s nothing new. Damn, President Clinton authorized a physical break-in to an American spy’s house to gather evidence against him. The government got the evidence and the spy made a plea deal and went to jail for lots of years.
The panel included two Democrats and as for the protections, they did NOT say when they were put in place.
It is debatable as to whether the Administration has broken any laws, many constitutional scholars believe that the President as Commander in Chief has very expansive powers to collect military intelligence for national security reasons. Other scholars disagree. What you don’t see is very many Democratic congressmen trying to stop the program, other than the obvious sound bytes.
Quite simply because communications are traveling at light speed these days compared to the 60’s and 70’s
Telephone calls are so much faster now than they were in the 60s and 70s that post-hoc warrants are impossible? Wow.
Every Administration since the 60’s and 70’s has broken the FISA laws to some extent.
Bull. Absolute BS. Prove it.
It’s nothing new. Damn, President Clinton authorized a physical break-in to an American spy’s house to gather evidence against him. The government got the evidence and the spy made a plea deal and went to jail for lots of years.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
It is debatable as to whether the Administration has broken any laws
The president himself admitted to violating the law. Go back and reread the Youngstown Sheet and Tube decision.
Ghost,
“so…..now that your little theory blows up in your face here you change direction? are you trying to say that there aren’t democrats so far to the left that they have actually left the “building” and your support? just like there are alot of far right republicans that i don’t consider republicans…they are just way out there nutjobs.”
My little theory blows up in my face? The straw man you created and slew isn’t my theory. I never said that you’d delete the comments.
The fact still remains, because you’ve now twice failed to repudiate it, that what you do here you would “deal with” if a liberal did it on your blog. You’re a hypocrite, Ghost. Being “socially responsible” to you means policing everyone else’s behavior while spending not one second critiquing your own.
Moreover, you completely miss the point about your use of “dhimmicrat”. Ignoring, for now, your revision from your previous usage of the term (which was most certainly directed at mainstream progressives as well as toward those on the far left of the spectrum), your use of the term very clearly implied that people would rather live under the governance of an Islamic regime. Rather than actually addressing people’s views, you trivialize them by imputing motives that are simply not in evidence. That’s the worst kind of ad-hominem argument.
So, face it, Ghost. You’re a typical, Republican hypocrite.
Sarge,
“NSA has NOT listened into 10 million phone conversations illegally. Gimme me a fucking break!”
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/.....talk_hersh
Given the NSA’s capacity and the government’s stated policy of not receiving FISA warrants before invoking that capability, 10 million phone conversations is very likely an underestimate.
Sarge,
“Quite simply because communications are traveling at light speed these days compared to the 60’s and 70’s……”
I hate to break the news to you, but communications have travelled at the speed of light ever since people have been using electrons running along wires, which would be some time in the middle of the 19th century.
Don Joe,
Read your whole article………. there’s a big difference in tens of thousands and 10 million.
There also is a big difference in computers tracking phone numbers – who’s calling who and listening in to the conversation…….
Another TJ,
“But in at least one well-documented case, Clinton authorized domestic electronic surveillance of a U.S. citizen without a warrant. FBI agents were allowed to break into the home of 31-year CIA veteran Aldrich Ames in 1993 to install eavesdropping devices.
An FBI summary of the case described it this way: “FBI Special Agents and Investigative Specialists conducted intensive physical and electronic surveillance of Ames during a ten-month investigation. Searches of Ames’s residence revealed documents and other information linking Ames to the Russian foreign intelligence service.”
“In the early morning hours of an autumn morning in 1993, an unmarked government sedan rolled slowly down an empty tree-lined street in Arlington. The FBI agents inside parked just up from a handsome two-story home. The agents knew the place well. Three months earlier, an FBI team had gone inside to bug the place. That operation had been a quick in and out. This time the agents planned to stay for a while. The owners were out of town on vacation. The house was vacant,” the pair wrote. “With several hours to go before dawn, the FBI team slipped inside. They had with them the necessary equipment, but they did not have a warrant.”
Though Ames’s attorney initially planned to challenge the admissibility of the evidence collected through the warrantless searches and surveillance, Ames decided to plead guilty to espionage charges instead. He is serving life in prison without possibility of parole.”
http://www.concurringopinions......bushs.html
sgmmac,
Your post at 7:19 is irrelevent. The U.S. government in the Ames case NEVER VIOLATED FISA.
Next.
Garge,
Either you didn’t read this:
Or you don’t understand the concept of a geometric progression.
Also, Sarge, while the source quoted in the New Yorker article gave a number in the 5 digit range, there’s strong evidence to suggest the number us much larger. Read up on the NSA’s Echelon program, that actually parses the content of, “an estimated 3 billion communications per day.” At that rate, 10’s of millions looks like an underestimate, and 10’s of thousands looks absurdly small.
Interestingly enough, I found that item by following through on some of the links on the Concurring Opinions page you referenced regarding the Ames case.
Don Joe,
I got that they tracked and connected the dots and that more and more people are sucked into the identified numbers. But as for actually listening – the number is small. The question would be – is it against the FISA rules to identify potential suspects? You can’t listen without a warrant, but can you identify suspects to then get a warrant to listen in on?
Investigation has always been an allowable police activity.
Another TJ,
Yes, Clinton and his administration violated FISA…… What part of breaking in a man’s house who was a US Citizen and installing listening devices don’t you get?
I first heard of the Ames case on Fox – Judge Napolitano wrote a book “Constitutional Chaos” was discussing it and his point is the government can’t break the law to enforce the law. He said his book is full of examples of the government breaking the laws they are trying to enforce.
Sarge,
First, go read the stuff on Echelon. In fact, do a Google search on the combined terms “NSA and ECHELON”. If that stuff doesn’t scare the pants off you, then you really are just a political hack. The only thing that prevents the NSA from crossing the legal line is the oversight provided by FISA.
Second, you’re not connecting the dots. Combine the concept of “chaining” with the 10’s of thousands number that was given in the report. Now, extrapolate forward using the geometric progression that’s implied by the concept of “chaining”. Not only is the number, by now, much larger, it’s not at all unreasonable for the number now to be orders of magnitude larger.
Sarge, if the term “geometric progression” is foreign to you, think “compound interest”.
As for Clinton and FISA, the argument is so pathetic on so many levels, it’s difficult to figure out where to begin.
First of all, what does the “F” in FISA stand for? That’s right. FISA doesn’t apply.
Secondly, the serveilance against Ames was conducted against a government employee with specific security clearances. The serveilance is justified under the terms of a voluntarily accepted employment contract. It’s exactly the same issue as the legal rights of members of the military. Why do you suppose Ames chose to plead the case rather than press the argument that the serveillance used against him was unconstitutional? Because he new he’d lose the argument.
Lastly, even if we assume that the “F” in FISA doesn’t stand for “Foreign”, and that the surveillance against Ames did, as a matter of law, violate Ames’ constitutional rights, you’re stooping to that lame old “Clinton did it” defense of something that is orders of magnitude worse. Indeed, the comparison to Clinton is so incredibly lame that it insults the intelligence of the average domestic pet.
Sarge,
One last point regarding Andrew Napolitano. I seems he’s come under criticism for misstating facts and issues of law both by conservative publications and less conservative publications.
When it comes to his discussion of US Constitutional Law, he’s far from an expert. He was a state-level judge, and his experience with Federal law is rather limited.
Yes, Clinton and his administration violated FISA…… What part of breaking in a man’s house who was a US Citizen and installing listening devices don’t you get?
Again, you don’t have the first damn clue what you’re talking about.
I first heard of the Ames case on Fox – Judge Napolitano…
Oh, sweet Jesus.
I first heard of the Ames case on Fox – Judge Napolitano wrote a book “Constitutional Chaos” was discussing it and his point is the government can’t break the law to enforce the law.
You do realize this undermines your claim that Bush can violate FISA at his discretion, don’t you?
So, have you reread the Youngstown Sheet and Tube case yet? Do you understand why it’s applicable here?
don joe….you are kidding, right? and just what do i do here that i wouldn’t “allow” on my blog?
you don’t have an answer…
as for ‘not’ thinking about what i do and say and think? oh please…the person that lives the unexamined life is a moron and i certainly do not fall in that category.
have you ever read anything on here where i call democrats names …like you guys do republicans/conservatives…. constantly? no? that’s because i don’t…..but maybe i should try it.
and “progressives” are not considered by any democrats i know to be mainstream or moderate. they are the fruit loops. it’s C-O-D-E for far left of left mindless fools.
there….now i have called them names.
i feel so much better already.
but you never answered my question…..do you consider the palestinian scarf wearing /zionist hating “progressives” to be part of the same political party as yourself?
try answering questions instead of just blowing by them…it’s called conversation.
and joe….”Rather than actually addressing people’s views, you trivialize them by imputing motives that are simply not in evidence. That’s the worst kind of ad-hominem argument.
So, face it, Ghost. You’re a typical, Republican hypocrite. ”
when you made those comments you did realize that you had both feet in your mouth, right?
irony….anyone?
“don joe….you are kidding, right? and just what do i do here that i wouldn’t “allow” on my blog?”
Wow, so now you have to misquote me. I never used the word “allow”.
Look. You articulated a standard of conduct. The actual “punishment” for that standard of conduct is irrelevant. The only relevant fact is the fact that your own behavior here fails to meet that standard of conduct.
Hell, rationalize away your hypocrisy. It’s no skin off my nose, but the more you try to rationalize it away, the more pathetic you look.
don joe……you are so sadly mistaken about me and my motives and just about everything else that i must assume[as dangerous as that usually is] that we have misunderstood each other completely.
not only did i NOT misquote you [come on…don’t parse so much. what is this? what the meaning of IS, IS?]
YOU HAVE HEARD OF TONGUE IN CHEEK, RIGHT?
HUMOR? SNIDE REMARKS?
think about what i actually say on my blog about comments.
now think about everything in caps above [and you know how i hate them]……H-U-M-O-R.
and you still haven’t answered my question which i’m sure [as much as you wish it would] has not passed too many people here by.
joe…..and one more question…..where have i not met my own standards here? HMMMM?
my standard of conduct i think is usually well above most of the sneering, name calling posters here on both sides…really, don’t you think?
no foul language etc.
Ghost,
“joe…..and one more question…..where have i not met my own standards here? HMMMM?”
I thought I’d already pointed that out. You really have no idea how offensive your “dhimmicrat” joke was, do you? Do you have even the remotest idea what such a comment would mean to someone who has a number of friends who are members of the Baha’i Faith regardless of their political perusasion?
Let me put it this way, Ghost, if you think “Welsher” is offensive, then you have to understand that “dhimmicrat” is way over the top.
Just in case you don’t know what this is about here is a blog post that explains the point rather succinctly.