Showing posts with label rightwing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rightwing. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

diagnosing symptoms of anti-science syndrome

This is an old post from Climate Progress but worth reading again as the attacks against Gore get dusted off one more time.

One tell-tale symptom of ASS is that a website or a writer focuses their climate attacks on non-scientists. If that non-scientist is Al Gore, this symptom alone may be definitive.

The other key symptoms involve the repetition of long-debunked denier talking points, commonly without links to supporting material. Such repetition, which can border on the pathological, is a clear warning sign.

Scientists who kept restating and republishing things that had been widely debunked in the scientific literature for many, many years would quickly be diagnosed with ASS. Such people on the web are apparently heroes — at least to the right wing and/or easily duped (see “The Deniers are winning, but only with the GOP“).

If you suspect someone of ASS, look for the repeated use of the following phrases:

  • Medieval Warm Period
  • Hockey Stick
  • Michael Mann
  • The climate is always changing
  • Alarmist
  • Hoax
  • Temperature rises precede rises in carbon dioxide
  • Pacific Decadal Oscillation
  • Water vapor
  • Sunspots
  • Cosmic rays
  • Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark
  • Ice Age was predicted in the 1970s
  • Global cooling


Monday, January 26, 2009

dear friend

Get your pre-order legacy edition now!



[click to enlarge]




via John Cole

Friday, September 12, 2008

Tuesday, September 09, 2008

Monday, September 08, 2008

collective wisdom vs. t he local bully

Like many of us, I have experienced a real trauma over the past week regarding the Palin pick and the subsequent fright fest of the RNC. Perhaps the most morbid piece of political theater I have ever witnessed in my short 36 years. To say that Palin brings up all kinds of ghosts and shadows from my past is an understatement. The Bush years have taught me one thing, that I continue to have scars from my experience with an evangelical upbringing. If you grew up in a rural place - particularly in the South (and now the SWest) - then you know what I mean first hand, or at least second hand which is bad enough in itself. You are familiar with the local politics of the Sarah Palin's of the world. You've known them in your schools and most likely your church. They are the bullies that seek to overthrow the board of ed. and by extension your city council. They annex the bleachers at middle school and high school sporting events and make sure a kind of unspoken religious bigotry gets conflated into sports competition and adolescent class warfare in school hallways. They have a way of belittling kids that seem "unsaved" or "unchurched" in the proper way. They are your local bully and hypocrite where the only rule is double standards and a vehement hatred of accountability and the common good.

The great thing about this week has been finding some kindred spirits on this subject. The Mississippifarian who does a great service in not only cataloging all the Palin links you need to read but discusses some of the feelings I have expressed above.


Intro:

The Sarah Palins I dealt with in my youth weren’t beauty queens. No, back in my day Catholics were still Catholics, and not converts to the pentecostal movement like Sarah Palin. Where I grew up Catholics tended to stay Catholic because of the profoundly anti-Catholic clique that ruled my world: my Lutheran church’s “100 widows.” With the exception of those elderly busybodies, my hometown was still pretty egalitarian.

But my church was the largest in town, so big we had to split into two softball teams (just like the Catholics). So large we made our own rules, which is why our ALC church sounded more like the Missouri Synod on most Sundays. Like any large group, there were differences of opinion among the parishioners. Some realized that in the ’60s the church needed to reach out to its young people, and our Sunday school classes (which didn’t end until you graduated from high school) started to become more “relevant.” (Younger readers should be advised that relevance was “the” buzzword of the late ’60s.)

Art and Char, two of our more liberal congregants, took responsibility for teaching World Religion to my just confirmed peers (we were mostly sophomores). It was one of the best classes I’ve ever taken in my life. Art and Char didn’t teach us what was wrong with these religions, they taught us what these other people believed, and in so doing helped us to better understand how differently people think in other parts of the world. But the 100 Widows were not amused, and shut us down. Art and Char, as I recall, didn’t even get to finish out the school year. The next year we had to take a class from the leader of the 100 Widows, a well-intentioned older woman who, when challenged, would always say something to the effect of “the devil is here among us, prompting you to ask that question.” And that would be that. She single-handedly pushed most of us away from the church.

Myrtle (that was her name), taught me about power, and how a small group of like-minded individuals could take over a much larger organization like our 1,400-member church (that may not sound large now, but there were only 10,000 people living in the entire county). For me, it was all Mark Twain and atheism after a year of Myrtle. If she was right, then I wanted to go to hell.

Women (and men) like Myrtle were a necessary precursor to the Sarah Palin generation. I have no clue where the power lies in today’s churches, but then it was with the older women. Men didn’t live as long back then because contrary to whatever the liars tell you, hard work will kill you. That and men didn’t used to be quite so churched. I had to read history books to learn how godless the Old West was, but my Dad’s generation still knew families that were defiantly unchurched. By the time I came along it was safe to say that anyone who didn’t go to church didn’t advertise that fact. Not being churched was the next worst thing to being a Communist in my part of Iowa, and I think just about everywhere else in the Cold War U.S.A.

And so countless millions of young people like myself left rural America. Most of us had to because there were no jobs, but in fact it was mostly the “hippies” who left, and the conservatives who didn’t, or who came back after college. Small towns like the ones I grew up next to became more and more conservative, and the evangelicals started showing up in greater and greater numbers.

I think the change came about with Reagan in the early ’80s. Rural communities in the north finally began to see what the South had been living with for so long. Which church you belonged to again became a big deal. For a while, in the ’70s, the old divisions had started to fade away. The evangelicals put a stop to that.

It started with the school boards. The thumpers grabbed a couple of seats and suddenly all the usual crap started: Creationism, anti-evolution crackpottery, book banning, wog bashing, etc. And it wasn’t just old women anymore, these movements were led by male pastors and by working women who subordinated themselves to male leadership. They scared the shit out of my hometown and the majority eventually made it a point to vote in the school board elections so they could be rid of the yahoos.

But they came back. They allied themselves with the jock culture that sprang up with an Eastern German fanaticism in the wake of Reagan’s goalpost-worshipping America. Football was a better wedge issue than Jesus. I had a “braniac” nephew with a fast mouth who put up with a lot of bullying despite being on the football team. (My experiences were much the same but I’m glad to say the bullies didn’t scar my nephew anymore than they did me thanks to good parenting and the fact that our bullies weren’t total braindead steroidal psychopaths li

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Friday, September 05, 2008

RNC: the words of choice (minus Choice of course)

This is good:

ThinkProgress has put together an analysis based on the prepared remarks (a total of 38,055 words) of the convention speakers, looking at how many times Republicans said various words. A glimpse at conservatives’ priorities:


Bush Administration
Bush: 1
Cheney: 0
Gonzales: 0
Rumsfeld: 0

National Security
War/Wars: 38
Surge: 14
Nuclear Weapons: 4
Diplomat(ic)/Diplomacy: 3
Torture (McCain’s): 3
Guantanamo: 1
Osama Bin Laden: 1
Afghanistan: 0
Torture (not McCain’s): 0

Economy
Jobs: 36
Economy: 27
Middle Class: 2
Housing: 1
Social Security: 1
Unemployment: 1

Other
POW: 14
Maverick: 11
Hockey Mom: 5
Tyrannosaurus: 1
Elvis: 1

Health Care
Health Care: 26
Medicare: 1
Medicaid: 1

Environment/Energy
Drill/Drilling: 18
Nuclear (Power): 10
Clean Coal: 7
Environment: 7
Gustav: 6
Climate Change: 1
Global Warming: 1
Green Economy: 1
Katrina: 0

Science
Technology: 13
Internet: 1
Science: 1
Stem Cell: 0

Civil Rights
Immigration: 5
Gay/Gays: 0

Saturday, August 09, 2008

Suskind's transcript

While the media goes haywire with John Edwards sex life one has to wonder if they will have the same reaction to the following transcript release from author Ron Suskind:

A note to readers

I've decided to post a partial transcript of one of a number of taped conversations in which Rob Richer and I discussed, on the record, the Habbush letter. We discussed it many times through the spring of 2008.

Rob Richer received a copy of The Way of the World on Monday night, August 4, the day before publication. On Tuesday, he said he had read key portions of the book and was comfortable with what they contained. Later that day, though, he issued the following the statement:

"I never received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document from Habbash as outlined in Mr Suskind's book."

The conversation below took place in June 2008. As in all of our conversations, it shows Rob pressing to get at truth and embrace probity.

This posting is contrary to my practice across 25 years as a journalist. But the issues, in this matter, are simply too important to stand as discredited in any way.

--Ron Suskind

I'm guessing this will get the back burner and yawn that all the other whistle blowers receive. Just another disgruntled CIA employee, nothing to see here move along. This isn't shocking to many of us except that it is SHOCKING and CRIMINAL and every other negative that you can conjure. At least historians will asses the contents of The Way Word Works. Of course whether those historians will be American is another question. This should be the only story the media is concerned with, regardless of partisanship. What bigger story than impeachment and treason? Just keep saying to yourself - the Surge works, the Surge provides....political cover and media myths that is.




image: Christopher Hitchens Watch

Friday, August 08, 2008

J. Edgar Chertoff


The new policy by Homeland security to seize any laptop, camera, or mobile phone they wish at international airports sure has me more than chilled. Visiting this country will become an act of pure masochism and for us natives, we may never be able to leave our harrowing hamlet again without the fear of some twit at the airport picking us out of the crowd only to fuck with our identity and long term personal safety. This could be especially problematic for artists and documentarians dealing with sensitive or controversial subject matter. It's harrowing to think of the costs and abuses of such a policy especially when you consider the "trained" eye of TSA workers.

Wired, should get a lot of credit for speaking to Chertoff about some major questions/concerns for us all. Of course our little czar misleads and answers in some of the greatest doublespeak ever uttered. What exactly is an "experiment in interactive policy-making" ?

be afraid and speak out.


image: Wired (an my sincere apology)

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Too Weird for the Wire - Kevin Carey

I tried to come up with a title but the real title is perfect so there you go. This issue of The Washington Monthly has an incredible piece about how arcane white supremacist legal theories are showing up in Baltimore courtrooms - out of the mouths of African-American drug dealers.

No kidding and after reading this, you realize how spot on the The Wire is about streets of Baltimore. But the story goes way past anything Simon could write for the show. This is something that could only surface in America. I mean it is nuts and then nuts some more.

Here's an excerpt::

Judge Davis ordered the three defendants to be removed from the court, and turned to Gardner, who had, until then, remained quiet. But Gardner, too, intoned the same strange speech. "I am Shawn Earl Gardner, live man, flesh and blood," he proclaimed. Every time the judge referred to him as "the defendant" or "Mr. Gardner," Gardner automatically interrupted: "My name is Shawn Earl Gardner, sir." Davis tried to explain to Gardner that his behavior was putting his chances of acquittal or leniency at risk. "Don't throw your life away," Davis pleaded. But Gardner wouldn't stop. Judge Davis concluded the hearing, determined to find out what was going on.

As it turned out, he wasn't alone. In the previous year, nearly twenty defendants in other Baltimore cases had begun adopting what lawyers in the federal courthouse came to call "the flesh-and-blood defense." The defense, such as it is, boils down to this: As officers of the court, all defense lawyers are really on the government's side, having sworn an oath to uphold a vast, century-old conspiracy to conceal the fact that most aspects of the federal government are illegitimate, including the courts, which have no constitutional authority to bring people to trial. The defendants also believed that a legal distinction could be drawn between their name as written on their indictment and their true identity as a "flesh and blood man."



Read the full story by Kevin Carey here.

Monday, July 14, 2008

your new FISA flow chart

Ok, so I'm still rather gripped by this legislation because frankly it scares me. Also because there continue to be excellent posts generated examining this bill. You do have to wonder, did Congressional staffs give this the same attention?

So for the latecomers to the issue or those simply confused/indifferent to it all , here is a handy flow chart examining and comparing the "old FISA" with the "new and improved FISA".

From Ketchup and Caviar:


The focus of change is the bolded red line marked “U.S. or non-U.S. Persons Located Inside or Outside the U.S.” Currently a warrant is required in this case. Notice the changes involving the bolded blue lines and text in the following chart:



continue reading Wes Alwan here and see if you can figure out how this new bill improves anything...

Friday, July 11, 2008

new FISA and the dismantling of the free press

Chris Hedges has an ominous opinion piece at the LA Times about the new FISA agreement. This will have a huge impact on how information is disseminated to the public - objective fact finding will severely be hindered. This isn't simple about the private citizen's right to privacy.

If the sweeping surveillance law signed by President Bush on Thursday -- giving the U.S. government nearly unchecked authority to eavesdrop on the phone calls and e-mails of innocent Americans -- is allowed to stand, we will have eroded one of the most important bulwarks to a free press and an open society.

The new FISA Amendments Act nearly eviscerates oversight of government surveillance. It allows the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to review only general procedures for spying rather than individual warrants. The court will not be told specifics about who will be wiretapped, which means the law provides woefully inadequate safeguards to protect innocent people whose communications are caught up in the government's dragnet surveillance program.

The law, passed under the guise of national security, ostensibly targets people outside the country. There is no question, however, that it will ensnare many communications between Americans and those overseas. Those communications can be stored indefinitely and disseminated, not just to the U.S. government but to other governments.

This law will cripple the work of those of us who as reporters communicate regularly with people overseas, especially those in the Middle East. It will intimidate dissidents, human rights activists and courageous officials who seek to expose the lies of our government or governments allied with ours. It will hang like the sword of Damocles over all who dare to defy the official versions of events. It leaves open the possibility of retribution and invites the potential for abuse by those whose concern is not with national security but with the consolidation of their own power.

Thursday, July 10, 2008

total failure

















MSNBC's Rachel Maddow asked: "What if Congress had responded to Watergate by immunizing the executive branch's lawbreakers and giving Richard Nixon sweeping new powers to snoop?

"Oh, wait! They just did! They just took thirty years or so to get around to it."

H.R. 6304, updating the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was passed by the Senate and awaits a pleased President Bush's signature Wednesday. The bill grants the executive branch virtually unchecked power to monitor Americans' electronic communications originating, or terminating, overseas, and immunizes from civil lawsuits the telecommunications companies that agreed to help the NSA eavesdrop on such communications without obtaining the proper warrants through the FISA court.

I promise to get back to art related posts soon, but I have been swept up in the drama of the Protect America Act/FISA over the last months and particularly the last weeks. The whole charade has depressed me deeply and is not without a dimension of fear. My support for the Obama candidacy has also been deeply compromised and the reality has set in that he is not ready for the enormous responsbilities of preisdent. There is an enormous legal cleanup job required after Bush's departure and it will take someone willing to fight tyranny. I'm not seeing it as he drifts closer and closer to the hypocrisy of the beltway elite.

I have to wonder how this will affect the online community and the alternative political narrative the web provides?

Here's how the whole day shook down:

Prior to final approval, the Senate, in the morning, rejected three separate amendments which would have improved the bill but which, the White House threatened, would have prompted a veto. With those amendments defeated, the Senate then passed the same bill passed last week by the House, which means it is that bill, in unchanged form, that will be signed into law -- just as the Bush administration demanded.

The first amendment, from Sens. Dodd, Feingold and Leahy, would have stripped from the bill the provision immunizing the telecoms. That amendment failed by a vote of 32-66, with all Republicans and 17 Democrats against (the roll call vote is here). The next amendment was offered by Sen. Arlen Specter, which would have merely required a court to determine the constitutionality of the NSA spying program and grant telecom immunity only upon a finding of constitutionality. Specter's amendment failed, 37-61 (roll call vote is here). The third amendment to fail was one sponsored by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, merely requiring that the Senate wait until the Inspector General audits of the NSA program are complete before immunizing the telecoms. The Bingaman amendment failed by a vote of 42-56 (roll call vote here). Both Obama and Clinton voted for all three failed amendments.

The Senators then voted for "cloture" on the underlying FISA bill -- the procedure that allows the Senate to overcome any filibusters -- and it passed by a vote of 72-26. Obama voted along with all Republicans for cloture. Hillary Clinton voted with 25 other Democrats against cloture (strangely, Clinton originally voted AYE on cloture, and then changed her vote to NAY; I'm trying to find out what explains that).

With cloture approved, the bill itself then proceeded to pass by a vote of 69-28 (roll call vote here), thereby immunizing telecoms and legalizing warrantless eavesdropping. Again, while Obama voted with all Republicans to pass the bill, Sen. Clinton voted against it.

Obama's vote in favor of cloture, in particular, cemented the complete betrayal of the commitment he made back in October when seeking the Democratic nomination. Back then, Obama's spokesman -- in response to demands for a clear statement of Obama's views on the spying controversy after he had previously given a vague and noncommittal statement -- issued this emphatic vow:

To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.
[read on at Glenn Greenwald]
Here is David Hutchins on why Democrats caved in - The MONEY Trail


image: the 110th Congress

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

Dodd-Feingold Amendment

Firedoglake is running the current voting tallies as the Congress debates for the final time on the approval of the Protect America Act and it's revision of FISA (and telecom immunity).

Call your rep today and check out where they stand here.

August 8, 1974 v. July 9, 2008

from Glenn Greenwald:

The votes in the Senate on various amendments to the FISA "compromise" bill and to the underlying bill itself were originally scheduled for today, but have been postponed until tomorrow (Wednesday, July 9) to enable Senators to attend the funeral of Jesse Helms. Rejection of the amendments -- including the Dodd-Feingold-Leahy amendment to strip telecom immunity from the bill -- is all but certain, and final passage of the bill (with the support of both presidential candidates) is guaranteed.

Once passed by the Senate, the FISA bill will then immediately be sent by the Democratic Congress to an eagerly awaiting and immensely pleased President Bush, who will sign it into law, thereby putting a permanent and happy end to the scandal that began when -- in December, 2005 -- he was caught spying on the communications of American citizens in violation of the law. The only real remaining questions are (a) whether Bush will host Steny Hoyer and Jay Rockefeller at a festive, bipartisan White House signing ceremony to celebrate the evisceration of the Fourth Amendment and the rule of law, and (b) whether Bush, when he signs the bill into law, will append a signing statement decreeing that even its minimal restraints on presidential spying are invalid.

If nothing else, as the Democratic-led Senate follows in the footsteps of the Democratic-led House this week by passing a bill demanded by George Bush and Dick Cheney to cover-up and retroactively legalize their surveillance crimes and protect the lawbreakers, there will be a clear record -- delivered to their front doors -- of what they're really doing, along with an accounting of the deceitful propaganda they are disseminating to mask and justify it.

continue reading here

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

Senator, get FISA right

Sorry for being offline, finally finally got the computer sorted and online. Anyway, if you are like me and have been deeply disappointed by Obama's position on the new FISA bill and telecom immunity from civil suits, you can pressure him via his campaign website

If you want to take further steps try these.


  • Contact Barack Obama's Senate office and do the same.
  • Use Cause Caller to contact both the Senate and Campaign Offices
    • As an alternative to the above options, you can use the Cause Caller website to help you contact the Senator and his campaign by phone
    • Click here for the Cause Caller page. The page provides a script of suggestions for things to mention on the phone, and an auto dialer for the campaign and senate offices.
    • In your own (calm, coherent) words, tell them what you think. See here for suggestions on how to say it.

  • New! Use Blue America's Whip Count Call Tool to call your senators in support of an amendment to strip telecom immunity from the FISA bill.
    • Click here so they can connect you to your senator. (If they connect you directly, the call is free.)
    • The page has suggestions for things to say in support of the Dodd-Feingold-Leahy amendment.
    • You can help track support for the Dodd-Feingold-Leahy amendment.
    • In your own (calm, coherent) words, tell them what you think. See here for suggestions on how to say it.

The Fourth amendment is at stake and with it a free society. This is a very dangerous and slippery slope towards opaque government and abuses that history reveals all too clearly.

From Glen Greenwald:


Just to get a flavor for how fundamental a reversal is Obama's FISA position, here is what Obama said back in February when accepting Chris Dodd's endorsement:

We know it's time to time to restore our Constitution and the rule of law. This is an issue that was at the heart of Senator Dodd's candidacy, and I share his passion for restoring the balance between the security we demand and the civil liberties that we cherish.

The American people must be able to trust that their president values principle over politics, and justice over unchecked power. I've been proud to stand with Senator Dodd in his fight against retroactive immunity for the telecommunications industry. Secrecy and special interests must not trump accountability. We must show our citizens -- and set an example to the world -- that laws cannot be ignored when it is inconvenient. Because in America –- no one is above the law.

Here is what he said back in January:
Ever since 9/11, this Administration has put forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand.

The FISA court works. The separation of power works. We can trace, track down and take out terrorists while ensuring that our actions are subject to vigorous oversight, and do not undermine the very laws and freedom that we are fighting to defend.

No one should get a free pass to violate the basic civil liberties of the American people -- not the President of the United States, and not the telecommunications companies that fell in line with his warrantless surveillance program. We have to make clear the lines that cannot be crossed. . . .

A grassroots movement of Americans has pushed this issue to the forefront. You have come together across this country. You have called upon our leaders to adhere to the Constitution. You have sent a message to the halls of power that the American people will not permit the abuse of power -- and demanded that we reclaim our core values by restoring the rule of law.

It's time for Washington to hear your voices, and to act. I share your commitment to this cause, and will stand with you in the fights to come.

And obviously, his vow last October to "support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies" can't be reconciled with his vow to "support" such a bill now.

The issue is not -- as one extremely confused Obama-cheering blogger put it -- that Obama has done "something contrary to what conventional wisdom as dictated by a small coterie of prominent bloggers agrees with," nor is it -- as an equally confused, Obama-cheering Ed Kilgore put it -- that Obama is "stray[ing] from Democratic Party orthodoxy or from strict down-the-line partisanship" by "expressing heretical thoughts on FISA" (incidentally, it's amazing how the rule of law, the Fourth Amendment and accountability for Bush lawbreaking have now -- in service of defending Obama -- all been instantaneously reduced to nothing more than quirky, self-absorbed, petty blogger "dictates," and Obama's disregarding of those core political values is a bold demonstration that he won't be held hostage to anyone's narrow partisan demands).

The issue is that Obama has repeatedly, over the course of the last year, made emphatic commitments and clear statements about his core political values that are completely irreconcilable with his support for the FISA bill. It's possible to recognize that someone is just a "politician" and still trust that they're telling you essentially the truth about what they think and what they'll do.

Monday, June 23, 2008

fisa/telco amnesty - the race to erase the past

There are a few prescient observations today on the never say die FISA bill and why it is detrimental not only to your privacy and the 4th amendment but our legal system as a whole. The entire bill looks and feels so Soviet that it depresses the hell out of me. If this passes, America becomes are very different kind of place. The enormous unchecked power acquired will have bad consequences for a lot of innocent people.
Firedoglake:

In short, the bill outlines a crazy process where the Attorney General will give secret information to the judge sitting on a pending telco case. The information will mostly consist of the AG certifying that the previous certifications by prior AGs were legal, and if the judge dismisses that case on the basis of this or other information given to him in secret by the AG, the judge cannot talk about it in his opinion (I suppose other than to say he is basing his decision on secret info from the AG).

So, if the judge made a mistake of fact in reaching his decision, no appeal because the plaintiffs won't know what that fact is. If the judge made a mistake in his analysis of the application of the law to the facts, no appeal because the plaintiffs don't know what that analysis is.

Further, no stare decisis, no using the decision in an earlier telco case to help figure out a later case. For a legal system built around case law precedents, this is a sea change. It could make briefwriters like me obsolete.

Telcom immunity means we will never find out what happened in the PAST. OK, that's bad. Cases that can't be used as precedent can, over a long period of time, erode the legal system as we know it. That's bad, too.

But changing the definition of who can be surveilled under a basket warrant to remove any requirement that the surveillance subject be a spy or a terroist or any kind of bad guy--that's way beyond bad.

David Kris /Balkinization:
It is interesting to compare the pending legislation to the TSP as it may have been implemented just prior to, and just after, the January 2007 FISA Court orders. There appear to be two main differences. First, the pending legislation applies only to targets located abroad, while the January 2007 orders may have allowed surveillance of targets in the U.S. (as long as they were making international calls). Second, more importantly, the pending legislation focuses only on the target’s location (or the government’s reasonable belief about his location) not his status or conduct as a terrorist or agent of a foreign power. In other words, there is no requirement that anyone – the FISA Court or the NSA – find probable cause that the target is a terrorist or a spy before (or after) commencing surveillance. [David Kris Post one and Post two - required reading]

Call your senators if you haven't already.

fisa fisa fisa


Our spineless peers in Congress just can't seem to roll over enough to destroy the 4th Amendment.
Here's Russ Feingold on why last week's House capitulation is bad for you. The objective is to strip immunity from the bill as it heads for the Senate.
Reports of the newest FISA compromise indicate that, on telecom immunity, a federal court would be compelled to grant the telecoms immunity if there was substantial evidence that the Bush administration assured them that the warrantless surveillance program was legal. Doesn't that actually endorse and extend to private actors the Nixonian view that if the president says it's legal, it's legal, regardless of what the law says and the Constitution says? Wouldn't that set an awful precedent that an administration could get private actors to do whatever they wanted including breaking the law? [Laura Rozen]
Here's a call list:

SEN. Barack Obama
Phone: 312-819-2008 Toll Free: (866) 675-2008 FAX: 312-819-2088


Name


Phone


FAX
Bayh (202) 224-5623 (202) 228-1377
Carper (202) 224-2441 (202) 228-2190
Obama (202) 224-2854 (202) 228-4260
Inouye (202) 224-3934 (202) 224-6747
Johnson (202) 224-5842 (202) 228 5765
Landrieu (202)224-5824 (202) 224-9735
McCaskill (202) 224-6154 (202) 228-6326
Mikulski (202) 224-4654 (202) 224-8858
Nelson (FL) (202) 224-5274 (202) 228-2183
Clinton (202) 224-4451 (202) 228-0282
Nelson (NE) (202) 224-6551 (202) 228-0012
Pryor (202) 224-2353 (202) 228-0908
Salazar (202) 224-5852 (202) 228-5036
Specter (202) 224-4254 (202) 228-1229
Feinstein (202) 224-3841 (202) 228-3954
Webb (202) 224-4024 (202) 228-6363
Warner (202) 224-2023 (202) 224-6295
Snowe (202) 224-5344 (202) 224-1946
Collins (202) 224-2523 (202) 224-2693
Sununu (202) 224-2841 (202) 228-4131
Stevens (202) 224-3004 (202) 224-2354
Byrd (202) 224-3954 (202) 228-0002
Lincoln (202)224-4843 (202)228-1371
Reid (202) 224-3542 (202) 224-7327
Coleman (202) 224-5641 (202) 224-1152
Durbin (202) 224-2152 (202) 228-0400
Smith (202) 224-3753 (202) 228-3997
Stabenow (202) 224-4822 (202) 228-0325
Kohl (202) 224-5653 (202) 224-9787
Leahy (202) 224-4242 (202) 224-3479
Schumer (202) 224-6542 (202) 228-3027

Enough already with lawless behavior!!


ad: Blue America PAC

Friday, June 13, 2008

GITMO gear for father's day?

You thought the McCain golf pack was enough but why not splurge a little more at the GITMO gift shop? Yes, the Gitmo Naval base actually sells t-shirts, caps and other souvenirs advertising its detainee operations. You may want to buy now since the Supremes may move to close this hallowed institution. Now if I can just locate that Blackwater beer coozy...


via: the Sleuth/WAPO