Look what I ran across today on MySpace while killing time waiting for CentOS SRPMS to download (link in SIG):

Say No to Senator Bond's FISA Capitulation

go to: http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/no_fisa_capitulation/?r=686&id=365-1631426-fVPkFP

For over 30 years, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) has dictated necessary and appropriate ways for the U.S. government to collect intelligence on its own citizens for the sake of national security.

Two key provisions of this law are that:

* The government must obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) before spying on a citizen.

* Citizens have the right to sue if they believe they were spied upon illegally.

FISA provided broad leeway for every President from Carter to Clinton to conduct extensive intelligence-gathering operations. However, President Bush has decided that he is above warrants and judicial review, and major newspapers have reported that he has been using big telecoms like AT&T to spy on Americans without warrants for years.

Now, there are over 40 lawsuits against this arguably unconstitutional practice, and rather than taking his chances in court, President Bush is looking to his allies in Congress for a legislative back door solution. In February, the House of Representatives stood up to President Bush and protected the Constitution, but now the Senate is getting ready to cave in again. Senator Kit Bond is proposing a complete overhaul of FISA -- he calls it a "compromise," but we call it a catastrophe.

Here are some features of Senator Bond's attack on civil liberties:

* Unlimited warrantless wiretapping for this President and every President for the next six years.

* Retroactive immunity for all the telecoms that helped President Bush wiretap illegally during the past 8 years -- this time dressed up as a "trial" in the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court where a note from the President amounts to a get out of jail free card.

* No future judicial review for the President, either: the Attorney General gets to decide whether the President's warrantless wiretapping is legal or not.

In order to avoid this disastrous legislation, all the House has to do is stand strong on their February vote, and stick with the current version of FISA. Send a message to your representative today, and him or her to vote for the Constitution by voting against Senator Bond's catastrophic FISA "compromise" when it comes to the House.

Sign the petition

"The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has worked well for every President for the last 30 years -- until President Bush decided that warrants and judicial review were beneath him. Senator Kit Bond's current proposal is far from a 'compromise' -- it is a catastrophe. It's a blank check allowing the executive branch to spy on Americans at will, and is a direct shot at the Constitution. Please stand up for the Bill of Rights and reject Senator Bond's proposal when it comes to the House. Thank you.

*beats shooter over the head with Scott McClellan's book*

Shut.

*THWAP*

up.

*THWAP*

you..

*THWAP*

partisan..

*THWAP*

turd!..

*THWAP*

..back to work..

pols will think twice before cutting this scum sucker a paycheck.. then again, historical data suggests that rewarding failure is par for the course in DC..

i won't hold my breath for the "what happened" style mea culpa, such that it is, from penn.

So if they weren't held at Guantanamo, but instead were held on a military base in Baghdad or in Afghanistan, there'd be no question - habeas petitions would not be entertained?

No, presumably the Geneva Convention would be applied in full, however, and the status of Prisoner of War would be afforded to detainees, instead of this legal fantasy limba narnia-land we now employ by calling them "enemy combatants".

Bacon ice-cream. You are missing out.. srsly..

I literally sat up and, in my best Cartman voice, growled at the TV: "I. Hate. You. So. Much. Right. Now. Ronald. D. Moore."

Then came about a months worth of SMSs on the SideKick.

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to point out anything Olbermann said that was specifically sexist, as opposed to other criticisms he levied against the Clinton campaign that were substantive and based on issues or tactics.

My point being, there is a vast difference in the manner in which Olbermann would levy criticism against Clinton, who I truly believe he respects, and the nightly ad hominem salvos he fires off toward Fox News in general and Bill O'Reilly specifically.

So, cite some examples please.

And I agree with you, calling Olbermann a "jerk" may be okay for Rush Limbaugh, but "brutal" is a claim that is completely without merit in regard to his treatment of Clinton.

First of all, it's Roslyn.

Second, her cancer will be cured when she takes a Go'auld symbiote. Duh.

President Lee Adama finally realizes why his relationships with Kara and Dualla failed when he meets Captain Jack Harkness.

Of course, the Skarans will be hella pissed when they find that their flower beds are scorched, and with the Peacekeepers on their tail, all hell is about to break loose.

Stay tuned, Sci-Fi fans!

Are you on hallucinogens, or just an idiot?