Yesterday , I wrote to my current non-responsive Congressman Michael Arcuri, and my former Congressman , Maurice Hinchey . I didn't waste too much effort on Arcuri , as I can't testify with any certainty, as to even his presence on the planet.:) . I did spend more time on Mr. Hinchey , as he has been opposed to immunity, and BushCo policies in general . The final point was to ask him to impress upon his colleagues, that if they rolled over , they could expect to be targeted by their own supporters in 2010. Good to see that it's happening even sooner .

Re: the Green Party : Mark Dunau ( an organic farmer in Hancock) ran against Hillary and "Rubber Stamp" Lazio in the 2000 campaign . With almost no money or publicity , he got a sizeable number of votes . I'm not sure , and would have to look as to how many , but it was much more than the usual for 3rd party candidates . I seem to remember his pre-election poll #s as ~17% (?) It's not near enough to win, but that would suggest , even 8 yrs ago, there was a certain level of dissatisfaction. I did hear the the occasional opinion that he was #1 choice, but the person didn't want to risk giving Newt et al, another soldier.

Tom , "but not on the substancial issues affecting our country." ?

I wouldn't characterize the 4th Amendment, giving the executive branch the power to break the law with impunity, or CMA-only secrecy, as "insignificant" . Allowing this to stand would also have a significant effect on who , and how, "substantial issues " are handled.

Oops , meant "insubstantial " , not "insignificant" .

to Ferraro, here : http://angryblackbitch.blogspot.com/

Slightly OT . I haven't had time to read all the comments so sorry if this is duplication. Did you catch this latest self-righteous bs in TWOD ?

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/legislature/sfl-flfmagicmint0312sbmar12,0,1101825.story?track=rss

There were other quotes than in that article , but don't remember where I saw 'em .

I took a great deal of abuse during Gulf War I for reacting negatively and publicly to the gleeful watching of deliberate slaughter.

I took even more abuse during "Shock 'n Awe" for the same reason.

With ya there . Hard to get happy period, but especially knowing that former neighbors or classmates, and their friends,family etc might be on the receiving end of all our "fun" toys. ( They were here. I wasn't there) . Not "abuse " for me , mostly blank looks, and sometimes comments after I was out of earshot. (So I was told by a silent agree-er)

Democrats/"liberals" : Want to over-regulate public behavior

Republican/"conservatives :Want to over-regulate private behavior.

;)

Yes , too simple . Wasn't entirely (or mostly) serious. ;)That's a tendency not an absolute description .

Just noticed something in the Florida leg. /salvia article .

" Bill makes possession of saliva a felony"

Hope that's just an AP typo , not the Wise Ones in FLA going on an anti-spit crusade . :)

Margalis , agreed. Should be a positional description, on a particular issue, not a state of being . Don't think that's the majority opinion , though

on the comment thread of "FISA Fight Continues"

A couple samples : " First we must cull out the RINOS from the Republican Party and then go on to elect politicians who can show some backbone. Only after can we get rid of imbeciles and career hypocrites like Pelosi, Reid et al..."

Posted: Egon Martinovsky on March 13, 2008 at 11:14 AM

"I don't blame Speaker Pelosi because she is what she is. I blame spineless Republicans who aren't screaming bloody murder. Why isn't the GOP on all media outlets informing the public of the Democrats miserable failure on national security? And then you want me to sign a stupid petition and contribute money for what? Get a grip GOP. Post this!"

Posted: Torrey Baird on March 13, 2008 at 11:18 AM

http://blog.nrcc.org/comment.cfm?entry_id=354

"their good faith efforts in furthering.." the bottom line .

Specifically , no-review mergers , while the legally observant competition gets hamstrung.

http://www.truthdig.com/dig/item/20070809_inside_the_data_mine/

It was Phillip C Bobbitt, of Columbia, formerly of U of Texas (big surprise ) ( Where's Lorena when you need her? ;)

http://www.law.columbia.edu/fac/Philip_Bobbitt

Wtf? Any idea where he was going with that? There's plenty of useless clutter bouncing around in the 'ol brainpan, now this . Thanks Glenn :)

As for the latest Obama critiques, since when has accurate, and actual knowledge of the target's positions/words been a prerequisite for their criticism ? Just a diferent flavor of the same 'ol , same 'ol .

adam , the dogs might be the problem ? :)

Some clarification might help the discussion stemming from your first post . I'm not even sure if y'all know what you're arguing . What do you define as "extreme" on either side?

tina , I read some of those that Glenn cites & their fellow travelers, sometimes for understanding, sometimes for amusement,, sometimes just to keep up . What Glenn has quoted isn't atypical . Some tend to go there at first opportunity . It is a curiosity.

Not to rain on the parade (OK I'm rainin'), but is there anything to stop our government from commissioning our allies to spy on us , and then share that information ? Sort of a informational extraordinary rendition?

60 minutes did a piece on Project Echelon , a few years ago . I think that's the operation you're referencing. 60M played a leaked recording of a Strom Thurmond call, to make their point .

A friend of a friend(Mike also), overhearing our discussion of it , was surprised that it was news to us. He worked on it when he was in the army, and his civillian job was involved with the technology somehow .(couldn't talk about it ) He assumed that it was common knowledge. Mike died of cancer ~1 1/2ys ago, so haven't been able to ask him about all of this . I've been wondering if all of this FISA/PAA stuff is just moot/a distraction .