Here's tthe case you mention http://www.truthdig.com/dig/item/20070809_inside_the_data_mine/

The thing I wonder about is, was Nacchio really dirty, or after he sold some stock, but before Qwest was notified of the nixed contract, did somebody from the WH or DoJ leak the info about the lost contract to those with stock, or brokers of same? I.e. , did somebody in the executive branch manipulate the price so they could play "gotcha" (and possibly help contacts make out better financially)? Sounds like a tinfoil hat scenario, but with this bunch nothing can be ruled out.

Ran across your ~ gooperish doppleganger . Good that you didn't go down that road and are the Good Celery . Here's the bad celery , (com)posting in the U.P. http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/dahlgren

(In his defense, UP winters could drive anybody batwingnutshit crazy :)

:0

re: Question

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? -- mikeinportc

Ah yes, a good example of why all this examination of intelligence resources helps the bad guys. I believe you're referring to the NY Times outing of the Swift Banking program, where EU central banks could trace financial paper trails, and the US asked for access to that information.

What was a very good source of information, was completely blown for no good reason, giving a crash course to terrorists of what not to do, and how to avoid scrutiny.

Keep up the good work. With that kind of help Al Qaeda may send folks like you a certificate of commendation for enabling death and destruction across the globe.

-- shooter242

Uh....nope. Way,way off . I was referring to the NSA and their counterparts in Canada,the UK, Australia, and possibly others, intercepting electronic communication,including financial transactions, and sharing it to get around domestic surveillance laws in the respective countries. Even if that program isn't as supposed , I still have the question in general. Is there anything in Constitutional law, FISA, the new bill, or any other law, to prohibit our government from doing this?

The Richard Reeves (back when) criticism of Bork seems the best fit . He's an authoritarian . That's his "principle". Authority> individuals. Every time .

ps I'm glad that the public decided to keep this public.

http://www.summitpost.org/area/range/368791/paria-canyon-vermilion-cliffs-wilderness.html

http://www.summitpost.org/image/149286/150395/nice-undercast-from.html

( & the overwhelming majority of what's on the site, and similar)

The second link,(I did volunteer work there - so no free ride) and most of the NY sites , are public via the state Constitution , enacted during a constitutional convention . How's that situation fit in/viewed by Libertarian theory ? (Really - just curious)

Soybean rust, eh? That a virus , or fungus ? Constantly finding new uses for it . It is the best, and about the only sure solution for mealy bug .

"they" have something on Calabresi &/or Time's management?

is turning into the all-Wright/Obama , all the time network. They seem determined to present the idea that Obama's in serious trouble (hint: of dropping out) .Looked all over print and electronic media , and FOX and closely related fellow-travelers are making it seem so dire .Still insinuating same for Rezko "situation" also . Hardly a mention in the overwhelming majority of MSM.Of course all of the prominent white hate/fearmongers are welcome in Murdochville , if they're wearing a collar.

I'm afraid that even if he gets through this more or less unscathed with the majority , the FOX-only crowd are being set up to think he's among the worst ever. Should he win they'll be closed and resistant, loudly and disruptively so, to anything he says or does , should he win . In other words the Clinton years revisited , with nothing viewed/decided on the merits .

Btw, I see some of the latest is , (and is being retracted by, sort of )from Newsmax. Incidentally, Chris Ruddy made contributions to Mark Foley. Does that make Ruddy a pedophile also?

http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=FL&last=Ruddy&first=Christopher

I only saw short (30-60sec) clips of the sermons, so may not be viewing them accurately , but.....

My first thoughts were roughly what Glenn has laid out . Also some questions:

Were the highlighted parts of the sermons the main themes, or just a small part of them?

Were those parts the most memorable parts of the sermons? Or were they relatively forgettable compared to the rest ?

Does anybody that was confirmably there, remember those sermons ? Were they remarkable, or largely forgettable?

Were the sermons , as a whole, "anti-white" and "anti-american", or "anti-hypocrisy"?

Can anybody confirm, with certainty , Obama's presence or absence, or presence elsewhere?

Is there any evidence of Obama espousing any views similar to Wright's sermons? ( And while we're at it , Hillary & Ferraro?(yes) , and McCain and Hagee?)

Is all of this meant to say Obama is unpatriotic and hates whites? Evidence (and lapel pin bs doesn't count)? Any indication that Obama has any (racially) negative views about his mother and her family ?

ps. For a preview of the next round of Obama-Is-Scary , see Roger Cohen's column in NYT/IHT , about Obama's half-brother in China, and other family stuff . :)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/17/opinion/29cohen.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

"Maybe one needs to actually focus on the candidate rather than hair, husbands, and ministers? No, that would require reason wouldn't it? Can't have any of that in politics can we?

-- Wabanatta_3

Nope! That would require some actual effort , to find out what the positions are, and figure out the consequences of same . Can't have that either .

Was just reading that . Robert Stein has a comment here :http://ajliebling.blogspot.com/

Inn response to Fournier :"Didn't You Mean, Uppity, Massa? ;)

btw sysprog, do you have lic plates with same sig? NY?

*In* response...