How can anybody really be surprised that this is the way the media works? After the post Watergate neutering the media got via threats of loss of access, the ascendancy of corporate ownership of the media outlets and subsequent conglomerations, and the witch-hunt for “liberals” in the media there is no other expected outcome. Let us also not forget that he who sits on high of the right-wing tabloid noise machine got his fame from doing straight tabloid television which then became the model for the new media revolution of the late 90s which plagues us today and is passed off as “journalism”. We are all simply consumers of reruns of “Inside Edition”. It’s just that simple.

The cry of “judicial activism” merely underscores the basic character trait which embodies so much of modern conservative thought. The pundits speak and the sheep obey, but none actually realize that the pundits are simply children who whine and throw tantrums when they don’t get their way. It doesn’t have to be rational or grounded in reason because, after all, children don’t necessarily express themselves reasonably or rationally. They are the children that always complained to their parents or their teachers and to all others playing because they lost the game as played by the rules laid out in the beginning and understood by all those playing because somehow it wasn’t fair or everyone was against them. That’s not to say that I think those who follow are incapable of ration or reason because after explaining to them how judicial process actually works (I am a lawyer by the way) they do seem to get it and when probed deeper will often admit to not having actually understood and therefore coming to hasty conclusions about the legitimacy of many judicial outcomes. They suffer from a lack of accurate information and a willingness to jump to conclusions based on it. One of two things seems to be at work here: either those who hue and cry in the media are actually the ones who are incapable or ration and reason and retain their childlike mental processes but somehow have ascended to positions of influence anyway; or they themselves do know better and are intentionally attempting to manipulate those with the predisposition to be followers (i.e. authoritarian minded types) to create the appropriate hysteria in order to reach desired outcomes. I don’t know which it is, though I have my opinion as to.

BTW I’ve noticed a few comments talking about Bush v. Gore and I think it may be worth pointing out that it is probably not the best example of the right’s own judicial activism. It was widely reported at the time (and still is for that matter) that the decision was 5 to 4. However, if one carefully reads the opinion (as convoluted as it is with nearly every justice writing separately) one realizes that the final count was 7 to 2 as to the substance of the claims with either Kennedy or O’Conner authoring the opinion. The 5 to 4 number comes from the vote taken by the justices on whether to hear the case in the first place and that I suppose could be argued was activist in its own way. At least that is my recollection of the case from having read it at the time of the decision.

This comment it so far down the list I bet no one makes it this far. Oh well, at least my thoughts on the matter are out there in the ether.

The age of reason and self governance seems to be coming to an end. “The people” have lost the ability to control the actions of the government and will soon be crushed under its oppressive will. We allowed corporations to thrive and gain massive amounts of wealth and influence and power to the point where they are virtually indistinguishable from our government and now we are going to receive our reward. We created a monster and having done so elected to retire to slumber and allow it to run amuck. Where are the villagers with their torches and pitch forks?

All over the world free systems are contracting and remaking themselves into authoritarian surveillant police states bent on exercising the outermost limits of their power (if there are any) on citizens. Our government’s insistence on technological dragnets of surveillance will NOT stop with “terrorism” (whatever the hell that means anymore). It will be used (as is always the case) for far more imaginative future needs and to settle age old scores with those who would seek to protest such actions. All this will of coarse now take place within the safest realms of secrecy far away from any modicum of scrutiny which might seek to intrude. And so now we set off on our new journey driving a bulldozer with a bumper sticker firmly affixed that says “Slavery Is Freedom.” I suppose though that that is the natural order of things. Freedom exists only as an aberration to tyranny, and though in the larger timeline of history our experiment here might have been brief, we did have a good run of it.

I wonder what any of this means not just for domestic to foreign and foreign to domestic calls but domestic to domestic calls that are routed through foreign networks? I don't really know how the US telephone networks route calls but I would have to assume that if some foreign to foreign calls come through the US that some domestic to domestic calls go through foreign networks. Even if that isn't the case for our old twisted pair phone lines or even fiber, certainly domestic to domestic VOIP calls may be routed all over the world before reaching back to their domestic destinations. So it seems that this would allow for warrantless interception of those calls at least.