http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/bush_heads_to_nsa_huddles_with.html

Bush heads to NSA, huddles with conservatives
by Mark Silva

With a day-trip to the secretive National Security Agency in Maryland, less than an hour up the road from the White House, President Bush and his senior team of advisers today hope to make the case for a permanent extension of the federal law on wiretapping of terrorism suspects.

Back at the White House, Bush plans to sit down this afternoon with several invited conservative columnists for a "roundtable'' conversation.

Congress approved an updating of the 1978-vintage Foreign Intelligence Security Act in hastily approved legislation before recess for Labor Day, but that compromise carried a six-month expiration.

“We believe the bill should be made permanent,’’ said Dana Perino, the White House press secretary. “Al Qaeda doesn’t work on a six-month extension. None of our enemies do.’’

Is that NSA facility where all the “warrant-less wiretapping’’ of foreign terrorism suspects communicating with people inside the United States is carried out? Perino was asked this morning. “Wow, that’s a loaded question,’’ she said. “I don’t know all that they do there.. But you can imagine that if they are implementing the FISA reforms, they have some measure of operational responsibility for that.’’

The White House has two demands for a permanent bill – one, that it be made permanent, and two, that telecommunication companies that helped the government on security after Sept. 11, 2001 be granted retroactive immunity for any legal liability in their cooperation with surveillance.

Bush will be accompanied by Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, National Security Adviser Steve Hadley, Counsel Fred Fielding, Homeland Security Adviser Fran Townsend and others, and plans a statement there.

Bush also plans a roundtable with several conservative columnists, including Michael Barone, David Brooks, Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Tony Blankley, Kate O'Bierne and others.

“We regularly meet with conservative columnists,’’ Perino said. [...]

- - Posted by Mark Silva on September 19, 2007

x x Against Ron Paul- the ONLY honest pol out there

-- brightstar65

I'm sure they said the same thing about Hitler back in Weimar in the 30's. Most of the clowns supporting Ron Paul now said the same thing about Bush in 2000, including Justin Raimondo.

People like you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Only an idiot thinks honest politicians exist. There might be one or two out there. It sure as hell isn't Ron Paul.

No one man is going to save you, the republic, democracy or the country. If you think that, you need help.

John Dean and old time Republicans disagree with you about the parties, anyway.

As I was writing this closing section an old friend from the Nixon White House called. Now retired, he is a lifelong Republican who told me that he voted for Bush and Cheney twice, because he knows them both personally. He asked how my new book was coming, and when I told him the title, he remarked, "I'll say the government's broken." After we discussed it, he asked how I planned to end the book, since the election was still a good distance away. I told him I was contemplating ending midsentence and immediately fading to black -- the way HBO did in the final episode of the Sopranos, but that I would settle for a nice quote from him, on the record. He explained that he constantly has to bite his tongue, and the reason he does not speak out more is because one of his sons is in an important (nonpolitical) government post, and we both know that Republicans will seek revenge wherever they can find it. How about an off-the-record comment? I asked. That he agreed to.

"Just tell your readers that you have a source who knows a lot about the Republican party from long experience, that he knows all the key movers and shakers, and he has a bit of advice: People should not vote for any Republican, because they're dangerous, dishonest and self-serving. While I once believed that Governor George Wallace had it right, that there was not a dime's worth of difference in the parties; that is not longer true. I have come to realize the Democrats really do care about people who most need help from government; Republicans care most about those who will only get richer because of government help. The government is truly broken, particularly in dealing with national security, and another four years, and heaven forbid not eight years, under the Republicans, and our grandchildren will have to build a new government, because the one we have will be unrecognizable and unworkable."

These comments summed up our current situation -- and our possible future -- as eloquently as anything I could have wished.

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/09/11/dean/index1.html

If you want Pols to be responsive to the people, not the big money interests and corporations and their lobbyists, you want publicly financed elections. I guaranfuckingtee you Ron Paul doesn't want that. Think what you like. Call him what you like. He's an extremist far right Republican and neither he, nor anyone like him, will ever be president. Thank God.

Poll: Overwhelming Support for Publicly Financed Elections

By Nathan Newman

A new national poll finds overwhelming support (74%) for public financing of elections, the result no doubt of soaring campaign costs, lobbyist scandals and the desire for fairer, cleaner elections.

The result is bipartisan with eighty percent of Democrats, 78% of Independents, and 65% of Republicans support this reform.

What's important to emphasize is why voters said things would improve with public financing of elections.

82% of voters believe it is likely, as a result of publicly financed elections, that candidates will win on their ideas, not because of the money they raise.

79% said it would allow candidates with good ideas rather than just the rich and powerful to have a shot at winning elections.

77% said that special interests would not receive as many favors, tax breaks and deals from politicians.

This last point is important. Public financing of elections are NOT a policy that will increase government spending; in fact, it's almost guaranteed to pay for itself many times over with less tax and government contract giveaways and more honest, cheaper services. 77% of the public recognize that are present system of legalized bribery costs the public every day, so replacing it with public financing will be a cost-saver.

Progressive States has a fact sheet on how public financing works in states like Maine and Arizona which have implemented it. It's time every state enacted these reforms.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/jun/21/poll_overwhelming_support_for_publicly_financed_elections