Letters to the Editor
-
How Does anyone still support Hillary?
You might as well just switch parties now. What bigger example of pure political fence sitting is there, when she doesn't even vote on the most important issue facing our country. Without trying to sound hyperbolic, this is a vote for pure, unadulterated fascism. There really is no other word for it. I wouldn't be surprised if this UC nonsense was literally conceived to save the candidates from having to weigh in strongly on either side of this issue. They certainly didn't use their incredible media spotlight to draw any attention to it. Nothing has made me want to move to Canada more than this...
-
Bernbart:
So don't think it cannot happen to you.
-- bernbart
Yeah. I have an FBI file, and I have no idea why. It's absurd to the empth degree. I went to a protest or two during the Vietnam War. Maybe that's why but, I don't know. That's how long I've known that I've been on file. I found out about back then, and I was reminded just a few years ago that I am still on file. If standing up for what you believe in in America puts you on an FBI File, well, that ain't good.
-
So let's see...
They can listen in on our phone calls.
They can listen in on our cell phone calls.
They can read our email messages.
They can get the list of our internet searches.
They can search our notebook computers.
They can search our cell phones
They can read our text messages.
They can enter our homes without warrants.
They can monitor our bank accounts.
They can monitor our credit cards.
They can put whatever they want on the 'news' shows.
They can count on a very solid bunch of democrats to join the stampede to pass any legislation that they want.
We can't find out who exposed a CIA agent.
We can't find out who ordered the US Attorney's fired.
We can't get the truth on what happened in the lead up to the Iraq war.
We can't get impeachment started let alone talked about.
We can't believe anythig that comes out of that administration.
Oh, and we can't get an investigation on the 'missing' emails and use of an RNC email server to run national business.
There are so many clear and glaring violations of so many laws that the idea that any politician would stand for anything that this administration would want should be criminal at the outset.
There are NO protections from the Bushist junta. NONE AT ALL!
Congratulations. There isn't much farther to fall except for open violence.
What's next? US troops patrolling the streets? Heil Bush!
-
The WTC and Elpehantman
A NYC, Midtown lawfirm I was in once seriously considered -- looked at and negotiated for -- office space in the WTC. Didn't take it, or that's where the firm would have been on 9/11. Suppose that affected me much?
I think Glenn has a similar story. Elpehantman and his ilk want to monopolize the horror. He and the likeminded may all f*ck themselves.
-
Another dud from Elephantman.
Well, no, actually. The Bush Administration has said that no laws were broken,
Except laws were broken. The Administration cannot simply legalize activity by its own declaration.
but that it nevertheless wanted to protect the telcoms from vexatious and horrifically expensive civil litigation which might impact on future national security operations.
Too bad for them, given they were essentially co-conspirators in a criminal act. I seriously doubt they were in any actual financial danger for their law-breaking anyway, especially with their recent profits reported.
-
Looking forward
It may be that the beneficial provisions in the House Bill will prevail in conference, and the day will be saved. One can hope, but I'm personally pessimistic, given how set the Senate appears to be on this issue.
But another thing that can be done is to boost exposure on this issue with the two democratic presidential candidates. The issue of presidential over-reach has hardly been asked of them, and as far as I know they have felt neither heat nor pressure from democratic or independent voters on this issue.
Would the candidates, if elected, work with (on) congress to remedy the mistakes made in the PAA? Would they ask congress to take another look? If a Democratic president was in office, would the Republicans still be such staunch supporters of vast and unconstitutional snooping powers by the executive?
It would be better if the House bill prevails. But failing that, doesn't it make sense to begin getting the presidential candidates on record about how they view Bush's over-reach, and what they might do to bring this government back to its constitutional foundations. There is still ample time, both in the primary and the general election, to raise the profile of this issue in the presidential campaign.
-
AGAIN, why does this surprise us?????
More and more I am reminded of the old Soviet Union. The population with no rights, spoon feed what the government wants them to know and think. ETC..... Has anyone thought about what we as Americans will do if the person we least want and expect, becomes the new President? Will we gasp and shake our heads in disbelief? What will we need to do to make changes in this corrupt Government? They are obviously going along business as usual. They hold all the cards. They are in charge. We can write articles, complain, vote for the unlikely candidate, but in the end, they do as they please. Covering each others butt, and lining their own pockets. We may want to think what our next move will be? I have lost all faith that anyone holding a government position will do what is just and correct for the population. We are their puppets.
-
A Cave In The House Too?
"The House has already rejected the idea of immunity for the phone companies, and Democratic leaders reacted angrily to the Senate vote. But Congressional officials said it appeared that the House would ultimately be forced to accept some sort of legal protection for phone carriers in negotiation between the two chambers this week."
---The New York Times
---Posted on-line today @ 5:55 EST