So I guess you could use your argument against me discussing FISA with my husband as an argument for not believing every analysis of Glenn puts forth either. ?????

Go back several posts.

Actually, it's been on my mind cause of a book my wife (not the one who shoots husbands) brought home from the library, "The Land Where the Blues Began" by Alan Lomax (Pantheon 1993). It tells of the conditions, social, legal, economic and human under which John and Alan Lomax made the recordings which so affected me as a boy.

Why a recording of Leadbelly wailing, as if to a new young occupant of a prisom farm with a long sentence:

"ooh-ooh, you ain't got no Mammy now,

ooh-ooh, you ain't got no Mammy now,

I told you late last night,

You didn't need no Mammy no-how

Oooh-ooh, black snake crawlin in my room...

Should burn so deeply into the soul of a white Jewish kid in the suburbs of Long Island needs no explanation, of course. It's only natchrel.

Anyway, the book told the story behind the recordings which affected me so deeply. And ever since, people have been saying to me, "Man, are you affected, or what?"

Anyway, get it if you can.

Good night and sleep tight. Paranoia will destroy ya!

Weak.

So I guess you could use your argument against me discussing FISA with my husband as an argument for not believing every analysis of Glenn puts forth either.

only if you're a lawyer and can think on your own.

Go back several posts.

That's what got me posting. All your unsubstantiated points have been countered. Answer my questions.

- Please show me a judge's ruling that contradicts Walker's.

- Can you substantiate anything?

- What specifically holds you to your viewpoint?

- What specifically could you not find?

This is great. I never thought of donating to the ACLU before, but now I have to look into it.

I have a BIO 87 Homeopathic medicine for a wound. Today a purchased a poison oak pill from a homeopathy store. Some cultures use the blood sucker worm leeches and maggots.

If a scalp was fetched for a PA, as a bounty in America, a Lady may grow poppies.

Can the court really function this way: accepting conclusive proof of lawbreaking in the form of letters from Michael Mukasey that certify the telecoms and their employees violated the law at the request of Alberto Gonzalez?

Don't these telecom employees have the right to face their accusor, Michael Mukasey? Isn't it unconstitutional for the court to participate in this sort of conclusive finding in proceedings where the accused has no representation?

Given that the telecoms and their employees remain vulnerable to criminal prosecution despite the new FISA law's elimination of civil liability for the telecoms, shouldn't telecommunications employees have some anxiety that they're the only ones in jeopardy of paying a price for this illegal spying program?

I try not to forget that she has had to put up with me, like forgetting that it has been 41 years, not 40.

Since he's not posting, I can't press his "read other letters" button, and I would like to read his last letters. He was such a frequent and prolific poster. What happened?

How can I find his letters?

Oh Lord, that's funny! I once wrote my wife, during a very trying period (the trial, of course, ended up with the judge saying I was not only guilty as charged, but "guilty as hell")

a long birthday poem from my cell, in which I rhymed her age with many things. Only problem- I got the age wrong! Thank God, at least I was off by one year younger, but still.

Among the reasons I don't give a rat's patooty what you report your husband's opinion to be, is because I have followed Glenn's legal and political analysis of the FISA debate for years now, and found his arguments to be incredibly prolific, reasoned and sound; he has literally made himself an expert on the matter: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/02/nsa-legal-arguments.html

To put it mildly, I know less about the statute and issues surrounding it than he does (which is true of 99% of lawyers). But I have the background that allows me to assess whether his analysis is well-supported and correct. Do you? Does your husband have the knowledge to put together anything like the analyses in that link?

And now I HAVE TO go to bed.

If I was an Oncologist,

I'd hope my Zodiac sign,

were not the Cancer sign.

mecessary to interpret FISA came to Mr. bernbart like a BOALT out of the blue!

Sorry, Sorry!

This link contains his last letter and all the others. (see sig)

http://letters.salon.com/0148de89d8c3dad94e5de32fe1847a91/author/index416.html

Thanks! I'll go look.

You can either click the search feature at the top of the page for Salon queries and enter "William Timberman" or do a regular Google search, and access the Salon hit. Either one will allow you to access his letters file.

I emailed Bill last week, and he replied that he is pretty much done with posting. Remember, he is an activist first, and the election is important to him. I firmly believe he will be back soon after the election is over, and he will be ready for bear.

Bernbart, my husband knows much more about being a pilot than I do and quite a bit more about economics. I can argue about the efficiency of a decent air conditioner, though, and my math skills are pretty decent. I'm also more in tune to the social cues in a group than he will ever be. We all have our strengths.

That being said, my paraphrasing arguments to him about what I've read in a blog will not mean I will argue the best way to land a 747-400 with an engine failure in bad weather with another pilot. There are times you should step back.

Argue the politics, your sense of the politics, but don't argue the technicalities with experts.

I get that you are on Obama's team. Push come to shove, I am (and I think GG and Mona are), too.

p.s. my thanks to Mona in that (bfg, but as my husband always says) if you have to resort to giving your resume you've lost the argument. GG knows that, but some here have to be reminded. Many a blogger are so much more qualified than others....