Letters to the Editor
-
Denied Warrants
Last year,I was in Nashville for Christmas and reading the local newspaper.I came across an article regarding the illegal tapping and the FISA court.I don't remember the exact number but the article stated that hundreds of warrant requests by the Bush administration had been denied by the court.If that is true-and the court is a "rubber stamp",what was in those warrant requests that caused them to be denied?Where did that article disappear to?Why are those numbers not being mentioned in the MSM?It makes perfect sense that with all those denials,an administration that thinks itself above the law would eventually circumvent the warrent process entirely.(If someone can find that article please post a link.)
Keep up the good work Glenn.You're an exceptional writer.Thanks.
-
Why 'falsehood'?
Just wondered why you use the fuzzy word falsehood when lie is more direct, more potent? We've had tyears of falsehoods of all different kinds from this particular Administration and its supporters. I think we can safely call a lie a lie at this point.
I'd also argue using the word falsehood projects an unnecessary civility that certainly is not reciprocated by the other side and, as a result, only winds up enabling the liars.
-
No Comments Allowed
Interesting that at the blog making these claims there is no option to comment.
-
weapon
the only effective weapon the Republicans seem to have is that of propaganda and it works not on our "enemies" but upon our own people.
-
"They hate us for what we believe" -- Bush yesterday
Rove told him to start using the term "Islamic Fascists" about two weeks ago and since then he's used the term four times in press encounters.
This was no mistake of language for which Bush is so famous, such as his ignorant gaff a few years ago when he cluelessly called his invasion of Iraq a "Crusade."
He started off his presidency claiming that he wanted to free the peoples of the Middle East and bring them democracy. Since that's not working anymore, Bush's brain trust is now dropping the fig leaf and going balls-out to characterize their Big Oil Grab as a full-scale clash of cultures in a final fight-to-the-death between the religion of Islam and Western Christianity. It's now the Islamo-Fascists against the Christo-Fascists.
Since Bush has utterly failed to sell any of his previous rationales for securing the world's largest oil fields, this last desperate ploy to pit Christians against Muslims is his final political redoubt.
-
We need to adapt
The response from the left should be an equally improvable provocative "facts". For instance; "Republicans use the Patriot Act to spy on Americans who have issues with the IRS. In fact, they have successfully prosecuted over 200 cases of tax evasion using phone tap data from NSA intercepts from American's to their attorneys.
The Administration knew of the British operation for four days prior. They knew that the Connecticut primary was going to be national news that reflected a growing wave of anti-GOP sentiment. So, forearmed with this national security knowledge, they primed the American “psyche” then linked their primer to an event memory using the emotion of fear. To “prime” is to bridge two unrelated ideas into one schema or cognition memory usually using strong emotions such as fear. The primer was “this proves that the Democratic Party has been taken over by extremists, who will allow America to be attacked by terrorists just like 9/11”. The Administration (and the GOP, is Ken privy to ultra classified info?) did the primer knowing that an event had already happened, that would be an EPISODIC MEMEORY to a majority of Americans. With the primer in place and being repeated in every media outlet, then the election of Ned Lamont, then the “event” to form an episodic memory to link the primer to the event, a negative memory is solidified. This was a large scale brain washing of Americans using national security secrets for political gain. It is, for want of a better word, heinous.
This is the political reality of the United States 2006. We have an authoritarian political party that is amoral, and as such, will do or use anything it can to win an election. I believe, with a heavy heart, that those in the middle and left are now justified to pursue the some of the same kind of guerilla tactics. We must make the GOP so repugnant to fifty one percent of voters that the idea of a Republican Congress is tantamount to treason.
-
Bush wrong...again
Doesn't this case prove the exact opposite of the argument made by Bush? That argument is that FISA conditions would not allow the government to act quickly enough in this new era. However, as I have read, the British government has been on to these terrorists for almost two years. Is two years not enough time to present your case to a judge and get a rubber stamp warrant to eavesdrop?
Excellent points made on the eavesdropping program in general. Per usual, the truth never seems to help the GOP and their case so they resort to out and out lying and actually seem to prefer political "hoaxes" to an honest discussion of important issues.
-
continued ironies
from WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
republic
n 1: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them [syn: democracy, commonwealth] [ant: autocracy] 2: a form of government whose head of state is not a monarch; "the head of state in a republic is usually a president"
Ironic that the Republicans are anything but, in fact their continued tactics and language are an abuse of the definitions of Republican.
Further, Joe Lieberman showed his true Republican in Democrats clothing by claiming in a NYTimes article "Lieberman, on the Offensive, Links Terror Threat and Iraq" that “If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” “It will strengthen them, and they will strike again.”
Using Rove's playbook Joe?