Warrantless Surveillance Hearings

[Millie_O]

Is anyone else listening to the spy hearings today? I mean the senate judiciary hearings to look into whether or not Bush broke the law with his warrantless wiretapping? I am so scared. Disgusted, appalled, and terrified. What are we gonna do? 

[Seldarin]

Well, hopefully the democrats will grow a pair and start shrieking for justice.

Then once it's shown he acted illegally once, everything he did that could be questioned will be and he'll be hurled into a 4X4 cell for the rest of his life.

What will probably happen is he'll pull strings and get out of it. =P

[olga]

I've been listening, too, Millie.

[crazynotstupid]

Normally I stay out of stuff like this, but I'd like to interject a couple points:

Clinton's folks made the same argument when HIS administration was carrying out warrantless tapping.  I mean, there was that program (can't remember the name) that would search damn near every email sent, not just those of suspicious individulas, but also yours and mine.  (OK, I'm suspicious, but still...)

Some light reading:  http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-271.html

Excerpts:

In July 1994 Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick told the House Select Committee on Intelligence that the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes." [51]According to Gorelick, the president (or his attorney general) need only satisfy himself that an American is working in conjunction with a foreign power before a search can take place.

The passage of that law (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) prompted Attorney General Reno to marvel at her newly acquired power: "I don't think J. Edgar Hoover would contemplate what we can do today."

Note that this was written shortly after Clinton's second term started.  Bush was waaaay on the far horizon.  People that are now screaming about him shredding the Constitution said nothing or next to about Clinton; there is an obvious argument that this is primarily because the press leans left and reports (indeed, hypes) things about Bush that they gave Clinton a free pass on.

Relly--before you start shouting to the high heavens, do some research.  If you take the time to read that pieve (yes, it IS long), then maybe you'll see things in a new light.

CNS, enlightening the masses

[Millie_O]

Read it. Followed it while it was happening. In context. Very well-informed. Disagree with your assertion that the press leans left. Disagree with everything you said. Resent the tone you said it in.

[olga]

The Cato Institute.

**snicker**

[revlow]

People that are now screaming about him shredding the Constitution said nothing or next to about Clinton; there is an obvious argument that this is primarily because the press leans left and reports (indeed, hypes) things about Bush that they gave Clinton a free pass on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've been hearing a lot about of this, and not just by the right-side press. This is one of the arguments that the Bush adminstration point men (and women) have been making over and over again in their spin.

While it may be true, it does not justify any

[grousemouse]

the american press is left leaning?

jaw hits floor.

either i'm getting weirder or the world is.

grouse.

[Seldarin]

The media leans left is what our conservatives like to yell a lot. I've never seen any real evidence of it.

Most news networks act as a cheerleader for whoever's in power. The rest are mostly republican cheerleaders.

Living in the deep south, I REALLY don't see it happening here. Yet it's still regularly shouted. *shrug*

I just read the whole thing and didn't see any actual proof of anything.

I actually had a huge long rebuttal typed out to the Cato paper, but when I scrolled it it was over a screen and a half long. The reply, I mean. The Cato paper is several pages. Not wishing to subject anyone to that, I'm just going to say it's silly and have done with it.

Here's the gist of the rebuttal, the Censoring Protestors part I could only find the case on white power websites screaming about how unfair it was...In the censoring television and radio part, I remember 2 of the radio stations shut down were sorta local. One a Klanner owned country station the other a weird naziish talk radio.

The country station regularly urged the lynching of anyone out after dark that 'the cops won't see hangin till daybreak'.

It's a damn shame such fine programming was taken off the air.

Even the Cato document says 'Clinton asked congress to approve'.

Bush didn't 'ask congress to approve'.

He didn't ask anyone to approve anything. He treats the FBI, CIA, and Department of Homeland Security as his own personal gestapo.

However, we'll assume that Clinton was the evil mastermind behind scanning emails for words.

So what? It's immoral, but morality isn't legality.

Email isn't phone lines. At the time, there weren't really any laws on the books regarding email monitoring. In fact, before Clinton took office, there weren't very many laws regarding the internet except anti-haxx0r laws, most of which were just modified versions of the old telcomm laws.

I'm also not making the point Clinton forged bravely ahead in making laws to keep cyberspace safe. I doubt he knew half of what was passed regarding the internet.

Frankly, I didn't like Clinton. He sucked and I hope he chokes.

[wifezilla]

"The media leans left is what our conservatives like to yell a lot. I've never seen any real evidence of it."

Really? How about this study by UCLA?

"While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper

[grousemouse]

fair enough. i guess it is me that is getting weirder.

[Becca]

Ah, but where did that article come from?

That's the problem with arguments about the "media" as a whole.  The media effectively determines what the discourse is at all.  What does this media outlet have at stake in calling the media "liberal"?

I would say that calling the media "liberal" or "conservative" obscures the reality that the media is not nearly as political as it is profit-driven, and its biases will fall as such.

[Becca]

God, I have such an internal dilemma as to whether to refer to the media as singular or plural.

[Millie_O]

Grouse - it's the media (singular because it's a collective noun used in a singular context) that's getting weirder. Really.

[olga]

Okay, off topic:

I always thought that television was one medium, but that TV, radio and print "are" the media.

**olga digs around in the bookcase for her copy of the Practical Stylist**

Damn.  Think I loaned it to someone.

olga

[revlow]

Yes, OT...but: I always used medium/media the way I'd use datum/data. But, apparently the usage is changing. I'll probably check elsewhere, but for now from http://www.merriam-webster.com/

Main Entry: media

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural me

[revlow]

WARNING: Again, completely OT.

Found a couple pieces, which may help to clarify the "media" quandary. First, an entry from a BB called "Wordplay" http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/mt/mt-com...i?entry_id=5495

With regard to "media" and "data" I think you are missing something important about the usage. If you are talking about multiple media -- radio, print, electronic, etc. -- then the proper use is "the media are..."

However, most of the time when someone is referencing "the media" they are talking about a particular understood set of media. Usually, this is the news media. Since it is a single set, the use of "is" is still proper.

So if someone is using "the media" to mean "the news media" then there is no problem.

The same holds true for data. The problem here is not with the improper verb usage, but the use of the wrong subject. They do not mean "the data" but "this data set."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next, from an edition of the "Technical Editors

[Seldarin]

Read the bottom line of that.

"Past researchers have been able to say whether an outlet is conservative or liberal, but no one has ever compared media outlets to lawmakers," Groseclose said. "Our work gives a precise characterization of the bias and relates it to known commodity

[december_brigette]

Hi All,

I wish I knew who my NSA spy was. Then I would make spy take me to starbucks every day and we could have lovely conversations about anything. and (s)he could write it off as "work." i mean - where are all those billions going?

i have no friends except for my spy.

and im fairly certain i have one as i am a member of the "hillary in 2008" campaign.

it really would be nice to make friends with my spy.

db

[crazynotstupid]

This whole thing wasn't a shot at you, CNS. I just realized it kinda sounded like one after I wrote it,...

No prob, I agree with parts, especially...

Then again, I'm a libertarian, and I shant be happy till I can buy a rocket launcher at the 7/11.

I'll spot ya a slurpee for a few rounds of target pravtice on the local DNC/RNC headquarters.

[Seldarin]

This whole thing wasn't a shot at you, CNS. I just realized it kinda sounded like one after I wrote it,...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No prob, I agree with parts, especially...

Then again, I'm a libertarian, and I shant be happy till I can buy a rocket launcher at the 7/11.

I'll spot ya a slurpee for a few rounds of target pravtice on the local DNC/RNC headquarters.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That'd definitely work for me. I'll bring the ammo crates.

[ncc1701]

the american press is left leaning?

jaw hits floor.

either i'm getting weirder or the world is.

grouse.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heya,

I dunno, but whenever I go to the US and watch the news, I think it's the other way.

As for wiretaps, well, in Ontario we have privacy legislation which supposably prevents that, but who knows with Bush-lite as the PM.

--ncc--

[Millie_O]

Pssst - ncc - it IS the other way. But look what happens when you try to point that out - you're verbally attacked, bombarded with misinformation, threatened with violence... You tell me. What's wrong in America?

[Seldarin]

Pssst - ncc - it IS the other way. But look what happens when you try to point that out - you're verbally attacked, bombarded with misinformation, threatened with violence... You tell me. What's wrong in America?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Then Rush Limbaugh comes to your house and steals your car.

I only really posted to say I love your sig. 

[Millie_O]

Then Rush Limbaugh comes to your house and steals your car.

I only really posted to say I love your sig.

[Reese]

Hrm, mom always said it's a bad idea to discuss politics in public, but I just have to add:

If you're on the warpath to impeach someone over warrantless wiretapping, you should look to your representatives in the house and senate. They're the ones who approved this practice in both the house and senate intelligence committees.

This issue has nothing to do with Clinton, Bush or Republicans or Democrats. The president (however you may feel about him) is only using the powers that he was *given*. Either way, he hasn't got much longer to use 'em, so the president himself is not really the issue here.

The only reason why Senators and Reps are screaming about it now is because the New York Times outed the practice, and now your Reps and Senators (who could have stopped this practice cold, years ago) are wanting to squirm out of their share of the responsibility.

Funny how those same Senators and Reps only started screaming about the practice when *you*, the voting public found out about it. At any time, rather than having salacious hearings, those same senators and reps could change the law so that whoever is president would have a *much* more difficult time claiming such powers. And, they could require him to report directly to them exactly when he uses this power, and under what circumstances.    They haven't done so.