Friday, July 25, 2008
Is Anyone Suprised Oil Man Bush Wants to Drill?
Am I just an idiot or suffering brain damage? I only ask because I'm the only one not putting it together that Bush and Cheney and their significant ties to big oil don't have a stake in drilling offshore.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
George W. Bush: Great F*** Up or the Greatest F*** Up?
Its frighteningly staggering when you add up the screw-ups of the last 8 years. Who would have thought that you could do so much damage in only 8 years.
TX Sen Cornyn Response to My Call on FISA
Dear Mr. Cherry:
Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). As you know, FISA passed the Senate on July 9, 2008, and I appreciate having the benefit of your comments.
Gathering communications intelligence is one of America’s front lines of defense in the war on terror. As you may know, Congress passed the Protect America Act in August 2007, modernizing FISA to give intelligence professionals the tools they urgently need to gather information, while still protecting the civil liberties of Americans. Senator John Rockefeller introduced the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 (S. 2248) on October 26, 2007, to continue this vital work. S. 2248 creates an expanded role for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, empowering the court to have more scrutiny over surveillance procedures and acquisitions. Additionally, this legislation increases congressional oversight by strengthening reporting and auditing requirements by the Inspector General.
The changes to FISA under S. 2248 also provide civil immunity for communications carriers that assisted the government with surveillance in the past, as well as creating civil immunity for future assistance. Communications carriers are currently facing billions of dollars in lawsuits for their role in assisting the National Security Agency’s Terrorist Surveillance Program instituted after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. This program worked to thwart future terrorist attacks by intercepting communications between suspected terrorists overseas and potential operatives within the United States. Though acting without a court warrant, the program was conducted under the President’s broad authority to protect and defend the nation. Communications carriers provided invaluable assistance, relying on official assurances about legality. While the process of litigation is integral to our system of laws, I believe it is unfair to punish the communications companies for patriotic compliance with the government’s war on terror.
Providing prospective civil immunity for communications carriers that assist government surveillance in the future is important to ensuring effective collection of intelligence. Communications technology has become so complex that our country needs the voluntary cooperation of carriers. Without it, our intelligence efforts will be severely debilitated. Providing immunity guarantees the needed cooperation of communications carriers who can rely on official assurances about necessity and legality. It is important to note that S. 2248 does not grant immunity to government officials.
S. 2248 overwhelmingly passed in the Senate Intelligence Committee, by a bipartisan vote of 13–2, and was passed by the Senate on February 12, 2008, by a bipartisan vote of 68–29. Unfortunately, this bipartisan Senate compromise was rejected by the House of Representatives, allowing FISA to expire on February 16, 2008, and leaving our nation’s intelligence community in the dark for a critical period of time.
In June 2008, the House of Representatives passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (H.R. 6304), and on July 9, 2008, the Senate approved H.R. 6304 by a bipartisan vote of 69–28. I was pleased to see that members of Congress can work together in a bipartisan manner to improve our national security. H.R. 6304 currently awaits further consideration by President George W. Bush.
As a member of both the Senate Armed Services and Judiciary Committees, I am committed to ensuring that we appropriately balance our national security needs and the protection of our civil liberties. I believe that the amended FISA bill, including the immunity provision for communications carriers, strikes this much needed balance. I appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate, and am thankful for your comments about this important legislation.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov
Please sign up for my monthly newsletter at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/newsletter.
PLEASE NOTE:
Due to the nature of electronic communication, if you did not receive this e-mail directly from my office, I cannot guarantee that the text has not been altered. If you have questions about the validity of this message, or would like to respond to this message, please use the web form available at my website, http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/contact.
Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). As you know, FISA passed the Senate on July 9, 2008, and I appreciate having the benefit of your comments.
Gathering communications intelligence is one of America’s front lines of defense in the war on terror. As you may know, Congress passed the Protect America Act in August 2007, modernizing FISA to give intelligence professionals the tools they urgently need to gather information, while still protecting the civil liberties of Americans. Senator John Rockefeller introduced the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 (S. 2248) on October 26, 2007, to continue this vital work. S. 2248 creates an expanded role for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, empowering the court to have more scrutiny over surveillance procedures and acquisitions. Additionally, this legislation increases congressional oversight by strengthening reporting and auditing requirements by the Inspector General.
The changes to FISA under S. 2248 also provide civil immunity for communications carriers that assisted the government with surveillance in the past, as well as creating civil immunity for future assistance. Communications carriers are currently facing billions of dollars in lawsuits for their role in assisting the National Security Agency’s Terrorist Surveillance Program instituted after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. This program worked to thwart future terrorist attacks by intercepting communications between suspected terrorists overseas and potential operatives within the United States. Though acting without a court warrant, the program was conducted under the President’s broad authority to protect and defend the nation. Communications carriers provided invaluable assistance, relying on official assurances about legality. While the process of litigation is integral to our system of laws, I believe it is unfair to punish the communications companies for patriotic compliance with the government’s war on terror.
Providing prospective civil immunity for communications carriers that assist government surveillance in the future is important to ensuring effective collection of intelligence. Communications technology has become so complex that our country needs the voluntary cooperation of carriers. Without it, our intelligence efforts will be severely debilitated. Providing immunity guarantees the needed cooperation of communications carriers who can rely on official assurances about necessity and legality. It is important to note that S. 2248 does not grant immunity to government officials.
S. 2248 overwhelmingly passed in the Senate Intelligence Committee, by a bipartisan vote of 13–2, and was passed by the Senate on February 12, 2008, by a bipartisan vote of 68–29. Unfortunately, this bipartisan Senate compromise was rejected by the House of Representatives, allowing FISA to expire on February 16, 2008, and leaving our nation’s intelligence community in the dark for a critical period of time.
In June 2008, the House of Representatives passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (H.R. 6304), and on July 9, 2008, the Senate approved H.R. 6304 by a bipartisan vote of 69–28. I was pleased to see that members of Congress can work together in a bipartisan manner to improve our national security. H.R. 6304 currently awaits further consideration by President George W. Bush.
As a member of both the Senate Armed Services and Judiciary Committees, I am committed to ensuring that we appropriately balance our national security needs and the protection of our civil liberties. I believe that the amended FISA bill, including the immunity provision for communications carriers, strikes this much needed balance. I appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate, and am thankful for your comments about this important legislation.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov
Please sign up for my monthly newsletter at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/newsletter.
PLEASE NOTE:
Due to the nature of electronic communication, if you did not receive this e-mail directly from my office, I cannot guarantee that the text has not been altered. If you have questions about the validity of this message, or would like to respond to this message, please use the web form available at my website, http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/contact.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
TX Senator Hutchinson Response to My Call Regarding FISA
Dear Mr. Cherry:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 provides the basic framework for the use of electronic surveillance in the context of foreign intelligence gathering. Over time, FISA has been amended to expand intelligence gathering to physical searches and access to certain business records. Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act made significant changes to some FISA provisions in order to aid in the capture of suspected terrorists.
On July 11, 2008, the President signed into law H.R. 6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. This bill updates FISA to close a critical gap relating to the surveillance of suspected terrorists and to address limitations on surveillance created by a 2007 FISA Court decision. The bill also includes important safeguards to protect privacy and civil liberties, including procedures to prevent the dissemination of information about U.S. citizens that has been collected incidentally during certain surveillance activities. H.R. 6304 passed the Senate with my support by a bipartisan vote of 69-28.
One contentious provision in the bill allows a federal district court to rule on whether there was “substantial evidence” that electronic service providers who may have cooperated with the federal government in its warrantless surveillance program after 9/11, received written assurances that the program was legal and authorized by the President. If the court rules that there was substantial evidence of assurances, the existing class action lawsuits that many of these companies face will be dismissed. It is important to note that FISA has provided for many years that suits against electronic communications service providers cannot be maintained if there is a court order authorizing the surveillance or the companies received written certification that their cooperation in surveillance activities was legal. Because the federal government asserted its executive privilege in the pending lawsuits in order to protect sources and methods of intelligence collection, the companies' ability to provide evidence to defend their alleged conduct has been limited.
I recognize that some oppose liability protection, but I believe that it is untenable to allow lawsuits to proceed at the same time that we limit the ability of the defendant companies to produce evidence critical to their defense. The potential liability awards that might result could be catastrophic, negatively affecting the broader economy and signaling to these companies, and to other private entities that we may need to rely upon in the War on Terror, that their cooperation carries major risks.
Please know that I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress to safeguard the security of our nation while upholding our personal privacy rights and civil liberties.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 provides the basic framework for the use of electronic surveillance in the context of foreign intelligence gathering. Over time, FISA has been amended to expand intelligence gathering to physical searches and access to certain business records. Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act made significant changes to some FISA provisions in order to aid in the capture of suspected terrorists.
On July 11, 2008, the President signed into law H.R. 6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. This bill updates FISA to close a critical gap relating to the surveillance of suspected terrorists and to address limitations on surveillance created by a 2007 FISA Court decision. The bill also includes important safeguards to protect privacy and civil liberties, including procedures to prevent the dissemination of information about U.S. citizens that has been collected incidentally during certain surveillance activities. H.R. 6304 passed the Senate with my support by a bipartisan vote of 69-28.
One contentious provision in the bill allows a federal district court to rule on whether there was “substantial evidence” that electronic service providers who may have cooperated with the federal government in its warrantless surveillance program after 9/11, received written assurances that the program was legal and authorized by the President. If the court rules that there was substantial evidence of assurances, the existing class action lawsuits that many of these companies face will be dismissed. It is important to note that FISA has provided for many years that suits against electronic communications service providers cannot be maintained if there is a court order authorizing the surveillance or the companies received written certification that their cooperation in surveillance activities was legal. Because the federal government asserted its executive privilege in the pending lawsuits in order to protect sources and methods of intelligence collection, the companies' ability to provide evidence to defend their alleged conduct has been limited.
I recognize that some oppose liability protection, but I believe that it is untenable to allow lawsuits to proceed at the same time that we limit the ability of the defendant companies to produce evidence critical to their defense. The potential liability awards that might result could be catastrophic, negatively affecting the broader economy and signaling to these companies, and to other private entities that we may need to rely upon in the War on Terror, that their cooperation carries major risks.
Please know that I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress to safeguard the security of our nation while upholding our personal privacy rights and civil liberties.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Dark Knight Review
Let me start out by saying that the only way to see this film iMax. The iMax experience is definitely worth the extra money.
Overall, I feel a little indifferent to the film. Ledger nearly hit a home run as the Joker, but he's not on screen with Bale enough. There are tidbits of intensity between the two here and there, but a lot of the screen time seems like filler when waiting for intense verbal exchanges between the ultimate comic book villain and Batman.
Aaron Eckhardt did a great job as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, but the cgi effects used on his face were a little too over the top and could have been done far more realistically. Its a shame because Eckhardt would have been great in a sequel. He would have been a real asset to a follow-up.
Bale seemed to be very plastic and reminded me of his performance in American Psycho. He lacks a lot of emotional range. I guess a film like this has to cut out more of that kind of character development to please the wider audience.
All of that said, the film is definitely a must-see. I give it a B+.
Overall, I feel a little indifferent to the film. Ledger nearly hit a home run as the Joker, but he's not on screen with Bale enough. There are tidbits of intensity between the two here and there, but a lot of the screen time seems like filler when waiting for intense verbal exchanges between the ultimate comic book villain and Batman.
Aaron Eckhardt did a great job as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, but the cgi effects used on his face were a little too over the top and could have been done far more realistically. Its a shame because Eckhardt would have been great in a sequel. He would have been a real asset to a follow-up.
Bale seemed to be very plastic and reminded me of his performance in American Psycho. He lacks a lot of emotional range. I guess a film like this has to cut out more of that kind of character development to please the wider audience.
All of that said, the film is definitely a must-see. I give it a B+.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Free 3G iPhones for Congress in Return for FISA Capitulization?
I finally figured out why Congress caved on the president's FISA requests. The answer: free 3G iPhones for all those who voted for FISA courtesy of AT&T. Incidentally, John McCain requested a rotary dial iPhone.
Next time you see your favorite Congressman cruising the beltway they will be doing it in style. God Bless America.
Next time you see your favorite Congressman cruising the beltway they will be doing it in style. God Bless America.
What Ever Happened to Single Earner Households?
The Fifties seem like a golden age in America. Perhaps I am guilty of giving too much credence to the popular memory, but at one time didn't most families have only one working parent? If you want a clear barometer of how the economic landscape of the U.S. has changed it would certainly seem logical to speculate that it would be almost impossible for most families to survive on one income.
How did such a shift occur and how did it occur so rapidly? The results have to be detrimental in terms of the socialization and development of children. The dual-income household which is now the standard has given rise to a whole host of problems. These certainly may include health and education.
The dual-income reality means that parents are less likely to make home cooked meals and instead opt for take-out on the way home from the daily commute. The dual-income household also gave rise to latch key kids.
Gee Wally, how the hell did mom and dad do it?
How did such a shift occur and how did it occur so rapidly? The results have to be detrimental in terms of the socialization and development of children. The dual-income household which is now the standard has given rise to a whole host of problems. These certainly may include health and education.
The dual-income reality means that parents are less likely to make home cooked meals and instead opt for take-out on the way home from the daily commute. The dual-income household also gave rise to latch key kids.
Gee Wally, how the hell did mom and dad do it?
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Million American March?!?
I want to start building the momentum for a million American march on Washington to demand responsible government. We need to get past all of the partisan nonsense that has been used so skillfully and successfully to divide and conquer the American people. We are so busy bickering about things like abortion, gun rights, and gay marriage that we allow ourselves to be manipulated by people who have blind ambition and cunning. While we fight over these issues they are taking our civil liberties, fiddling with the economy(poorly), and turning us into nothing better than the 21st century version of share-croppers.
Spread the word, the clamor of a million voices in Washington crying out for change cannot be ignored by those who have sullied the name of this great nation. God bless America!
Spread the word, the clamor of a million voices in Washington crying out for change cannot be ignored by those who have sullied the name of this great nation. God bless America!
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
FISA Passed 69-28
Words cannot begin to describe the feeling of dread in the pit of my stomach. Hillary out of nowhere came out and voted against cloture, and I threw my vote away on Obama.
Monday, July 7, 2008
FISA Isn't the Only Threat
freedomworks.org — Help stop this legislation! Hidden deep in the Senate housing legislation is a sweeping provision inserted by Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) that affects the privacy and operation of nearly all of America's small businesses. There is a good chance that we can still stop this, but not without everyone's help.
http://freedomworks.org/petition/grassley/index.html
http://freedomworks.org/petition/grassley/index.html
Saturday, July 5, 2008
The Audacity of Hype
Am a an idiot for having the audacity to hope that Barack Obama was a different kind of politician. He certainly had me going for awhile.
The New York Times wrote today:
"The new Barack Obama has abandoned his vow to filibuster an electronic wiretapping bill if it includes an immunity clause for telecommunications companies that amounts to a sanctioned cover-up of Mr. Bush’s unlawful eavesdropping after 9/11."
I began this primary season as a Ron Paul supporter, but after McCain grabbed the nom early on I reluctantly switched to Obama and even voted for him in the Texas Democratic primary and caucus.
The campaign finance flop didn't really bother me all that much, though it did bring his integrity into question. It would have been a foolish maneuver for Obama to accept public financing given his ability to raise money on the web.
His flip-flop on FISA however is a deal-breaker for me. If he refuses to come out against FISA I will refuse to vote for him in the general election. Not to say I would cross-over and vote for McCain, who is even worse. I can't vote for Bob Barr either due to his voting track record.
If only I was old enough to write myself in.
The New York Times wrote today:
"The new Barack Obama has abandoned his vow to filibuster an electronic wiretapping bill if it includes an immunity clause for telecommunications companies that amounts to a sanctioned cover-up of Mr. Bush’s unlawful eavesdropping after 9/11."
I began this primary season as a Ron Paul supporter, but after McCain grabbed the nom early on I reluctantly switched to Obama and even voted for him in the Texas Democratic primary and caucus.
The campaign finance flop didn't really bother me all that much, though it did bring his integrity into question. It would have been a foolish maneuver for Obama to accept public financing given his ability to raise money on the web.
His flip-flop on FISA however is a deal-breaker for me. If he refuses to come out against FISA I will refuse to vote for him in the general election. Not to say I would cross-over and vote for McCain, who is even worse. I can't vote for Bob Barr either due to his voting track record.
If only I was old enough to write myself in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
