Monday Open Thread

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< George Zimmerman: Jury Selection Begins | PRISM, "Five Eyes" and Kim Dotcom >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    CONSCIOUS vs. SUBVONSCIOUS, vols. 28 & 29 (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 02:42:54 PM EST
    subConsious, that is (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 02:43:53 PM EST

    or subConsCious (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:17:26 PM EST
    good lord, you philistine.

    volume 29 is broken (none / 0) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:19:50 PM EST
    I have aimed squarely for his frontal lobe (none / 0) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:22:03 PM EST
    I get a handful though and when I open my hand all I have come away with is balls.  Splain that

    That's pretty funny (none / 0) (#11)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:58:35 PM EST
    The link works for me, tho. And the toon is supposed to say, "This may look like a purse, but it could just as easily be called my husband's scrotum. His ball spend more time in here than in his real one."

    The link works (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 04:01:10 PM EST
    the premise is broken

    ah (none / 0) (#14)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 04:03:10 PM EST
    me slow

    I've (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by lentinel on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 05:54:09 PM EST
    been thinking about Edward J. Snowden, the man who revealed what the NSA has been up to.

    I'm thinking about the fact that our government may move to extradite him from Hong Kong, and that they may be successful, and that they will move to put the man behind bars for the rest of his life.

    I'm thinking about the fact that I, as a citizen, would like to be asked if I would agree to having my personal conversations and correspondence monitored in exchange for the promise of some security from terrorism. I would like to be able to vote for a candidate who would represent my point of view in one or the other houses of congress - or in the executive branch.

    When I watched Snowden being interviewed, I had the sense that I was listening to an American kind of intelligence. It is a kind of intelligence with which I could feel that Benjamin Franklin might identify. Those founders did not give an inch.

    If Mr. Snowden is to be prosecuted, I hope the proceedings will be broadcast live - like the McCarthy hearings.

    Don't count on it, lentinel (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Zorba on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 06:49:50 PM EST
    Unfortunately, his hearings will most likely be redacted all over the place.  "National security" issues and all that, don't you know?
    It's the way it is in The Security State of America.

    You're (none / 0) (#33)
    by lentinel on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:53:37 PM EST
    probably right...

    But how can they censor the hearings on the grounds of national security when they're prosecuting a guy for having already revealed what they're attempting to censor?

    Obviously, the "enemy" knows everything there is to know about what the NSA is doing. Why should it care?

    It would only be a case of the government trying to prevent the American people from getting the information they deserve to know.

    We cannot have an informed electorate in a security state.
    And, even when informed, we have no one to vote for. So far, anyway. Hillary? Please.


    Obama administration has dropped its (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:15:09 PM EST
    attempt to restrict access to the morning after pill.

    The reversal by the government means that anyone, no matter how young, will soon be able to walk into a drugstore and buy the pill, Plan B One-Step, without a prescription.

    The Justice Department had been fighting to prevent that outcome, but said late Monday afternoon that it would drop its appeal of a judge's order to make the drug more widely available. In a letter to Judge Edward R. Korman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, the administration said it would comply with his demands that the Food and Drug Administration be allowed to certify the drug for nonprescription use.

    The Justice Department appears to have concluded that it might lose its case with the appeals court and would have to decide whether to appeal to the Supreme Court. That would drastically elevate the debate over the politically delicate issue for Mr. Obama.

    About damn time. Maybe with all the brouhaha over Snowden's revelations the administration has decided to pick its battles. Or maybe not. Maybe they just figured they would lose in both the courts and the court of public opinion.

    Of course, this ruling seems to apply only to Plan-B One-Step which is a specific drug. Does this mean that the same kind of fight will have to be waged with the administration over every other morning after pill that comes on the market?

    Maybe, (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by lentinel on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:56:12 PM EST
    the administration is getting a little more sensitive to the views of the electorate. I don't think so, but it is a possible explanation for this welcome reversal.

    Now - let's see about marijuana laws...

    And the treatment of people like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden....


    Lost on Two Step Last Week (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:49:45 PM EST
    Last week the appeals court ruled that the two step plan b could be sold without restriction, and denied the FDA's attempt to halt sales pending appeal....  but it granted the FDA a temporary halt of the one step pill..  

    Given that they are pretty much the same, the FDA must have decided that they would lose their appeal, and gave up the fight..


    Why is it (none / 0) (#36)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:15:46 PM EST
    people think when the government fights something in the court system their intention is always to win? Sometimes it's just to take the politics out of it and let the court settle it.

    By the way, the decision is a blow to right wingers, religious fanatics, anti-women groups, and Tea Party conservatives everywhere.


    Interesting Take (none / 0) (#38)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:35:06 PM EST
    Or put politics into it.. fighting to appease your political opponents even though you know you will lose..  

    Korman's ruling also underlined one source of his apparent ire at the Administration: the fact that the FDA decision on over the counter access has been pending for twelve years and he has already remanded the case back to the Administration to no effect. "In my 2009 opinion, after concluding that the administrative agency process was corrupted by political interference, I declined the plaintiffs' request to avoid a remand and simply direct that the FDA award them the relief that they sought," he wrote. At the time, he added, "A new FDA Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, and President had come into office since the agency's decision on Plan B had been made, who I thought could be `trusted to conduct a fair assessment of the scientific evidence.'" That, he said, is no longer the case: "On remand, defendants engaged in the same bad faith that resulted in my initial remand. They delayed the decision for three years and, ultimately, improper political influence prevented the FDA from granting the petition."

    Dialect Survey (none / 0) (#3)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 02:46:43 PM EST
    Is it really pop or soda?  A sub or a hoagie?
    Here's a nifty new way of looking at some old regional differences in dialect. NC State graduate student Joshua Katz was looking for an idea for his end-of-year statistics project, when he came across interesting linguistics data from Dr. Bert Vaux of Cambridge University. Vaux had collected data on regional dialects in the U.S. via a 120-question survey that asked about everything from the pronunciation of "caught" to whether "y'all" is preferred over "you." Then he had mapped that data, to indicate where particular dialect differences were more prevalent.

    Here are the results by question.

    It is Pop, it (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Wile ECoyote on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:12:46 PM EST
    will always be pop.  Unfortunately my kids say soda.  

    I agree (none / 0) (#5)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:14:12 PM EST
    A soda is something else besides a carbonated sugary-tasting beverage completely.  :)

    live in (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:44:46 PM EST
    Ga and everything is called coke or cols

    Soda (none / 0) (#15)
    by Zorba on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 04:28:48 PM EST
    It's soda.  But then, I was born and raised right in the middle of one of the deep red "soda" areas.       ;-)

    Where I was raised, not all that far from (none / 0) (#17)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 04:34:02 PM EST
    Zorba, we called everything by the name. Coke, Pepsi, Seven-Up. We didn't say soda or pop.

    Depends upon where you're from. (none / 0) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:31:55 PM EST
    Out here in the islands, it's called "soda." In the Midwest, my relatives call it "pop." And speaking for myself only, I call it junk food.

    the one that kills me to this day (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by CST on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 06:24:48 PM EST
    is "tennis shoes"

    I remember finding out in college, that not only was tennis shoes not a strictly western PA thing, but that I, as a resident of the northeast, was in one of the only parts of the country that says sneakers.

    It's strange finding out that you are the "weird" one when you don't know it.

    Wicked strange.


    I said tennis shoes growing up in Illinois. (none / 0) (#25)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:21:25 PM EST
    I switched to sneakers back in the '70s when I moved to Oregon. And I have called them sneakers ever since.  

    Of course, when I was a kid tennis shoes were all we had. PF Flyers and Red Ball Jets and US Keds and Converse All-Stars which I think are now called Chuck Taylors.

    Now there are running shoes and cross-training shoes and court shoes and basketball shoes and other specialized sport shoes. So, sneakers seems like an umbrella term the covers all rubber-soled sport shoes and their fashion look-alikes.


    I still say tennis shoes (none / 0) (#26)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:27:06 PM EST
    ...or tennies....unless I make a real deliberate effort to be modern!

    The age demographic of TL is showing (none / 0) (#29)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:37:16 PM EST
    because not one person yet has referred to them as kicks

    I thought kicks was the Brit term? (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:07:47 PM EST
    I call them sneaks . . .

    What about... (none / 0) (#41)
    by unitron on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 01:01:36 AM EST
    ...tennie pumps?

    I switched to sneakers (none / 0) (#30)
    by sj on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:43:39 PM EST
    when I had to decide between running shoes and walking shoes.  Before that I thought they were tennies.

    Kicks, baby (none / 0) (#45)
    by Dadler on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 08:00:29 AM EST
    That's been the dope term for sneakers the last several years. New kicks, bro?

    But that's probably outdated already, too. ;-)


    Funny you bring that up (none / 0) (#46)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 08:15:25 AM EST
    I have had that conversation with my New York City raised BF, and he insists I am crazy to call them "tennis shoes".

    I loved sending him that link and highlighting that particular question by pointing out that even NY'ers and Northeasterners are out of step with the rest of the country sometimes.  :)

    To be fair, with the advent of "specialized" shoes - running shoes, tennis shoes, cross trainers, golf shoes, "sneakers" (meant mostly for casual wear) IS probably the most appropriate choice nowadays.


    I grew up in CA (none / 0) (#8)
    by shoephone on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:20:55 PM EST
    We called them "soft drinks."

    my wife and I (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by bocajeff on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 03:54:17 PM EST
    argue over caramel. I say "car-mal" and she says "care-a-mel". Thank goodness this is the worst fight we ever have.

    +10 (none / 0) (#16)
    by shoephone on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 04:32:30 PM EST
    As a kid in Connecticut (none / 0) (#22)
    by jondee on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 06:45:16 PM EST
    everyone called hoagies "grinders"..in the Deep South, or, at least where I lived in Louisiana, they called them "po' boys"..

    In the deep south its all Coke (none / 0) (#13)
    by Slado on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 04:02:10 PM EST
    Interesting how branding and regional dialect works.

    This crosses over into parts of FL and even here in southern Indiana sometimes as well.

    I still say Coke and they ask me half the time...."Is Pepsi OK?"

    the flip side of that (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by CST on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 06:20:27 PM EST
    I asked for a coke on a road trip and they said "what kind?"

    Uhh... coke?


    Tim Tebow (none / 0) (#21)
    by CST on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 06:27:46 PM EST
    is officially a Patriot.  Not sure how I feel about that, but I hope he can play tight end!

    In other sports news, GO BRUINS!!!

    Darn. I was sort of hoping the Cubs would (none / 0) (#28)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:33:12 PM EST
    make Tebow an offer. Anything to shake up the bullpen at this point.

    Surely the Pats do not see Tebow as any kind of successor to Brady. Do they see him as even a viable #2? What does he bring to the Pats? Unless, as you said, he can switch to tight end.


    Ha! that would have been good. (none / 0) (#31)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 07:48:36 PM EST
    I am torturing myself with Cubs scores notifiers on my phone. I thought I would get more involved with the season and enjoy it won or lose if I kept up better. Not working so far.

    Aw, gee Ruffian (1.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Zorba on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:32:37 PM EST
    Can you see the tears I'm crying for you and caseyOR?
    You can't?  Oh, darn.
    And did you notice that the Cardinals are leading the National League Central?
    And that, in fact, they have the highest winning percentage in either league right now?
    Just sayin'.

    kdog (none / 0) (#40)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:00:18 AM EST
    I can't help myself. How often does one player get a block, an assist, a steal, and a dunk in the span of about 45 seconds.

    Even with all that from LeBron, my favorite part of the 45 seconds is the no look over the head bounce pass by Mike Miller.

    On a sidenote, how scared does it make you that Belichick might again see something the Jets missed?

    Glad I missed Game 2... (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:10:37 PM EST
    while I was thoroughly and completely unplugged at Mountain Jam.  No room for the Heat or Tebow on this harsh reality Tuesday...my mind is still lost somewhere in an epic 4 hour Widespread Panic set in the pouring rain Friday night...gimme a couple days;)

    Sad that a Democrat is in the White House (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 02:21:17 AM EST
    While the NSA was dramatically expanding and spying on all of us.  If we ever thought the Republicans looked crazier and therefore less desirable, I think that political advantage is about to be completely lost.  This administration now looks voraciously corrupt as all hell.

    How did they ever ever think for one minute nobody was ever going to leak any of this stuff?

    I think they were hoping that their (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 06:55:09 AM EST
    zealous pursuit of leakers would be a deterrent, that the treatment of Bradley Manning would serve as a warning, that their aggressive approach to peaceful dissent - Occupy - would discourage people from remembering that the government is supposed to be working for them and protecting their rights, not the other way around, that putting American citizens on kill lists would make people think twice, that the embrace of an indefinite detention policy would scare people quiet.

    Seems like there's been a lot of effort on the part of this administration to drive home the message that leaking is a one-way street - their street - the sole province of those in power, used to make them look good, and remind us just how powerful they are.  

    I see that the message of the day is how damaging to our security these latest leaks are...interesting to me that we get patted on the head and assured that no one's reading or listening to us so we have nothing to worry about, but just the revelation that vast amounts of data are being collected has sent the upper echelons of power into a raging, frothing-at-the-mouth fit.

    Which tells me all of this isn't nearly as benign and nothing-to-see-here as they want us to believe.


    These leaks are administration devastating though (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 09:30:39 AM EST
    And you have Greenwald releasing in phases, so people are finally as a group paying attention to the information.  I see fear and panic at Orange because they seem to understand that this can decimate the President, this is not a fake or trumped up scandal.

    You can threaten people all you want, but if what they know you are doing is going to destroy you if known, you are a god damn fool.

    The President has given us Plan B yesterday out of nowhere with no fight, and right now the news is having a feast because he is already in front of the cameras this morning with "labor unions".  I think the White House is terrified.  And they should be, they should be as equally terrified as the citizens have been made in discovering what they have been up to.


    Except (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 09:42:52 AM EST
    Since a majority of the people in the country (in recent polls) don't seem to mind that their phone data is being compiled, if it means catching a terrorist or two, and since Congress won't go after the president on this issue, then these reveletaions could actually help Obama because it takes the AP scandal, the IRS scandal, Benghazi, and now the latest potential scandal at the State Department, off the front page.

    I have seen two very different polls on that (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 09:49:22 AM EST
    And we all must remember the question magic that pollsters use to get the numbers they sometimes are in search of.  I took all of my Obama hating tea party family out of my news feed, hmmm....I wonder what they are screaming about this morning?  When you have as many factions uniting in agreement over civil liberty violation you have a huge problem.  We have only just begun, and Clapper is already on record lying his a$$ off about what they were doing.

    Oh sure. (none / 0) (#52)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 09:58:42 AM EST
    But when it's the Democrats supporting something the Republicans supported a few years ago, you can bet no one will be hollering about this except op-ed writers, pundits, and bloggers.

    Maybe. For now. (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by sj on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 10:16:25 AM EST
    you can bet no one will be hollering about this except op-ed writers, pundits, and bloggers.
    That's part of the brilliance in releasing in phases.

    Shrug (none / 0) (#54)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 10:59:37 AM EST
    If the Democratic members of Congress (and most of the Republicans too) aren't going to put up a fuss, you think anything will get done about it?



    You had Senators attempt to warn us (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29:38 PM EST
    Using carefully chosen words, but it was illegal for them to just come out and share with us what they knew and were attempting to issue some warnings about.  Chew on that fact for a moment.

    If they're constituents make a fuss about it (none / 0) (#55)
    by shoephone on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 11:27:25 AM EST
    (and, from what I'm hearing and reading, they are) then the politicians won't be able to pretend it's nothing.

    "their" (none / 0) (#56)
    by shoephone on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 11:27:43 AM EST
    I understand your ... (none / 0) (#57)
    by sj on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 11:31:58 AM EST
    ... lack of confidence in meaningful discussion and change (Lordy, I hate to use that word which has been corrupted by the last two Presidential elections). I really do. But the opportunity for change has to start somewhere.

    He will benefit because the right (none / 0) (#60)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:30:43 PM EST
    does not know who to fight. They agree with the data gathering in general. My conservative friends only briefly seized on the issue when they thought something illegal had been done that they could go after Obama for - impeachment is still their goal.  Once they learned it was an escalation of what they loved under Bush, they backed down.

    They could possibly gang up on Snowden now - which would show the hypocrisy of their initial freakout - shouldn't they be glad someone revealed government over-reach?

    Interesting times....


    The daily (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:35:36 PM EST
    beast had an article stating that this kind of thing is probably going to tear the GOP apart for precisely the reasons you have stated. The neoconservatives loooovve the national security state and spying on people. The small and shrinking libertarian wing of the party not so much.

    Since when have they been people of (none / 0) (#65)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:39:25 PM EST
    Principle when playing politics :)?

    They are principles for sale and whatever hurts Obama :)


    Oh (none / 0) (#67)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:41:40 PM EST
    I agree with that but there's plenty of statements from same people like Ryan saying how all this stuff was great. I just don't think that they are going to actually DO anything because dismantling the national security state is not in the best interest of the GOP. They love it.

    I am a pretty awful person though (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 01:02:13 PM EST
    My granddaughters just got Plan B whenever they need it yesterday.

    I like Obama scared.  Hmmmm....what else can I get out of him that he has been denying me, being a bipartisan douche about?  Hmmmm....what is in this for me....I see things, possibilities, because maybe just maybe he needs me now.


    I think at this point they will do anything (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:46:29 PM EST
    To get back into power and running this country again.  They'll dismantle whatever it takes and worry about it later.

    We've been hearing (none / 0) (#66)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:41:27 PM EST
    that one thing or another was going to "tear apart the GOP" for at least 5 years now.

    It ain't gonna happen.  


    They're (none / 0) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:43:24 PM EST
    already split. Pretty much George W. Bush destroyed the party. I just think this is probably just yet another divide. With the economy being so rough for so many years, Romney should have done better.

    We heard that about the Democrats (none / 0) (#72)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:48:21 PM EST
    After 1992, and again in 2000, and in 2004.

    There's always more infighting reported in the party that's out of power.


    But, ol Rand Paul is slip-sliding (none / 0) (#74)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 01:14:53 PM EST
    today.  Maybe, as the polls start to weigh in, Sen. Paul thinks one-side of the mouth will cue those Libertarians while the other side will try to sound like one who could govern --- e.g., listen to his responses today to Charlie Rose et al as he tried multi-times to avoid agreeing with Snowden or referring to him in heroic terms; all a 180 from his initial response yesterday.

    Very complex area. Lots of jostling of allies.

    And, today, Sir Boehner speaketh (maybe after reading the credible WP/Pew poll) & opines that the leaker is a "traitor."


    Mine Or It Tees (none / 0) (#76)
    by Dadler on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 02:09:07 PM EST
    Sound it out.

    GOP beddy-bye. Not that the Dems are worth waking up either.


    Immigration reform is their challenge. (none / 0) (#75)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 01:20:05 PM EST
    Sheer numbers; sheer growth in numbers with each passing year.  Viva immigration reform!

    Immigration Reform (none / 0) (#78)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 02:29:02 PM EST
    passed it's first Senate vote 82-15 and now to debate. Voting against:

    Barrasso (R)
    Boozman (R)
    Crapo (R)
    Cruz (R)
    Enzi (R)
    Grassley (R)
    Inhofe (R)
    Kirk (R)
    Lee (R)
    Risch (R)
    Roberts (R)
    Scott (R)
    Sessions (R)
    Shelby (R)
    Vitter (R)


    I dunno (none / 0) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:35:58 PM EST
    Paul Ryan said that he isn't so sure this stuff should have been done.  He says we need more information.

    Just my opinion, but the Republicans are delighted and are in backrooms rubbing their hands together and giggling gleefully, and it looks like congress critters were not well informed about the programs.  They have some cover.

    I think this is just a calm before a horrible storm.


    Then (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:38:43 PM EST
    they need to start a movement to repeal the Patriot Act. People need to find tapes of them gleefully egging on George W. Bush increasing the national security state. And they are loathe to admit that George W. Bush was wrong about anything. So I kind of agree with Ruffian on this one. They are going to yell and scream but it's kind of ironic that a hated liberal like Glenn Greenwald is the one that exposed this. All kind of interesting stuff going on around this one.

    They may have started it (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:42:20 PM EST
    but Obama expanded it and the laws too into "domestic" terrorism....a lot

    I don't think he has cover.  I know many wish that he did, but I don't think he does here and I think he has been dumb as god damned post about all this.


    I'm still (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:44:45 PM EST
    not sure about that. I guess we will see. Not seeing much stuff from conservatives on facebook about this.

    I agree with you on the issue (none / 0) (#79)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 02:41:30 PM EST
    but on the politics...if the people who disagree most with Obama are the people like you and me and most of us on this blog...he does not have much to worry about.

    The Fox show I just watched (none / 0) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 05:27:24 PM EST
    Did call viewers who would have been okay with this under Bush hypocrites if they are upset about it under Obama.  Of the five flunkies present only one brought up the expansion and knew how many times the Bush administration had gone before the FISA court vs. Obama who doesn't seem to need to do that as much.

    Yes (none / 0) (#49)
    by sj on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 09:42:12 AM EST
    Releasing in phases is brilliant actually.

    Interesting factoid (none / 0) (#62)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 12:35:46 PM EST
    Whether one agrees or not, it is worth being aware that the Washington Post & Pew Research weighed in yesterday pm with the first of the big polls reflecting American attitudes about data-gathering & the NSA.  In our representative democracy, those results: 56% found the described NSA operation "acceptable," while 41% found the NSA operation "unacceptable." Additionally, a full 45% wanted an expanded program in the US.  (The poll was conducted over a 3-day period after disclosure with a MOE 3.5%.)

    It will be more than interesting to see the progress of this situation.  IMO, the corner that has been turned may be that we are in a post-post 9/11 time finally...maybe that will ultimately allow a little less fear-based balancing of the national interests. (For me, I'm very interested in & glad that the unwieldy contractor-expansion condition in the civilian employ has had a spotlight put on it.  This Reagan-engendered "lets downsize the government and --oh by the way--lets privatize & hire on & pay top dollar to contractors" has been expanding in all the Agencies for 30 years.)  

    How this plays out may surprise us all in our "majority rule, minority rights" republic.


    Hey everyone, the President is beginning (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 09:42:03 AM EST
    His speech, the unannounced speech about?  Oh....immigration reform.

    And Europeans are upset and having a WTF moment about how freely we feel like we can spy on all of them and every move they make too.  What a sucky morning huh White House?


    If the US Government is doing nothing wrong (none / 0) (#43)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 04:31:37 AM EST
    CONSCIOUS vs. SUBCONSCIOUS, vol. 30 (none / 0) (#77)
    by Dadler on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 02:15:46 PM EST