Clarity

Let's just make clear that I agree with the point of this paragraph in its entirety:

As for FISA, while in principle I think legally restricting government spying is a good thing, in practice I'm skeptical it makes much difference. As someone who has had a foot in the harder "left", the one that gets spied on, the old FISA rules didn't stop government infiltrators or all sorts of violations of privacy. [...] I see FISA as a nice issue to huff and puff about, but it's a pretty minor issue compared to just ending the war [and] shutting down torture...

It's not about "making a difference" in a strict "the government shall never spy on its citizens without due process" sense. It's about making a stand. It's about the political optics of the vote. It's about letting your opponent flail about with a bunch of vague claims as opposed to clear, quantifiable, and antithetical viewpoints from you and your campaign over the course of a very few months.
Is this so hard to understand? Is there no Democratic policy adviser that can understand these simple facts? You are the Change Candidate and you choose to side with the least popular President in history? To hand the GOP a bill that they couldn't pass when they held control of both houses of Congress? This is Change we can Belive In?

Let the illegal, warrantless wiretaps expire in August. Tell America why you did so. We still would have the secret FISA court, and plenty of low-barrier, almost-never-denied secret warrants out there avialable for when bin Laden makes that so-frequently-heralded call to somebody in this country. We already know these things were approved on the least scrap of probable cause. That bit of non-action accomplished, you set about prosecuting anyone and everyone who took part in these illegal wiretaps.

But don't take my word for it. Check out this quote:

"This Administration has put forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. When I am president, there will be no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens; no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime; no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. Our Constitution works, and so does the FISA court."

That would be Obama, back in 2007. I guess he thinks it's better to wait until he's President to live up to those words rather than to do so yesterday when it really mattered.

9/11 didn't happen because law enforcement couldn't tap a phone. Broadly speaking, it happened because when presented with a memo titled "bin Laden determined to strike in US" Bush said "All right. You've covered your ass, now" Period.

Fucktards

NYT reports:

Supporters of the plan, which revised the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, said that the final vote reflected both political reality and legal practicality. Wiretapping orders approved by a secret court under the previous version of the surveillance law were set to begin expiring in August unless Congress acted, and many Democrats were wary of going into their political convention in Denver next month with the issue hanging over them—handing the Republicans a potent political weapon.

So the crack group of thinkers running the Democrat Party responded by...handing the Republicans a potent political weapon. Here, Luthor, have some kryptonite. I know there's nothing you can do with this. Ha, see how I've outmaneuvered you by giving you the thing with which to kill me.

Naturally, the Democrat had a cunning plan:

Democrats pointed to some concessions they had won from the White House in the lengthy negotiations. The final bill includes a reaffirmation that the surveillance law is the “exclusive” means of conducting intelligence wiretaps — a provision that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats insisted would prevent Mr. Bush or any future president from evading court scrutiny in the way that the N.S.A. program did.

Ho ho ho, they sure showed the GOP. First, let me legalize everything illegal you've been doing for years. Then, I'll also let you and your enablers off the hook without EVER checking into what, exactly, it was you were even doing. Then, I'll reaffirm, in a very strongly worded letter, that the law is the law! Amazing, really. Such strict terms.

Worth noting that a GOP Congress couldn't get this piece of shit passed; for that, we needed the Democrats in charge. Brilliant. Thank God Dear Leader is reportedly happy and expected to sign the bill into law quickly. Wouldn't want to inconvenience or annoy the least popular President in the history of polling. Why, that might make the Democrat appear weak and feckless.

4 million quatloos for the newcomer

Hey, DHS, this is really a great idea:

A senior government official with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has expressed great interest in a so-called safety bracelet that would serve as a stun device [...]

This bracelet would:

• take the place of an airline boarding pass

• contain personal information about the traveler

• be able to monitor the whereabouts of each passenger and his/her luggage

• shock the wearer on command, completely immobilizing him/her for several minutes

This is fantastic. But why let these liberal alarmists on the Left and the crazed communists at the ACLU worry us into limiting this remarkable technology to flying 'Mericans? If we really want to challenge The Enemy, we should make these into stylish neck bracelets that all Patriotic 'Mericans wear. I know I'm not afraid of being tracked (and proactively punished) 24/7. It's really no different from the tracking that Lord Jesus performs on me anyway.

Interiors

Is there some overriding reason that the various departmental functions of Homeland Security can't be folded into the Department of the Interior? Then can we ban the use of the phrase "The Homeland" when referring to the United States of America for at least the next 10 years?

The arrangement makes more organizational sense, eliminates one whole department of government (golly, think of the savings!), and prevents any intelligence "stove-piping" re: the Native American Menace. It's win/win. Unexpected bonus: DOI already has a bitchin' logo. Once The Enemy has a chance to see that buffalo, I say let 'em bring it on.

Just a splash

Well, this didn't take long:

SHUSTER: Well, here's the other thing that we saw on the tape, Chris, is that, when Obama went in, he was offered coffee, and he said, "I'll have orange juice."

MATTHEWS: No.

SHUSTER: He did.

And it's just one of those sort of weird things. You know, when the owner of the diner says, "Here, have some coffee," you say, "Yes, thank you," and, "Oh, can I also please have some orange juice, in addition to this?" You don't just say, "No, I'll take orange juice," and then turn away and start shaking hands.

Indeed you don't. In many parts of the world such an incredible affront as requesting what you'd like to consume in a restaurant is met by torture and/or indefinite imprisonment. You know, how they roll at Guantanamo. Either way, I hope somebody sent the alert to MoDo:

DOWD (4/21/07): Whether or not the country is ready to elect a woman president or a black president, it's definitely not ready for a metrosexual in chief.

In presidential politics, it's all but impossible to put the man into manicure. Be sensitive, but not soft. Effete is never effective. Not much has changed since George H. W. Bush drove his New Hampshire campaign off the road by requesting ''a splash'' more coffee at a truck stop.

John Kerry sank himself by windsurfing in spandex and ordering a cheese steak in Philly with Swiss instead of Cheez Whiz.

Next thing you know, we'll have to sort out how to tell the children that Obama wears four button suits. It's just not 'Merican. That's all I'll say.