Thursday, May 11, 2006

Bush: We're not trolling your personal life
The picture below is from the excellent watertiger. Photoshop has "like" made a small change. It says a lot about what the decider thinks about us.


The government has been secretly collecting records of ordinary Americans' phone calls in an effort to build a database of every call made within the country, it was reported today. President Bush said any domestic intelligence-gathering measures he's approved are lawful. "We are not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans," President Bush said.

Just trust me ...heh.. heh
He is lying, what they are trying to decipher from these calls is looking for patterns which is called data mining. The definition is here "Data Mining, also known as Knowledge-Discovery in Databases (KDD), is the process of automatically searching large volumes of data for patterns. Data Mining is a fairly recent and contemporary topic in computing. However, Data Mining applies many older computational techniques from statistics, machine learning and pattern recognition."
You know on an unrelated issue Lou Dobbs on CNN said " Dobbs to president: Do you take us for fools?"
Yes Lou he thinks we are fools!

From the USA today report
Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused. The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events.

Yes they were worried the FISA court would not agree with them because it is illegal! That is why they want to keep it secret. Morons.
To any Bushbot/worshipper who reads my blog, first go read the conservative radio talk show host McIntyre here .. to understand why I can't and won't respect your defense of the decider in chief unless you can admit that the man has made a number of mistakes. The man lacks any humility , compassion or an ability to admit a mistake. The conservative in the article I can respect.. because he knows when he is wrong and has the guts to admit it. That we should all be capable of. You can have a conversation with him, but not some blind W supporter.

From the article by the conservative McIntyre..
And speaking of domestic embarrassments, let’s talk for a minute about President Bush’s domestic record. Yes, he cut taxes. But tax cuts combined with reckless spending and borrowing is criminal mismanagement of the public’s money. We’re drunk at the mall with our great grandchildren’s credit cards.

I think our two party system is broken, the democrats have been spineless, ineffective and have not played the role of an effective opposition party. Yes I am a liberal but I am also pragmatic, which to me right now means that in the absence of an effective 3rd party alternative and the need to put a check on this administration, I will support the democrats. But my money and time will not go to the congress and senate candidate comitees, but will go to specific candidates.
One such candidate is Patrick Murphy (link on the right) an Iraq war vet and someone who I have had the chance to hear in person and I liked what I heard from him.

In response to
""We are not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans,"
Three things-
One- Any legal intepretations of this latest outrage by the administration should be directed to the excellent Glenn Greenwald and his post here on this issue. He has litigated about first amendment issues and has come out with a book about what a patriotic American can do in these dark days.
One other thing, unlike some conservative blogs like Instapundit, Andrew Sullivan (wimps) Glenn does have comments at his place. Jonathan Turley constitutional law expert at Geroge Washington on MSNBC clearly stated that laws were broken, I will put up a link when I find one.

Two- Kudos to Qwest for taking a stance against turning over records, as consumers you can bet we will cancel our accounts with any of the companies who turned over our records. And they may be liable for billions of dollars for violation of laws.

Three- here are what some of the early comments at Atrios were like.. sort of funny, but nothing about this story is funny, its a chilling example of a democracy being undermined slowly but surely.

Last week he's the Deciderator, this week the Collectorator -- I can't keep up.plantsman Homepage 05.11.06 - 12:13 pm

If I wuz mining I'd be wearing one of those funny hats with a flashlight on it.
/DubyerHolden Caulfield Homepage 05.11.06 - 12:14 pm

Um, so you're collecting this massive database and just... letting it sit there?
He's preparing for a lucrative post-presidential career in telemarketing.NYMary Homepage 05.11.06 - 12:15 pm

suprised he has not started up a DNA database like we have here in Britain!Moonbootica, Buffy Geek
That sounds to much like that thar science stuff.
And we know how he feels about that.Terry C, Coldplayer 05.11.06 - 12:17 pm

Phishing, that's his great moment.Ruth

Your President can be trusted.
And so can I.
Trust me on this one...-Ahmad Chalabi 05.11.06 - 12:28 pm

17 comments:

Dr. Distracto said...

Michael Moore is fat! Democrats are angry! Ignore our moral bankruptcy.

Signed,

The Republicans

(from the Kenosha Kid)

karmic_jay said...

Kenosha, Thanks for stopping by. You said exactly what one of my commetators who leans republican says. :)

Teri said...

heck yeah, democrats ar angry! Anyone with at least half a brain, democrat or not, is angry.

I thought Republicans favored less government, not more (extraordinarily intrusive) government!

Thanks for stopping by my blog!

San said...

ooh bush :S

Jordan's Dad said...

Here's some sanity for you libs.

The telephone companies voluntarily gave this information to the NSA.

Thus, the NSA broke no law in requesting and receiving the information.

The telephone companies may have broken the law by giving the info.

When there is another attack in this country, will you still blame Bush after you've crippled every legitimate means to prevent them?

Oh, and please keep screaming about this and showing the public how little you care about their safety. You handed us the '04 election. We'd appreciate the '06 one as well.

Keep praying for another attack. You may get what you ask for.

dem said...

JD, how can you make these claims with a straight face? I guess it's party before country for you. Do you realize that Scott McClellan's job has been taken?

The Telecoms DID NOT provide the information voluntarily, and the NSA IS breaking the law. That is why even members of YOUR OWN party in congress are so upset!

From the USA Today article we learned that the Telecoms were paid [<- JD] to provide the NSA with private information. We also learned that the NSA refused to get permission [<- JD] from FISA or the Attorney General, the implication being that the NSA knew it wouldn't get approval because its actions were illegal. Although even that is strange considering that it appears that the AG is blocking an investigation by the Dept of Justice into this scandal. I wonder why...

In addition the article made clear that the NSA threatened Qwest [<- JD] by suggesting the company would suffer financially if it didn't cooperate.

Funny thing about you JD is that you think the criticisms us libs make about your leader and your party will backfire, but you still keep trying to stop us from making them. That's really a bad strategy for electoral victory on your part, don't you think? Or are you scared that the public will agree with us?

By the way, when are you going to answer my questions regarding media bias that don't deal with the NYT?

karmic_jay said...

JD no one is praying for an attack. Get a clue will ya?

But then you are probably so scared that you don't think rationally any more.

For a change try to come up with some facts and cogent criticism will ya?

Bush has done whatever he has wanted to do, provide proof of how the he has been crippled?
You think the bad guys don't think we spy on them? That they get a clue after the newspapers spoek about NSA programs?

You control the Congress, senate the presidency and the courts have been fairly deferential of the administration.
Trying to blame the democrats is not cutting it.
What scares you is that most of our citizenry is walking up to who is in charge now and they realize what a mess the gop has got this country in to. That bothers ya but then unlike the talk show McIntyre you can't come up with any acknowledgemnt of things gone wrong.

Alter Abhishek said...

too much...

Id it is said...

national security at the cost of privacy ... that jars.

dem said...

Although a lot of conservatives oppose Bush's latest abuse of power (seeing as a conservative principle USED to be limited government), some of them have also excused this behavior by asserting that more access to personal information in the hands of the feds will protect us.

To raise other points worth discussing, l'll leave aside the fact that the latter group offers not evidence to back up its claim but the vacuous accusation that critics want Al Qaeda to kill us all. Instead, I wonder if anyone here could explain how a member of that group would reply to the following two questions:

1) How would Bush defenders define crossing the line into excessive power in the hands of the government. I'm not asking for an extreme situation, just what it would take to cross the line.

2) I would hope that we could all agree that it is conceivable that a system without checks and balances could lead to abuse and ultimately tyranny. That being the case, what checks and balances do Bush defenders believe protect Americans from unlawful intrusion and abuse of power by the federal government (i.e. crossing the line, as described above)? I don't mean after the fact, like voting someone out of office, but preventive measures or actions that would automatically occur if such a situation were to arise.

Just to make it clear, by checks and balances, I DO NOT mean leaving oversight to the people who have the power to cross the line.

Mridula said...

I have seen (read) a lot of anger over this on in the US.

Mr. J said...

Jay, i'd wish to see you and Bush locked in a room. Wonder what would happen. What would happen?

Jordan's Dad said...

"Funny thing about you JD is that you think the criticisms us libs make about your leader and your party will backfire, but you still keep trying to stop us from making them." - Dem

"Oh, and please keep screaming about this and showing the public how little you care about their safety. You handed us the '04 election. We'd appreciate the '06 one as well." - JD

I repeat - PLEASE keep screaming about this.

- JD

dem said...

And I hope you keep screaming about how liberty must be preserved by doing away with it.

I'm sure all the veterans that fought for our freedoms will be happy to see the Republicans toss them out the door as if the sacrifices of those who served in previous wars were meaningless.

"If you want to pick one of the many issues you raise, perhaps I can educate you."

I'm still waiting for your answers to my questions about media bias and what it would take for you to say the government had overstepped its authority.

Dr. Distracto said...

From Gallup/USA Today:

"The majority of Americans disapprove of a massive Pentagon database containing the records of billions of phone calls made by ordinary citizens, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. About two-thirds are concerned that the program may signal other, not-yet-disclosed intelligence efforts directed at the general public."

From the GOP:

The liberal press lies! Black is white! Up is down! Democrats want us all to die! Ignore our moral bankruptcy!

karmic_jay said...

LOL@JD.
JD = broken stuck record.
The people are waking up, that merely saying terra terror is not enough. You know like you have to be competent and shit when you are running the country.

Remember when the Iraq war was going to pay for itself? I am sure you supported that?
Did ya? Did ya? Come on you got hoodwinked.. how much kool aid do you have in your veins?

SR said...

Maybe this would seem borderline legal - the phone call records (it is still not clear to me that it is outright illegal) - if not for the fact that the AG refused to testify at a hearing regarding the related issue of wiretapping US <-> international calls. It dissolves whatever shred of trust we have in our current administration. If they want us to trust them, they have to first show themselves trustworthy.