Posted at the nam.org website:

The activists want to undermine the legitimate surveillance of foreign communications through litigation

You not only have no basis for that statement, but it borders on slanderous. All the "activists" that I am familiar with are motivated by the desire that the traditional rule of law extend to the executive branch and that any needed modifications to the FISA law are provided for by the normal political process that the Constitution requires.

The Bush administration's brazen desregard for not only the FISA law but also the Presidential Records Act and his declared intention to ignore any other portion of any statute which purports to regulate his own behavior or freedom to act, is more than adequate motivation for anyone who cares to see that the Constitutional balance of power is maintained.

The accusation that the EFF is motivated by either financial reward or the desire to inhibit intelligence collection is not only dishonest, but it undermines any legitimate arguments you would care to advance in defense of the current NSA program or the President's conduct.

Re: John McCain and Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia

The NYT included this paragraph in their story:

An insurgent group operating in Iraq, called Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, is actually a homegrown Sunni Arab extremist group that American intelligence agencies have concluded is foreign led. The extent of its links to Osama bin Laden’s network is not clear. Some leaders of the group have sworn allegiance to Mr. bin Laden, but the precise links and extent of affiliation are unknown, and it was created after the American invasion.

Now if only we could get them to lead with THAT paragraph the next one would write itself as in "John McCain used potential supporter's ignorance over this basic fact in order to level a baseless charge against Barack Obama, thus opening himself to charges of stupidity or dishonesty or both."

There is some difference

In response to:

Glenn Greenwald

Let me preface by stating that contrary to being naive, stating that he'd be willing to go after OBL in Pakistan and then experiencing the backlash was precisely what drew me to Obama's campaign.

Quoting something I posted elsewhere:

Hunting OBL in Pakistan" was Obama "Emperor's New Clothes" moment. He actually had the audacity to state the obvious and the shocked gasps of the King's court are still resonating....

I think the only thing he might be criticized for is staing bluntly what's been happening quietly.

Having said that though, I will note that much of what Obama is being criticized for isn't that he'd express willingness to go after OBL, it's that he's willing to bypass one of our favored dictators in order to do so.

When McCain spouts off one-liners about bombing Iran or Syria. at least he's referring to nations that are presumtive enemies (at least among the Republican base).

Pakistan (like Saudi Arabia) on the other hand has a purported "ally" in power and is hence off limits. That this is precisely why Al Qeada considers those countries safe haven is not only lost in the debate, it is absolutely taboo to discuss.

At this point I'm ready to promote this as Dirks' addendum to Occam's razor.

"If there are two competing explanations for an event and one calls for someone being surprisingly brilliant and the other calls for them to be incredibly stupid - stupidity wins every time."

Always nice to make the main page

....www.time-blog.com/swampland/

UPDATE: Commenter Paul Dirks wants to know:

So are the Union officials responding to their membership or attempting to guide them? I'd be interested in how the people who WEREN'T undecided fell

Sometimes the jokes just write themselves

went out to microphones set up on the Capitol steps, and accused the Democrats of a political stunt.

Politico

If this quote is accurate

Clinton dismisses weekend losses

Clinton argued that caucuses are "primarily dominated by activists" and that "they don't represent the electorate, we know that."
then shame on Hillary.....

Activist:

Someone who cares sufficently about the issues to actually participate in the political process in a meaningful manner.

compare

The Electorate:

Someone who only shows up at the polls on election day and pulls the lever for whoever makes them feel better based on what Wolf Blitzer told them the other night.

How the hell did we ever allow "activist" to become an epithet.

And shame on Hillary for using the term in that manner. Lets see how well she'll fare without her own set of "activists"

Be vewy vewy afwaid......

http://www.infragard.net/

I'm not sure who's more paranoid. The people who feel the desire to join or the one's who get creeped out by the organization's existence.

It does seem like a bedwetter's dream come true!

I'm reminded of the Jr Detective cards you used to be able to send in for from the back of cereal boxes. Only instead of decoder ring, you get access to an FBI maintained VPN. How cool is that?!!

Reacting to Romney's concession...

I disagree with Senator McCain on a number of issues, as you know. But I agree with him on doing whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq, on finding and executing Osama bin Laden, and on eliminating Al Qaeda and terror

Hmmm.....

Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before the invasion.

And Al Qaeda in Pakistan appears to have agreed to a cease-fire with the government of President Pervez Musharraf.

And Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell is doing his best to make sure that we're experiencing terror.

I guess the Republicans are running on a platform of "change" after all!

Re: Signing statements

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but to me, the fact that Bush is derailing the Constitutional checks and balances that were put in place to prevent executive abuse and overreach is worse and more alarming than most of the particulars of his particular abuses.

And to make matters worse, much of it appears to be due to simple laziness. In particular, when it became clear that the Poindexter-led TIPS program wasn't going to pass muster, he simply ordered it in place anyway. That this has evolved into the current FISA controversy is unfortunate, but the sad fact is, that if he had pushed for the reforms contained in the August bill back when he needed them, retroactive immunity wouldn't even be necessary let alone a deal-breaker.