Doesn't matter. They'll still get screechy about it.

Look at the rhetorical pretzel this writer at the Daily Kos twists in order to make it seem like what Clinton and Carter did was different.

I have some pretty grave reservations myself about the whole surveillance/remote-monitoring issue, but the Left is as usual rasing a stink while at the same time completely missing the point. It never fails to amaze me that people will burn with outrage if the government gathers personal information, but these same people will shrug indifferently when retailers use their "discount cards" to track their purchase habits, or when credit agencies sell their information to companies. They will scream if a government official wants to verify if they are an actual citizen or not, and yet they think nothing of handing their credit cards to a total stranger in a restaurant. This indicates to me that these people do not, in fact, understand even the simplest aspects of privacy or security.

Your privacy is far more likely to be violated in the private sector than in the public sector (and for far less compelling reasons); at least the government has the countervailing goal of defeating our enemies in a time of war. I can argue with the means, but the Left seems to want to assert that there are no enemies at all...which is complete madness.

The Democrats are playing a stupid and dangerous game here. Their hatred of George W. Bush and his administration has passed beyond any sane horizon and has entered a completely non-linear realm that I cannot even understand. The Left hates him so much that they are willing to compromise a national security apparatus during wartime simply to generate bad P.R.

bad link?

I enjoy the outrage the press shows over the monitoring "without a warrant". Have they bothered to think that a warrant might not be nessesary.

Monty-

I was going to write something very similar to yours but you said it much better as usual. After spending 20 years in the telecom and internet space I can tell you that the private sector knows a hell of a lot more about the average person than most have any idea. And to my way of thinking, for much less legitimate reasons than the gov't. Those who do know don't seem to care much at all or have any clue how much this information is shared.

The right definitely got obsessed with Clinton hatred over the last few years of his presidency much to their shame and to their harm. But it never approached the looniness the left has now with Bush.

It boogles my mind that these folks are talking openly about whether or not Bush using warrantless taps to listen into conversations between people with ties to international terrorists rises to the level of impeachment. Truly through the looking glass stuff.

The (pretty clear, if you've followed the Supreme Court on criminal procedure like an MSM legal reporter presumably would) legal issues aside, I'm still kinda shocked that MSM propagandists think releasing this story is a *negative*, provoking "Oh, that evil Chimpy McHitlerburton must be destroyed!" reactions.

Way, way more likely reaction of the average person, "Thank Jeebus he's *doing* something!"

"The right definitely got obsessed with Clinton hatred over the last few years of his presidency much to their shame and to their harm. But it never approached the looniness the left has now with Bush."

I beg to differ. The Democrats have offered way more support to Bush than Clinton ever got from Republicans. In fact the Republicans tried to impeach Clinton when he was at war. However, that fact doesn't seem to prevent Republicans from moaning like stuck pigs at any sign of less than mindless loyalty.

I beg to differ.

1. Posting this kind of tripe without at least putting a name to it is cowardly. It's the equivalent of the graffiti you find scrawled on subway walls and bridge girders: BUSH SUX! ARMANDO + MONICA 4 EVAH!

2. The fact that you apparently believe the crap you just posted identifies you as a threat to both yourself and society. You ought to start taking your meds again immediately; bipolar disorder is nothing to play around with.

3. I like using numbered lists.

The Democrats have offered way more support to Bush than Clinton ever got from Republicans.

BWAH-HA-HA-HA!!! Ground Control to Major Troll, your brain is dead, there's something wrong...

anon beggar - In fact the Republicans tried to impeach Clinton when he was at war.

If you were not such a dumbass you would have known that the articles of impeachment were started on 1/7/99. The air campaign in Yugoslavia began on 3/24/99 after the impeachment and was completed on 6/3/99.

I beg to differ.

Begging will get you nowhere. I don't placate. My loyalty is not with Bush or the Republican party. My loyalty is to the quaint concepts of national security and integrity of our leaders. Bush seems to embody my beliefs and therefore has my support.

The US currently is involved in a very serious ground war though many on the left can't seem to grasp this. Clinton's bombing of the Balkans was not close to a ground war and comparing the two is just dumb. A good number of people on the right also agreed with this not because we thought that the fighting in the Balkans was an imminent threat to the US but because an unstable region in the Balkans could have spread to other regions in Europe and Asia and because genocide should always be fought when possible.

The simple fact is Clinton engaged in, depending on your level of outrage/support, even more direct "spying" on US citizens without a warrant than Bush. Think not? Ask Aldridge Ames. And guess what, I support his actions 100%. I didn't support him selling out to the Chinese, basically ignoring international terrorism, placating N. Korea, using the IRS, sifting the FBI files, etc., etc., etc..

I could care less about him getting a BJ from an intern (although I find it amusing that the left and feminists who call this the worst sort of employer/employee abuse of power and have fought to have employers in the private sector fired and prosecuted for this) and I thought the right totally mishandled it and should have let it go. The fact that he lied in court and got disbared for it was probably punishment enough.

And the simple fact is, your wrong. Look at the poll numbers. Bush has virtually no support from the left. In relative terms, Clinton had far more support from the right. Its not debatable. Its a fact.

Gee all the mindless vitriol here is just so convincing.

Name one thing Bush has not got from Democrats in his war on terror? They even supported his attack on the wrong target.

Would replacing Clinton with Gore have been THAT deleterious to the war effort? Moreso than dragging the impeachment process out rather than resigning, as is customary? Gore then could have run as an incumbent, and probably would have won, does that nightmare scenario keep Anonymous up at night?

I know Conservatives who became bleeding heart Serb-loving Quakers when *that man* started bombing those verminous Krout wannabes. I am not among them, as most Conservatives are not. These people are overrepressented on the net, like Pagan Objectivist urine fetishists.

Name one thing Bush has not got from Democrats in his war on terror?

a blowjob

Surely, given all the moaning and groaning about Liberals, demonstrated in every second thread here, there must be one solid reason for all the angst. What is it? What obstacles have the Democrats put in Bush's way in his war on tar. Personally, I've never seen a president get a free ride like this one.

Hey cupcake!

Good to see you again.

Josie, that's just too silly to even try and respond to. Is that the best you've got?

Aw, go easy on our 'lil cupcake.

Guy (or gal) is sensitive.

Name one thing Bush has not got from Democrats in his war on terror?

A united front against the enemy.

I wonder if this is Velma?

Lee save a brewsky for me.

But of course.

I'm good like that.

"A united front against the enemy."

Oh I see, in addition to supporting the President in all his policies, we also have to agree with you that the policy makes sense, or is of any real benefit to the nation. Mere support of the policy is not enough.

Ok, if you're going to start telling lies, Josie Velma, I'm going to have to chime in here. The Democrats, as a party, have not supported *any* of the Presidents policies as regards the war on terror with the possible exception of the lipservice they paid Afganistan and that was only because it was too close to 9/11 for them to get away with their usual ankle biting.

Oh I see, in addition to supporting the President in all his policies, we also have to agree with you that the policy makes sense, or is of any real benefit to the nation. Mere support of the policy is not enough

You go first. Exactly which policies do you support even though you don't agree with them while we go after the "wrong target in this war on tar."

Aw, cupcake, why you gotta play like that?

During World War II, Wendell Wilke ran against President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Guy could have run the way the Dems are running now - criticizing every aspect of the war, leaking military secrets to the press - but he didn't.

Shortly before he died, he told a friend, that if he could write his own epitaph and had to choose between "here lies a president" or "here lies one who contributed to saving freedom," he would prefer the latter.

Too bad the Dems don't have that kind of integrity, huh?

Methinks the anonymous troll is a chainsmoking teenage girl, who will tomorrow thrill her friends with tales of how she tweaked a bunch of wingnuts. Totally.

The misspellings, and the whole nuance of free-floating angst, give the poster away.

Recommendation: either ignore her, or ruthlessly insult her. (It'll be double funny if the dumbass in question turns out to be a guy.)

(Of course, it could be our pal the Proud Liberal Vet posting from his hut at Ice Station Zebra.)

Oh I see, in addition to supporting the President in all his policies

Like Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Henry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, Al Franken, and Jay Rockefeller have? Any more 'support' from them and Saddam will be strolling through his palaces again in no time.

Mere support of the policy is not enough.

This is kind of irrelevant to the main point anyway, since they never supported the policies, but entertain my curiosity: how do you 'support' a policy if you publicly express disagreement "that the policy makes sense, or is of any real benefit to the nation?"

Let's see the Democrats were the party that originally proposed the Homeland Security Department, and until Bush pushed it beyond what it allows, always supported it. They still do, minus the excesses. The vast majority of Democrats supported the War on those responsible for 9/11. They overwhelmingly supported the war on Iraq. Hillary Clinton rumored to be a leading candidate of the Party still thinks Iraq was a good idea. The Democrats have supported all the money bills earmarked for the war on terror.

I must be missing something.

Of course, it could be our pal the Proud Liberal Vet posting from his hut at Ice Station Zebra

I don't think so Monty. It hasn't called us fags yet.

I must be missing something.

Now you're making sense, cupcake.

Other than that sentence, most of what you wrote is utter bullshit.

You bitches better RECOGNIZE!!!

I must be missing something.

The first truthful thing you've said, Josie Velma.

I must be missing something.

...um, should I go ahead and take the shot, or would it be too cruel? Can I get a ruling?

Take the shot.

For me.

Wendell --

Eh. The moment seems to have passed. It'd be kind of like wrestling your kid brother down onto the floor and then farting on his head, you know? Momentarily satisfying, but utlimately not worth the effort.

Besides, I gotta go get something to eat. You guys beat up on this punk 'til I get back.

I must be missing something.

Not to worry. You have a lot of company on the left.

The continued vitriol is so convincing, even though it is so empty. But I guess they are doing the bestest they can.

Oh, Monty you're such a big softie.

You teddy bear, you.

The castrato troll missed something, all right. He apparently missed Dick(less) Durbin comparing American troops to Nazis and Ted Kennedy and his endless bleats of "QUAHGMIAH!" to name just a couple of things off the top of my head.

The continued vitriol is so convincing, even though it is so empty. But I guess they are doing the bestest they can.

Par for the course, cupcake.

First, enter with inane comment.

Second, get flamed.

Third, whine about being flamed.

It's all so droll. Come up with some new material, baby. You've got to stay fresh if you want to run with this crew.

I'm only a dumb red state Jesusland type, so naturally I don't much cotton to that there fancy book learnin' and I don't know what "vitriol" means. But from context, I assume it must mean "getting my ass handed to me."

Yes Lee the rhetoric runs at dizzying heights here.

Hey, Velma/Josie/AnonFem:

You never did say if you wanted to spank me.

Or acknowledge my apology.

After spending 20 years in the telecom and internet space I can tell you that the private sector knows a hell of a lot more about the average person than most have any idea.

For example, are you all aware that Ace plants a tracking cookie on your hard drive when you first come here, and then can monitor your usage? It's harmless, I suppose, and almost all blogs do this. But personally I have software that blocks it (Ad-Aware se -- you can download it from a company in Sweden called Lavasoft).

Whoa... ace doesn't plant that, and ace didn't even know about that until now.

I imagine that cookie is for the purpose of remembering your information in the comments, which, of course, doesn't work.

From the comment by the anonymous troll posted at 06:49 PM: you know, that accent becomes you. I hereby dub thee Jethro, unless and until you post a real name or nick. I request all other posters to do the same -- Jethro is this fuckhead's moniker from here on out.

Are we agreed?

ace,

paypal and sitemeter put the cookies out from your site.

As well as blog ads, google syndication, etc etc

I did not know that.

ace,

I did not know that.

You're an unwitting tool of the corporate combine, dude. A naive shill, drawing in the unwary so their most private thoughts can be gleaned and picked over by Wall Street eggheads who will use the information to gain legal custody of your corpse after you die and use your corpse as the base for a line of cosmetics. That's what I read somewhere, anyway. Or maybe I just made it up. I don't know. The point is, the noises in my head are very loud.

I hope Monty doesn't hurt himself. Does he throw things when he gets all worked up like that?

IF CLITON HAD DID IT YOU WOULD,NT HEAR A THING FROM THE NEWS MEDIA

I hope Monty doesn't hurt himself. Does he throw things when he gets all worked up like that?

Jethro! Your concern for my well-being is touching, but never fear: I often employ hyperbole and sarcasm for humorous effect. What's your excuse?

I make no excuses. I accept full responsibility for whatever false accusations are attributed to me, from the Left or the Right.

I accept full responsibility for whatever false accusations are attributed to me, from the Left or the Right.

No you don't. If you were willing to take responsibility you'd use a nickname so we could call you an asshole without offending the other Josie Velma Jethro's.

Something tells me that there isn't much that stands in your way where calling someone an asshole is concerned.

It remembers my info, still asks me every time if I want to sign off as D, Dave Munger, davemunger.blogspot.com, or Dave Munger - Republiqueer Fagsucker.

When the Japs bombed Pearl Harbor, we America Firsters closed up shop and went off to support the country. The argument was over.

Not kidding, Ace. I just came back here, and your site has tried to plant tracking cookies called "2o7.net/", "imworldwide.com/cgi-bin" and "realmedia.com/".

And I've just been here a couple of minutes. Not to worry, this happens on every site. Normally it's pretty harmless, but I got cautious when my daughter ended up with spyware on her computer at college that stole my credit card number. Eventually, I got the charges reversed, but it was a hassle.

I make no excuses. I accept full responsibility for whatever false accusations are attributed to me, from the Left or the Right.

Oh, bullshit, cupcake. That martyr suit doesn't quite fit.

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? No! Nothing is over until we say it is!

Lee we moderate Liberals are martyrs. On the one hand we are attacked from the Left, for supporting the President. The Right either lumps us in with the radical Left, or calls us wishy-washy, for supporting the President. Others on the right accuse us of being idiots, morons, traitors, America haters, soldier haters, etc. In fact it is so depressing one wonders why we even bother.

Lee we moderate Liberals are martyrs. On the one hand we are attacked from the Left, for supporting the President. The Right either lumps us in with the radical Left, or calls us wishy-washy, for supporting the President. Others on the right accuse us of being idiots, morons, traitors, America haters, soldier haters, etc. In fact it is so depressing one wonders why we even bother.

You keep mentioning your support for the president and yet you've not yet indicated exactly in what areas you support him.

So color me suspicious.

Oh, and your "we are martyrs" line?

Total flamebait.

Buttercup given the fact that your side is now justifying it's actions by claiming that Carter or Clinton did the same thing I'm surprised at your question. Are you or are you not simply following Liberal policies? Nation-building and enormous growth in government spending are supposed to be Liberal policies are they not?

Buttercup? Man, you know how to make a guy feel warm and tingly inside. Are we friends now?

Anyway, I don't like the spending. Not one bit. Drives me crazy when I get my pay stub and see how much of my money was taken for ridiculous shit like the 'bridge to nowhere' or to name some piece of crap federal building after one of the Senate Club. So if you hate spending, we're in total agreement on that for a change.

As for the nation building? Yeah, we stole that. You guys don't seem much interested anymore.

Jethro just don't want to answer the question, does he?

which policies again are you all supportive of? cause we must have just missed that altogether.

I just want to give you the credit you so richly deserve.

I can't do it. I can't respond to the non-signing commenters -- I can't work out if it's one or more than one or one spoofing another, or what.

Look, sticking a post-it on your comments in no way de-anonymizes you. Call yourself X or Winky or Blank or Thing or whatever...it's just so we can keep the voices straight. Think of it as the minimum courtesy, less than which marks you as unworthy of reply.

Weasel given the size of the creative challenge that confronts anyone seeking to brand himself or herself with a false identity I didn't feel it was appropriate to rush into it. However, I can assure you that I am making progress and have narrowed it down to a manageable level of options. My problem at this point is finding a name, which sounds good when preceded by the word ‘asshole’, or 'moron.' For example, 'why should I waste my time on a moron like you noname liberal.' If you could just be patient a little longer I will try to make a final decision. We Liberals still have to work for a living and only have so much time we can devote to blogging.

Thanks to the virtual properties of an electronic archive, ameriglobe.net you can also do a computer search of all the obituary notices to look for specific words, the-free-directory.co.uk and so check for specific patterns and features in the way his times valued MT. resource.coolringtones.us It's interesting, for example, to see whether "Tom" or "Huck" is mentioned the most - and what other characters and novels are singled out. Gold http://www.bookstunter.com/res_miscellaneous-3.php

Clemens' funeral was a small gathering in Elmira, where his wife and daughters were already buried. internetholidayfinder.co.uk But to allow his public a chance to pay their respects, his body was first taken to New York City, ventrolla.co.uk where thousands saw it in the Presbyterian Brick Church. connecticutcigarettes.com The viewing was open to the public, but if you had a ticket like the one at left you could be admitted first. Band http://householdgiftsonline.com/site/1568134/page/173180