Putting the brakes on Big Brother??

Unlike some of the folks in DC...

Bush: Eavesdropping Helps Save U.S. Lives

By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
Sat Dec 17, 6:42 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Facing angry criticism and challenges to his authority in Congress, President Bush on Saturday unapologetically defended his administration's right to conduct secret post-Sept. 11 spying in the United States as "critical to saving American lives."

Bush said congressional leaders had been briefed on the operation more than a dozen times. That included Democrats as well as Republicans in the House and Senate, a GOP lawmaker said.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she had been told on several occasions that Bush had authorized unspecified activities by the National Security Agency, the nation's largest spy agency. She said she had expressed strong concerns at the time, and that Bush's statement Saturday "raises serious questions as to what the activities were and whether the activities were lawful."

Often appearing angry in an eight-minute address, the president made clear he has no intention of halting his authorizations of the monitoring activities and said public disclosure of the program by the news media had endangered Americans.

...some politicians are starting to realize this government is supposed to have a system of checks and balances...

Senate Rejects Extension of Patriot Act
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent Sat Dec 17, 9:53 AM ET

WASHINGTON - In a stinging defeat for President Bush, Senate Democrats blocked passage Friday of a new Patriot Act to combat terrorism at home, depicting the measure as a threat to the constitutional liberties of innocent Americans.

. . .

"We can come together to give the government the tools it needs to fight terrorism and protect the rights and freedoms of innocent citizens," said Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., arguing that provisions permitting government access to confidential personal data lacked safeguards to protect the innocent.

"We need to be more vigilant," agreed Sen. John Sununu, a Republican from New Hampshire, where the state motto is "Live Free or Die." He quoted Benjamin Franklin: "Those that would give up essential liberty in pursuit of a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security."

...other, that is, than our writing them checks to increase their balances.

And does anyone other than me think putting a giant fence around the country is a distrubing thing to do? For whatever reason?

House votes to build a border fence
House approves tough immigration bill
By Lisa Friedman, Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Far-reaching legislation that turns America's estimated 11 million illegal aliens into felons passed the House late Friday after a raging two-day debate.

The bill passed 239-182 largely along party lines after Republicans beat back a last-ditch attempt by Democrats to scuttle it.

The legislation authorizes construction of a fence along 698 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border and makes employees responsible for knowing the immigration status of their workers. Anyone who hires an illegal immigrant could be fined as much as $25,000 per worker.

JFK, Clinton: Most popular of last 10 POTUSes

President George W. Bush ranks as the least popular and most bellicose of the last ten U.S. presidents, according to a new survey.

Only nine percent of the 662 people polled picked Bush as their favorite among the last 10 presidents. John F. Kennedy topped that part of the survey, with 26 percent, closely followed by Bill Clinton (25 percent) and Ronald Reagan (23 percent).

Bush was also viewed as the most warlike president (43 percent), the worst for the economy (42 percent) and the least effective (33 percent). But he was rated most highly in response to a question on who would do the right thing even if it were unpopular.

The survey was conducted by the Chicago-based National Qualitative Centers, a marketing research company, as part of research for a forthcoming book on popular preferences, one of its authors, Ken Berwitz, said on Friday.

Sources: White House to Accept Torture Ban

After months of resistance, the White House has agreed to accept Sen. John McCain's call for a law specifically banning cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of foreign suspects in the war on terror, several congressional officials said Thursday.

Under the emerging deal, the CIA and other civilian interrogators would be given the same legal rights as currently guaranteed members of the military who are accused of breaking interrogation guidelines, these officials added. Those rules say the accused can defend themselves by arguing it was reasonable for them to believe they were obeying a legal order.

The congressional officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they did not want to pre-empt an expected announcement later in the day at the White House, possibly by President Bush and McCain.

These officials also cautioned the agreement was encountering opposition in the House from Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. A spokesman for Hunter said negotiations were ongoing.

But Sen. John Warner, R-Va., Hunter's counterpart in the Senate, was said to be on board. And his spokesman, John Ullyot, said: "Senator Warner is meeting with Chairman Hunter to work out the refinements."

A day earlier, the House endorsed the Senate-passed ban, agreeing that the United States needed to set uniform guidelines for the treatment of prisoners in the war on terror and to make clear that U.S. policy prohibits torture.

That put pressure on the White House at a time when the president finds himself defending his wartime policies daily amid declining public support for the Iraq war and his own low standing in opinion polls.

The White House at one point threatened a veto if the ban was included in legislation sent to the president's desk, and Vice President Dick Cheney made an unusual personal appeal to all Republican senators to give an exemption to the CIA.

But congressional sentiment was overwhelmingly in favor of the ban, and McCain, a former Navy pilot who was held and tortured for five years in Vietnam, adopted the issue.

The Republican maverick and the administration have been negotiating for weeks in search of a compromise, but it became increasingly clear that he, not the administration, had the votes in Congress.

As passed by the Senate and endorsed by the House, McCain's amendment would prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. government custody, regardless of where they are held. It also would require that service members follow procedures in the Army Field Manual during interrogations of prisoners in Defense Department facilities.

In discussions with the White House, that languge was altered to bring it into conformity with the Uniform Code of Military Justice. That says that anyone accused of violating interrogation rules can defend themselves if a "reasonable" person could have concluded they were following a lawful order.

The Senate included the McCain provisions in two defense bills, including a must-pass $453 billion spending bill that provides $50 billion for the Iraq war. But the House ommitted them from their versions, and the bills have been stalled.

Negotiations intensified this week, with Congress under pressure to approve at least the spending bill before adjourning for the year.

In recent weeks, the administration had been seeking to add language that would offer protection from prosecution for interrogators accused of violating the provision. But McCain rejected that, arguing it would undermine the ban by not giving interrogators reason to follow the law.

Supporters of the provisions say they are needed to clarify current anti-torture laws in light of abuses at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and allegations of misconduct by U.S. troops at the detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

The White House long has contended that the United States does not engage in torture.

Hope for the voters?

Many thanks to the folks over at blackboxvoting.org for their tireless efforts to insure clean elections. Looks like there may be hope your vote will count eventually:

Breaking:

Due to security design issues and contractual non-performance, Leon County (Florida) supervisor of elections Ion Sancho told Black Box Voting that he will never use Diebold in an election again. He has requested funds to replace the Diebold system from the county. He will issue a formal announcement to this effect shortly.

Finnish security expert Harri Hursti proved that Diebold lied to Secretaries of State across the nation when Diebold claimed votes could not be changed on the memory card.

A test election was run in Leon County today with a total of eight ballots - six ballots voted "no" on a ballot question as to whether Diebold voting machines can be hacked or not. Two ballots, cast by Dr. Herbert Thomson and by Harri Hursti voted "yes" indicating a belief that the Diebold machines could be hacked.

At the beginning of the test election the memory card programmed by Harri Hursti was inserted into an Optical Scan Diebold voting machine. A "zero report" was run indicating zero votes on the memory card. In fact, however, Hursti had pre-loaded the memory card with plus and minus votes.

The eight ballots were run through the optical scan machine. The standard Diebold-supplied "ender card" was run through as is normal procedure ending the election. A results tape was run from the voting machine.

Correct results should have been:

Yes:2 No:6

However the results tape read:

Yes:7 No:1

The results were then uploaded from the optical scan voting machine into the GEMS central tabulator. The central tabulator is the "mothership" that pulls in all votes from voting machines. The results in the central tabulator read:

Yes:7 No:1

This proves that the votes themselves were changed in a one-step process that would not be detected in any normal canvassing procedure - using only a credit-card sized memory card.

Diebold Elections Systems head of research and development Pat Green specifically told the Cuyahoga County board of elections that votes could not be changed on the memory card.

According to Public Records responses obtained by Black Box Voting in response to our requests shows that Diebold promulgated this misrepresentation to as many as 800 state and local elections officials.

In other news, according to Bradblog a stockholder suit was filed today against Diebold by the law offices of Scott and Scott:

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002153.htm

Permission to reprint granted with link to http://blackboxvoting.org

Hey George, remember that little oath you've sworn twice now?

I once took the standard "work for the government" oath. It's interesting: you aren't asked to defend the country, or the government. Instead, you swear to "defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

This is the same oath all elected US officials swear.

I think many are foresworn.

Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'
By DOUG THOMPSON
Dec 9, 2005, 07:53

Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial USA Patriot Act.

Several provisions of the act, passed in the shell shocked period immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, caused enough anger that liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union had joined forces with prominent conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Bob Barr to oppose renewal.

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”

Full rant is linked in the title above.

I guarantee: his seat *is* secure

Rep. John Murtha's stock is rising in the Democratic Party right alongside his public profile.

The once-camera-shy Vietnam veteran who rattled Washington last month by calling for the removal of troops from Iraq seems to be popping up everywhere, making TV appearances and being cited by reporters as a leading Democratic opponent of President Bush's war policy.

On Wednesday he delivered the House Democrats' response to Bush's speech on the war. He appeared paternal as he chastised the administration's plans for Iraq, even rhetorically asking of the president, "What has he said that would give him credibility?"

Murtha, 73, of Johnstown, Pa., made headlines last week when he appeared at a fundraiser in Boston for the opponent of Texas Rep. Tom DeLay, the indicted former House majority leader, and he's become a darling of the morning television talk shows.

Murtha's background as a largely behind-the-scenes Democratic hawk with Pentagon connections makes him an ideal anti-war poster boy because opponents can't argue he is weak on defense, Democratic operatives say. Even some Republicans acknowledge he's difficult to attack.

That status made it hard for the Bush administration to dismiss Murtha's comments as coming from yet another Democrat carping about Iraq for political reasons. The White House tried, first comparing Murtha to liberal filmmaker Michael Moore before toning down its criticism. Bush later called Murtha "a fine man and a good man."

"John Murtha is the perfect storm of credibility and quotability," said Mark Nevins, who worked as a spokesman in Pennsylvania on the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry, another harsh critic of Bush's Iraq policy.

Not everyone, however, is singing his praises.

A spokeswoman for Rep. Joe Wilson (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., said this week the congressman was looking into the details surrounding a June report by The Los Angeles Times that said at least 10 companies represented by a lobbying firm where Murtha's brother is a partner received a combined $20.8 million in defense contracts. When the story broke, Murtha's office released a statement saying every lobbying firm is given the same consideration.

Ohio Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt created a firestorm in the House last month when she said of Murtha, "Cowards cut and run, Marines never do."

Partly because of that, Republicans have to be careful in how they attack Murtha, said John Pitney, a government professor at Claremont McKenna College in California.

"By attacking him on ethics, they could take a Democratic hero and turn him into a Democratic martyr," Pitney said.

Murtha said he's received 16,000 letters, faxes and letters in support, but about 20 percent of all those who have contacted his office are critical — even using words almost as bad as he heard in Marine boot camp.

"I probably heard worse words, but some of those folks working with me had never heard words like ... that 20 percent that called in," said Murtha, a retired Marine colonel.

Murtha was first elected to Congress in 1974. Although it appears his own seat is secure, it remains to be seen whether his anti-war rhetoric and that of some others in the Democratic Party will affect tight congressional races next year in areas where voters might be uneasy with opposition to the war.

The cause goes beyond politics for Murtha, and he showed no sign Wednesday that he would back down.

"You know a lot of people have attacked me, but it's not about John Murtha," he said. "The American public is thirsting for a plan. They don't see a plan, a way out."

Wal-Mart: racial profiling? Quel suprise

GAF Materials Corp. is handing out gift cards from Target as a reward to select employees this holiday season. That's because Wal-Mart, the discount store that held the business for years, last week called sheriff's deputies to apprehend a GAF manager on a bogus bad check rap while he was trying to buy this year's gift card supply.

GAF has been spending about $50,000 a year on gift cards at the Wal-Mart Supercenter at 11110 Causeway Blvd. in Brandon. For years GAF sent a white, female administrator to buy them without incident. This time, when she was on vacation the day before Thanksgiving, Pitts did the job himself. He phoned in the order for 520 cards, got the accounting department to issue Wal-Mart a $13,600 check and then encountered a royal hassle trying to exchange it for gift cards at the store.

"For a while there I thought I was going to prison," he said. "It was a totally humiliating experience."

For about two hours, store managers stalled on accepting the check for the already-printed gift cards, while Pitts stood waiting by the customer service desk. He had handed over his GAF business card, his driver's license and the toll-free numbers to GAF's bank. His accounting supervisor assured them over the phone that GAF, the nation's biggest roofing systems maker with revenues of $1.6-billion in 2004, was good for the check.

Two African-American Wal-Mart clerks watching all this from nearby told Pitts that several similarly sized transactions were made for other companies that day without delay, Pitts said. They suggested to Pitts that he was subjected to all the extra scrutiny by their bosses because he is black.

Pitts finally got upset over the lengthy wait. He asked for the check back so he could go to another store. But store managers, who had kept huddled in a nearby office during most of his two-hour ordeal, refused to return it. The only explanation he got was that the store was having trouble "verifying" the check or who Pitts was.

Later, two Hillsborough County sheriff's deputies appeared. One grabbed Pitts by the arm. He objected to the rough handling and asked if he was being arrested.

"We need to talk with you about this forged check that you brought in here," Pitts recalled deputy Bryan Wells saying. Later Wells explained the reason for the firm arm grab: "Well, Wal-Mart called us and reported to us that you committed a felony, and that's the way we approach felons," Pitts recalled.

Within 19 minutes deputies reviewed the evidence, determined there was no grounds for a criminal charge and learned Wal-Mart would not press the issue further. Wells handed the check to Pitts.

"Our deputies didn't even see enough (of a case) to write a report," said Lt. Carmen Rivas, the shift commander. "We responded only because Wal-Mart called in a bad check report."

To road deputies, the dispatch code means a possible felony.

Wal-Mart store manager Mark Cornett, who could not be reached for comment Thursday, told Pitts that he only "did what he had to do" before saying "have a great day, sir," according to Pitts.

Pitts was so shaken that he called his boss, Dennis Branch, a regional vice president for GAF in Savannah, Ga. Branch called Cornett and confirmed Pitts' version of the story.

"I was appalled," Branch said. "He wouldn't answer questions like, "Do you call the sheriff every time you cannot verify a check?' He got very defiant. He would not apologize and eventually hung up on me. Reggie had given them the names of several GAF VPs who could vouch for him. All they did was call the GAF guard house number they found in the phone book," which was not answered.

Wal-Mart's critics were not surprised. Wal-Mart, like many large retail chains, has been confronted by employment and promotion discrimination suits. In Boston, one suit claims Wal-Mart engaged in a form of racial profiling to prevent shoplifting.

So far, four Wal-Mart officials, including a regional vice president of operations at corporate headquarters in Bentonville, have called Pitts and apologized for the incident. But no one from the store did. And nobody from the company has offered an explanation of what happened.

Rounding up the usual suspects

Was there some law that I wasn't aware of that says US citizens going about their business in their own country are required to carry ID cards at all times?

Miami Police Take New Tack Against Terror
By CURT ANDERSON
Associated Press Writer
Nov 28 9:28 PM US/Eastern

MIAMI - Miami police announced Monday they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant. Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and out and hand out leaflets about terror threats.

"This is an in-your-face type of strategy. It's letting the terrorists know we are out there," Fernandez said.

The operations will keep terrorists off guard, Fernandez said. He said al-Qaida and other terrorist groups plot attacks by putting places under surveillance and watching for flaws and patterns in security.

Police Chief John Timoney said there was no specific, credible threat of an imminent terror attack in Miami. But he said the city has repeatedly been mentioned in intelligence reports as a potential target.

Full story linked in the title.

Walgreens to Illinois pharmacists: "Fill the scripts"

Walgreen Co. said it has put four Illinois pharmacists in the St. Louis area on unpaid leave for refusing to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception in violation of a state rule.

The four cited religious or moral objections to filling prescriptions for the morning-after pill and "have said they would like to maintain their right to refuse to dispense, and in Illinois that is not an option," Walgreen spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce said.

A rule imposed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich in April requires Illinois pharmacies that sell contraceptives approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to fill prescriptions for emergency birth control. Pharmacies that do not fill prescriptions for any type of contraception are not required to follow the rule.

Ed Martin, an attorney for the pharmacists, on Tuesday called the discipline "pretty disturbing" and said they would consider legal action if Walgreen doesn't reconsider.

At least six other pharmacists have sued over the rule, claiming it forces them to violate their religious beliefs. Many of those lawsuits were filed by Americans United for Life, the Chicago public interest law firm with which Martin is affiliated.

The licenses of both a pharmacy and that store's chief pharmacist could be revoked if they don't comply with the Illinois rule, Bruce said.

Walgreen, based in Deerfield, Ill., put the four on leave Monday, Bruce said. She would not identify them. They will remain on unpaid leave "until they either decide to abide by Illinois law or relocate to another state" without such a rule or law. For example, she said, the company would be willing to help them get licensed in Missouri and they could work for Walgreen there.

Walgreen policy says pharmacists can refuse to fill prescriptions to which they are morally opposed — except where state law prohibits — but they must take steps to have the prescription filled by another pharmacist or store, Bruce said.

Bruce said Wednesday the four pharmacists were the first Walgreen had disciplined under the state's rule. Walgreen has 488 stores in Illinois, out of about 5,000 nationwide, with generally three to five pharmacists employed at each one.

It was not clear whether other large pharmacy chains had taken similar action.

Jean Coutu Group Inc., which owns more than 1,900 Eckerd and Brooks stores, requires its pharmacists to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception, spokeswoman Helene Bisson said. But she wouldn't say if Jean Coutu has taken action similar to Walgreen.

CVS Corp., the nation's largest retail pharmacy, did not immediately return calls