Skip to main content

View Diary: Those FISA IG reports (173 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It was obvious. (9+ / 0-)

    Anyone can show it to you.

    The bill calls for a review of the programs by offices that are incapable of performing that review. Whether they're reviewing fourth amendment issues or Tiddlywinks Federation rules, it's a problem when you pass a law this poorly constructed.

    As it happens, though, it's not Tiddlywinks.

    But you're preprogrammed not to care about some portion of the bill, and therefore by extension, you've decided to deride any and all analysis of every portion of the bill.

    Yay, reality-based community!

    •  I've read opinions by Constitutional scholars... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      here and elsewhere that have lucidly explained that this FISA bill is meaningless.  The Patriot Act has already ensured that you're going to be spied on and people are going to get away with it.

      Read the Epilogue of Audacity of Hope. The answer is in there.

      by David Kroning on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 07:12:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes. (7+ / 0-)

        And this bill also ensures that there will likely be no review of the program.

        The opinions of your Constitutional scholars were undoubtedly focused on the bill's effect on surveillance programs.

        If you still haven't picked it up yet, this story was actually about... a different aspect of the issue.


        •  you took the horse to the water but (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Termite, rlochow, Skid

          he would not drink.

        •  Hey Kargo (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          are you this arrogant and condescending in person, or is this just something you do when you're going by "Kargo X"? I've been wondering this ever since you insulted me and called me names for daring to question your priorities a few weeks ago when you were talking about FISA and the end of the world as we know it.

          •  Depends on the other person. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            •  I'll take that as a (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              iliketodrum, Dustee

              "no, of course not. In person I actually try to act like a respectful adult."

              •  Here's how you SHOULD take it. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Skid, dirtfarmer

                I would likely not treat you, personally, very well.

                •  Well, let's get together sometime and see. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  iliketodrum, Dustee

                  You'd probably be very embarrassed by the way you've treated me, once you realize what a nice, liberal, pro-Constitution guy I am. That is, unless you're actually as much of a jerk as you seem to be when you're posting anonymously.

                  •  We'll see. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    smintheus, The Termite

                    I think you'll be embarrassed at having made such a spectacle of yourself, coming into every FISA diary and shitting on people's work just because you're not interested in it.

                    You've spent an awful lot of time not being interested in it, and I think that's where the embarrassment should lie.

                    And I'm not anonymous. My name is in the About section. I'm pseudonymous, which is different.

                    I'm sure you're a perfectly lovely guy. You've just  been unable to demonstrate it in the last week, and then ran into someone who thought you should know.

                    •  I'm not saying you're a liar, but... (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      iliketodrum, Dustee

                      I believe this is the second FISA diary I've ever commented on, and the first one was June 24th. Care to bet whether there have been more than two FISA diaries since June 24th?

                      And you're claiming it's "shitting on your work" to write in the comments section (you know, where the community is supposed to VOICE ITS OPINION) that I think too much attention is being paid to this particular subject? If that's what you consider "shitting on your work," I'm thinking maybe you have a bit of a self-esteem problem.

                      And your responses to my comments have been, essentially:

                      a) misrepresent my criticism
                      b) insult me
                      c) question my intelligence and understanding of American government

                      And now you've done it (a and b) again.

                      •  Oh well. (0+ / 0-)

                        It's actually four diaries.

                        But in fact, 57 comments if four diaries.

                        What a cordial expression of disinterest!

                        •  The majority of those comments (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          have been responses to insults from people like you. By which I mean responses to you.

                          I'm afraid I can't find four such diaries, unless perhaps three of them fell on June 24th, but even if it turns out to be four, that's a far cry from "every FISA diary," is it not? There have been several hundred FISA diaries, and I've commented on (at most) four of them.

                          I guess this is what passes for an apology from you when you've made a completely bogus accusation? How very noble.
                          time talking about it! You sure you don't secretl
                          But you seem to be missing my point, still. I'm not criticizing how I spend my time, I'm criticizing how a few Kos bloggers spend their time. Remember, you're the influential one, not me.

                          And one could easily turn your criticism against you. One could easily say, "gee, for a bill you claim not to like, you sure do spend a lot of time talking about it!" But that would be dumb, wouldn't it.

                          •  I have no idea what happened in that last comment (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            Perhaps the FISA spies are messing with my comments. But I'm sure you could easily get the gist. Being as clever as you are and all.

                          •  Jesus, that's dumb. (0+ / 0-)

                            I invite you, indeed, implore you, to make that argument. It's the dumbest one yet, by a mile. I don't like the bill because I think it's bad and important. You don't like the bill because you think it's unimportant.

                            Which one of us is the idiot for spending so much time on it?

                            What a bizarre attempt at argument!

                            Well, if I don't like it, it must not be important!

                            The Jeremy Zilber worldview in a nutshell, ladies and gentlemen!

                          •  Let's try this again.... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            I'm concerned about a LOT of issues, not just FISA. So, when I criticize Kos bloggers for their endless attention to this issue, which I believe comes at the expense of attention to other issues, such as universal health care, homelessness, etc. I'm implicitly expressing my concern for other issues. This isn't to say FISA is unimportant, it's to say that Daily Kos is spending too much time on this ONE issue, whipping people into a frenzy on this ONE issue, and causing people to make voting and contribution decisions based on this ONE issue. When so many liberals are threatening to withold their vote or their money from Obama because of his FISA stance, I cringe. And in large part, I blame Kos bloggers for blowing this stuff out of proportion by posting inflammatory stories five times a day without giving equal attention to other serious issues.

                            Let me repeat: when I spend time complaining about attention to FISA, it's not because I'm saying it's wrong to care about FISA, it's because I'm saying it's right to care equally, if not more so, about OTHER ISSUES. Is that ok with you?

                            Or, let me try it this way: I like baseball, and I've liked it since I was a kid. I enjoy reading stories about baseball from time to time. But if Kos started posting 5 baseball stories every day, I'd complain about it. And if people suddenly started saying they weren't going to vote for Obama because he's not a big baseball fan, I'd complain even louder. Can you understand that this isn't because I don't care about baseball, but because I care about OTHER things just as much, if not more? Are you so predisposed to disagree with everyone who dares question your priorities you that you can't get this simple point?

                      •  In fact... (0+ / 0-)

                        It appears you haven't commented in anything but FISA diaries since June 23rd.

                        •  Ok, now I AM calling you a liar (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          iliketodrum, Dustee

                          You are a liar.

                          One of those comments is about Obama's VP choice.

                          Another is about McCain's $300 million "battery prize."

                          Nobody called me any names or insulted my intelligence when I made those two comments, so I felt no need to respond to anyone. Hence, fewer comments on those topics. Funny how that works.

                          Oh, and for someone who doesn't value my opinion, you sure do spend a lot of time looking things up about me!

                          •  Oh. My. God. (0+ / 0-)

                            Well, now I'm calling you the worst fucking reader I've ever met.

                            The comment about the battery is from June 23rd.

                            The comment about the VP choice is from June 19th.

                            And... since June 23rd, you haven't commented in anything but FISA diaries.

                            Like. I. Said.

                            But boy, you got me with a zinger! I looked you up after you said you had only commented in two FISA diaries! And what did I find? That you were... wrong!

                            Are you sure you understand how this "argument" thing works? You're supposed to prove your point, not mine.

                          •  I apologize (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            for making such a mistake. I looked at all of the comments you linked us to, because I assumed you wanted me to look at all of them, and I failed to notice the two comments I cited were dated prior to June 24. I'm not sure why it matters that my non-FISA comments pre-date June 24, i.e., the date you conveniently chose as the cutoff, but you're absolutely right to say that they did.

                            Now, since I've apologized for this horrible mistake, are you ready to apologize for claiming I'd commented on "every" FISA diary, when in fact the actual number is (at most) four? Which turns out to be far less than 1%. Which, if you rounded off, would actually be 0%? Are you ready to apologize for calling that "every"?

                            Oh, and if I'm the worst fucking reader you've ever met, then you're the worst fucking estimator I've ever met. Possibly the worst fucking estimator on earth.

                          •  No, wait... you ARE a liar (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            My July 1st comment (the last comment I made before today, in fact) was regarding Kos's decision not to contribute to Obama. He barely mentioned FISA in his post, and only among several other things, and my comment had nothing specifically to do with FISA whatsoever.

                            Now, I'm sure you'll agree that July 1 comes after June 23? Or, to put that differently: you're wrong again. I'm not sure why my previous comments matter so much to you, but it'd sure be nice if you'd stop lying about them.

                          •  Nope, sorry. (0+ / 0-)

                            Why did Kos decide not to contribute to Obama?

                            Come on, you pwecious widdle cutie-pie! Say why he did it! Come on! Cooooooooome on!

                            Who's a widdle woser? Who's my pwecious widdle woser?

                          •  so you're compounding your lies with more lies (0+ / 0-)

                            and baby talk?

                            The answer, my lying baby friend, is as follows. See if you can spot anything besides "FISA" in this passage:

                            First of all, obviously Obama is a great candidate who is running a great 50-state race. That much cannot be denied. But he's had a rough couple of weeks.

                            First, he reversed course and capitulated on FISA, not just turning back on the Constitution, but on the whole concept of "leadership". Personally, I like to see presidents who 1) lead, and 2) uphold their promises to protect the Constitution.

                            Then, he took his not-so-veiled swipe at MoveOn in his "patriotism" speech.

                            Finally, he reinforced right-wing and media talking points that Wes Clark had somehow impugned McCain's military service when, in reality, Clark had done no such thing.

                            All of a sudden, there was a lot of cowering when, just days ago, we got to read this:

                               When Mr. Wenner asked how Mr. Obama might respond to harsh attacks from Republicans, suggesting that Democrats have "cowered" in the past, Mr. Obama replied, "Yeah, I don’t do cowering."

                            Could've fooled me, and maybe he is. Maybe what looks like cowering to me is really part of that "moving to the center" stuff everyone keeps talking about. But there is a line between "moving to the center" and stabbing your allies in the back out of fear of being criticized. And, of late, he's been doing a lot of unecessary stabbing, betraying his claims of being a new kind of politician. Not that I ever bought it, but Obama is now clearly not looking much different than every other Democratic politician who has ever turned his or her back on the base in order to prove centrist bona fides. That's not an indictment, just an observation.

                          •  FISA's there. (0+ / 0-)

                            That's all that's necessary. You lose again.

                            You really suck at this. I think you should stop.

                          •  Oh, I forgot YOU make all the rules! (0+ / 0-)

                            Your assertion was that I've only commented on "FISA diaries" since June 23rd. (Again, I have no idea why this is relevant to anything, but you seem to think it is.) Reasonable people (or even you) could reasonably disagree as to the definition of a "FISA diary," but it's hard to see how a short reference to FISA within a rather long post covering several topics would be considered a "FISA diary" by anyone who isn't predetermined to see it that way because he'd otherwise have to admit a mistake. It's rather like calling the Bill of Rights a "religion diary."

                            In fact, did you happen to notice the tags for that so-called "FISA diary"? They're as follows: "Barack Obama, president, 2008." Oddly enough, no mention of FISA! Maybe you should go tell Kos he doesn't understand what his own posts are about. Maybe you could call him a few names and use some of your cutesy baby talk in the process -- you seem to think it helps you win arguments.

                          •  Yes. (0+ / 0-)

                            Maybe you should... maybe you should... maybe you should... maybe you should.... maybe you should...

                            Bip bip bip bip....

                            Would you like me to admit a mistake?

                            OK, it turns out that one of your previous 57 comments was in a diary that didn't have FISA in the tags, but was in fact the very same post that was at the heart of almost every complaint from FISA stiffs for the past week.

                            But hey, it wasn't it the tags!

                            YOU RUUUUUUUUUUULE! WOOOOOOOOOOOO!

                            Now will you shut the fuck up and stop pretending it proves I "lied?"

                            What are you, five?

                          •  Are you being intentionally ironic... (0+ / 0-)

                            by asking if I'm five? I mean, just look at your comments preceding the question. It's definitely ironic, but I'm just not sure you meant it that way.

                            Anyway, you're right that this one incident doesn't necessarily prove you're a liar, but it fits a pattern of blatant disregard for the facts, which leads me to believe you're quite comfortable telling lies if you think it'll help win an argument. You wildly misstated the frequency (and timing) of my comments in FISA diaries. You've more than once completely mischaracterize the content of my comments. You willfully ignored the nature of Kos's essay. Yesterday you claimed to believe I'm a lovely guy, and today you called me the world's biggest dick because I added another few comments disagreeing with you. Sorry, but you're not coming across as a credible person. You're coming across as a guy who's willing to say just about anything to prove he's never wrong about anything, ever. An occasional mistake is understandable -- I, for example, overlooked the fact that your real name is posted in the "about" section when I claimed you blog anonymously, and I happily admit that mistake -- but repeatedly attacking a person with "facts" that you've just made up out of thin air -- that's a very different story.

                  •  You complete fucking idiot (0+ / 0-)

                    He's not exactly anonymous.

                    His bio and full name are right here.

          •  Hey Jeremy Bilzer (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            smintheus, Skid, Kentucky Kid

            Are you this arrogant and condescending in person or is this just something you do when you're going by Jermey Zerbil?

            "A person is as free as they believe themselves to be off." - Fortune cookie

            by The Termite on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 07:30:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  The "patriot act" will eventually expire... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Termite, rlochow, KingCranky

        Immunity for corporations can't be revoked, and due to this likely passage will cause more cases of immunity in the future for who knows what corporation(s) once this precedent is set.

        •  And this FISA bill -- if it ever becomes law -- (0+ / 0-)

          can be declared unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.  When, and if, we ever get a liberal court once again.  We sure as hell won't get one of those under John McCain.

          Read the Epilogue of Audacity of Hope. The answer is in there.

          by David Kroning on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 07:26:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (122)
  • Community (60)
  • Media (23)
  • Elections (23)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Culture (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Environment (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Ireland (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Bernie Sanders (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Health Care (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site