In my post, American Stasi, I noted the case of an ISP owner who the FBI attempted to force to spy on one of his customers using one of those National Security Letters whose abuse by the  FBI has recently come under fire.

At the time I noted how very much this resembled the behavior of the dreaded East German secret police, the Stasi, which enlisted hundreds of thousands of citizen spies during its reign of terror.

More skullduggery after the jump.

[x-posted at CaliBlogger]

In his 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush made a rather mystyfying reference, when he called for legislation to prohibit "human-animal hybrids".

At the time the comment left me and quite a few others curious as to why someone had slipped such an odd reference into the SOTU.

But with all due apologies, it turns out the president's worst nightmares have become reality.  Run for your lives it's...

I know the story is a couple of days old, as well as the subject of a major diary by Buffalo Girl, but it seems to me that the Waas story is potentially not only damaging for Gonzales, but for the Bushmeister himself.

Therefore, in order to keep the big mo' going here's my take.

(below the fold of course)

Ha ha, gotcha t' click the link didn't I?

Sorry.

Anyway.

I am, shall we say, no fan of Ann Coulter's.

But the uproar about her latest vile screed at the CPAC convention has got me t' thinkin'.

Mixed with the well deserved criticism resounding around both left and right blogistan have been calls for the various networks and newspapers who spread her poisonous views to shun our darling Ann.

And while I can viscerally agree with this stance, and as disagreable as the thought of further success for her continuing efforts at self-promotion is to me, still I have to wonder, aren't we on left really better off having her as the face of the Republican party?

[x-posted at CaliBlogger.com]

Some thoughts on the much anticipated (for the last week anyway) documentary, The Lost Tomb of Jesus.

Am I the only one who thinks that someone attempting to debunk essential Christian mythology shouldn't be pretending that he's not doing just that?

I mean buddy, I've lived the past 6 years under George Bush, I know disingenuous when I see it.

If the United States chose its presidents based on resumé alone, Bill Richardson would be the clear front-runner for 2008.

But Richardson, who is notably lacking in Obama's charisma, Hillary's name recognition and organization, or even Edward's boyish charm, is currently firmly ensconced in the dwindling (farewell Tom Vilsack, we hardly knew ye) second tier of potential Democratic nominees.

But regardless of his poll standings, I have no doubt that the New Mexican Governor, former UN ambassador, and Energy Secretary (see, I told you he has a great resumé) would may an excellent president.

One reason I believe that is his clear vision of America's place in the world and what needs to be done to improve that place.

Incredible, a public servant, a senator no less, who actually seems to think that the people really are his bosses and feels obliged to let them know what he's up to.

From kencamp at Western Democrat (a great site for Dems to keep an eye on for news about the increasingly important mountain states):

In what has to be a first, Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) has posted his daily schedule online.

Now if we could get presidential candidates to do the same I suspect we'd learn more about where they really stand than from all other sources combined.

Time is a precious commodity.  I imagine a look at who gets face time and how much would be quite revealing indeed.

[x-posted at CaliBlogger.com]

I remarked yesterday on the deafening silence with which the anti-American letter from congressman Virgil H. Goode Jr. (R-Dark Ages) was greeted.

So before I go about the rest of the day, a round of golf, a little shopping, a little tree trimming, I thought I'd spend some time poking around the blogosphere checking out how the major conservative blogs were reacting to this outrage against the American way of life.

Here goes.

[Cross-posted at CaliBlogger.com]

I've an admission to make:  Ashamed as I am, I sometimes read blogs other than DailyKos.

I know, I know.

Anyway.

I've been following a very interesting thread prompted by a post by sideways over at Donklephant (h/t to The Moderate Voice though I can't find a link to the original post).

The gist of the question posed was this, given the enormous cost to civilians in WWII, were US actions moral?

And if so, or if not, what implications does this have for our current situation?

My thoughts and a question below the fold.

[x-posted at CaliBlogger.com]

Yesterday's ruling (text here) that BushCorp^TM's warrantless wire tap schemes violate both the FISA statute, as well as the constitution comes as no surprise to anybody passingly familiar with the aforementioned legal documents.  But that been Bush's worst crime?

more after the jump

My initial gut-reaction (Stephen Colbert would be so proud) to the Phil Angelides v. Steve Westly has been this: that of a principled liberal (Angelides) versus a Pro-corporate (as is typical in Washington these days) Democrat.

And what I've learned since has only confirmed my view.

Now we learn that Westly is just the man the corporations would love to see run against Schwarzenegger.  From their point of view it would be win/win:  which ever guy wins he'll still be in their pockets.

In an effort to distract from his incredible shrinking poll numbers, the Preznit delivered a speech on immigration policy designed to make Lou Dobbs' head explode. But rather than deconstruct presidential proposals that have no hope of passing our xenophobic House, I thought I'd take a stab at the whole immigration thing myself.

After all, I grew up in San Diego, doesn't that make me an expert? (That's a joke folks).

Anyway, here goes:

Maybe I'm way off base, but shouldn't we be encouraging immigration?

The off-year election cycle which ended yesterday with so many Democratic victories gives hope to those who would see an end to wingnut domination of this nation's institutions.

But electing 2 Democratic governors and giving the Gropinator a well deserved slap in the face do not a winning mid-term strategy make.

Here in California, in an effort to defeat Arnie's anti-union propositions, the California Teacher's Association put forward an unlikely hero, schoolteacher Liane Cismowski.

I've long supported the concept of non-partisan districting.  I further believe that, although far from perfect (and what in life is might I ask?) CA-77 is a step in the right direction.

As I commented long, long (at least 8 months) ago:

In my outrage and frustration over the inadequacy of governmental response to Katrina I've been, perhaps, a little harsh in my criticism of the President particularly, and Republicans generally.  Not that the criticism isn't warrented, it is, with more to come.

But I would be remiss in my duties if I didn't point out that there is plenty of blame to go around.

Soon or late, after hundreds more deaths or after thousands, leaving an Islamic state, or a state of civil war, the US will, eventually, draw down the number of troops in Iraq.

And when it does it will be perceived by everyone worldwide (except, apparently, Republicans) as a serious defeat for the United States.

And why will we have been defeated?

all will be answered after the jump

I've long favored fair districting practices as an important step in regaining the public's sense of fairness in politics, in reducing political polarization, and increasing the effectiveness of the California delegation to Washington.

This week, in a move that seems to improve the chances of some actual reform, Democratic State Senator Alan Lowenthal has sponsored a counter-proposal to the the Governator's plan.

Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.
(It is sweet and fitting to die for one's country).

So ends Wilfred Owen's famous poem condemning the barbarity of war.

Owen uses his recollection of death by gas attack in the trenches of WWI to illustrate something it would be well for us, in this age of smart-bombs, to remember, death is death. And it is never glorious, for good causes or bad.

One would think, none the less, that a soldier who's died fighting in his or her country's name would, at the least, be able to receive a decent burial close to family and friends. One would think.

...or not, more after the jump