For the second day in a row, the corporate media is running with the new revelations around the Bush administration's data
mining adventures.
Arlen Specter, so aptly named for his tendency to vanish when the lights go on, is puffing harder than ever over this issue,
and Pat Leahy, ranking Democrat, is nearly apoplectic with rage.
Bush just limboed below the magic 30% approval number.
BEFORE this story hit.
The strong feeling I got from my surfing yesterday, here and elsewhere, is that this transgression crossed a line with
the American people, and for once I am inclined to believe it.
So doesn't this transform Senator Russ Feingold's censure resolution from 'fringe politics' to a no-brainer?
And why is nobody talking about it?
Like many progressives, I dutifully wrote and called my senators urging support for the Feingold censure resolution. One
(the democrat!) ignored my letter, the other responded with a personal letter saying he was concerned and would wait for the
"investigation" into the matter to be completed.
No doubt he knows this, but the investigation was just decapitated
yesterday.
So now what?
If your senator used this excuse to avoid holding Bush accountable, he or she just lost the escape hatch.
There is no reason left for any Democratic Senator NOT to cosponsor Feingold's resolution. Likewise, Republican Senators
can be forced to state their support for unchecked executive power by opposing this resolution. I wrote my senators again
this morning, highlighting this specific point.
Maybe this is the subject for another rant, but here's some thoughts about the ramifications of this odious program;
What happens if somebody outside the father/protector/decider/bigbrother government gets ahold of this information?
Do you think the NSA is keeping these records in a hack-proof vault somehere? (I would remind you that the other hallmark
of BushCo is its systemic incompetence).
Read this story and sleep comfortably (not!!) This guy was looking for UFOs. The next guy might be looking for your identity, or when you're not at home, or when
you're home alone.
Or, how about this one? Saying "hi, babe" over the phone is a coded terror message. See you in Guantanamo. That is, if they take my hood off.
Finally, some cozy thoughts. I will preface this last by saying that I do not believe for one second that this program
is "limited" to analyzing calling patterns. BushCo has unfailingly lied about every aspect of this program, and is illegally
blocking investigation of its own illegality. Fool me three times, I'm a fool.
The venomous wingnuts who still run to Bush's defense like to claim that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing
to fear.
Think about what you have to hide, for a moment.
Have you ever dialed a phone sex number? Bought a little pot over the phone? Confided to a drinking buddy about
how you don't remember driving home last night? Discussed a loved one's illegal activity over the phone? Cheated on
your spouse and confessed to your best friend on the phone? Called in sick to work, then didn't go to the doctor? Called in
a prescription you'd rather everybody didn't know about? How about those calls to your doctor discussing your medical situation?
Then have you ever discussed that awful family secret (you know the one) with your trusted confidant? Come to think of it,
can you vouch that no one you have spoken to via telephone since 2001 has anything to hide?
Because that makes you a target.
Everything you have said over the telephone for the last five years is known to the government. When some bored
adolescent hacks into the database and publishes it on the web, you gonna have some 'splainin' to do. Or maybe sooner.
http://www.senate.gov
http://www.house.gov
You know what to do. Censure is a moderate first step. Let's at least get that far with this.
