?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

What's on the other side of exhausted?

'Cause I think I'm there. Not physically, just intellectually. The meeting ran nearly two hours over, as we sat around talking about general geek long after half the members had gone home. So much wonderful geek. Ideas and tours and crafts and workshops and inter-club collaborations and really crappy sci-fi movies and I got interviewed for a radio show and Firefly marathon sleepovers in the Rotunda. I love my little fledgeling club. Even if it does make me go to school two hours early tomorrow.

As for the other thing... urrgh. Would a black armband be too melodramatic? I'm considering it. Even though with the current trend, the NDP will feel so stupid over the results that we'll have another government topple by summer.

Just... still. Them. In power. A little voice in my head keeps repeating "it's not too late to move to England!"

Sigh.

Sleep.

Comments

( 12 comments — Leave a comment )
smolder
Jan. 24th, 2006 08:45 am (UTC)
Can I ask a native?

Trying to understand this here...I read the far-left party helped bring about this election...why would they help the conservatives?
chandri
Jan. 24th, 2006 04:38 pm (UTC)
Because they thought it meant they'd come out of the election in a slightly better position, even a really useful one. Personally I thought it was a hell of a dangerous risk to take considering they were never going to actually *win,* and it pissed off a lot of people. They were partly right, as they picked up some seats, but I bet they feel awfully stupid right now. They're still part of the Opposition, and not even the big part. (Which is why a lot of us are betting the government will topple *again,* pretty soon. *eyeroll*)
hex_16
Jan. 24th, 2006 05:31 pm (UTC)
I thought the world was coming to an end with Clinton took office here in the US. You and I are like oil and water when it comes to politics. But I've learned you can't stake your whole emotional outlook on one election. (Although in my case, Clinton got elected twice. *eyerolls*) Hang in there, kiddo. You'll get another crack at electing the people you want. In the meantime, keep yourself informed, and don't let anyone spoonfeed you only one version of a story. "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
smolder
Jan. 24th, 2006 09:24 pm (UTC)
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."

...

and illegal wiretapping...
hex_16
Jan. 24th, 2006 10:14 pm (UTC)
What illegal wiretapping? Are you familiar with FISA? Are you familiar with USSID, signed into law by Bill Clinton? I yanked the following from
http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_11106.shtml. (N.B.: Though I'm quoting a conservative blog, it's the only one I've found that cited the relevant statute.)

USSID, enacted in July of 1993, creates the following, as described by The American Spectator’s Jed Babbin:

Under Section 4 of USSID 18, communications which are known to be to or from U.S. persons can't be intentionally intercepted without: (a) the approval of the FISA court…; OR (b) the approval of the Attorney General of the United States with respect to "communications to or from U.S. PERSONS outside the United States...international communications" and other categories of communications including for the purpose of collecting "significant foreign intelligence information."

USSID 18 goes on to allow NSA to gather intelligence about a U.S. person outside the United States even without Attorney General sanction in emergencies "when securing the approval of the Attorney General is not practical because...the time required to obtain such approval would result in the loss of significant foreign intelligence and would cause substantial harm to national security.”


Babbin further reports that FISA, misrepresented by liberals far and wide, allows the Attorney General to bypass the FISA court. This obviously makes sense, since it would be virtually impossible for the government to go before the FISA court every time a terrorist made a telephone call in which someone in the United States was a participant.

These facts are terribly simple. As Babbin summarizes, “[e]veryone who is ranting and raving about illegality has neither the facts (most of which we don't know) or the law and regulations (which weigh heavily in favor of legality) on their side.”


So I repeat, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. We won't have our precious liberty very long if we don't have our ears open for the people that would like to turn America into a smoking crater.
iamgerg
Jan. 24th, 2006 10:49 pm (UTC)
You of course read the next bit in USSID that say:


(3) In all cases where emergency collection is authorized, the following steps shall be taken:

(a) The General Counsel will be notified immediately that the COLLECTION has started.

(b) The General Counsel will initiate immediate efforts to obtain Attorney General approval to continue the collection. If Attorney General approval is not obtained within seventy two hours, the COLLECTION will be terminated. If the Attorney General approves the COLLECTION, it may continue for the period specified in the approval.


Because you wouldn't be sloppy enough to take an arguement directly from a blog without reading what he was quoting would you?

And I say to you:

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Benjamin Franklin
hex_16
Jan. 24th, 2006 11:06 pm (UTC)
And it's my understanding neither side has stated whether or not Bush has been going to the FISA court as required, which that blog article mentions, but proceeds to point out that the liberals are jumping all over Bush in absence of that key fact.
iamgerg
Jan. 24th, 2006 11:19 pm (UTC)
The doubts are serious enough that Judge James Robertson Resigned from the FISA court calling Bush's actions illegal. The accusations are serious enough that there should be an investigation of the president, because what Clinton did, doesn't hold a candle to the seriousness of these accusations.
hex_16
Jan. 25th, 2006 12:46 am (UTC)
One judge resigning from the FISA court, and saying there's wrongdoing (without providing the reasons he believed this to be so, I might add), does not indicate wrongdoing.

The accusations are serious enough that there should be an investigation of the president, because what Clinton did, doesn't hold a candle to the seriousness of these accusations.

See... here's the key difference. Serious accusations about Bush vs. what Bill Clinton did. Clinton lost his license to practice law due to some of the wrongdoing he committed. Bush has merely been accused of wrong-doing. There's a double-standard here. As far as some of the nutty liberals in the press and government are concerned, the facts don't matter; it's only the seriousness of the charges that matter, and prove in their minds that Bush is the evilest thing to hit D.C. This goes back to what we were talking about earlier: people are prejudging the situation all around. Conservatives are assuming that Bush is doing the honorable thing, and liberals are assuming he's laughing, pulling the wings off of flies while listening in on people's intimate conversations with their fiancee back in Elbonia. The blog entry I pointed to decided to dig up the relevant laws, and use that to back up their positions, rather than get into a pissing match.

Anybody can make an accusation. Some are true. Some are merely made to smear someone permanently. The accusation could easily be baseless. Judge Robertson might have a dog in the fight, and an axe to grind against Bush and Co. Absent any other facts, I don't think it's right to jump to conclusions. I have no problem with an investigation. I'm just sick of the press and hardcore wacky left (not you, and definitely left-wingers in general) screaming, "See! Bush is teh EEEEEVIIIL!!11 like the fruits of the Deeevil," without proof he's done anything inappropriate.
smolder
Jan. 25th, 2006 02:53 am (UTC)
See... here's the key difference. Serious accusations about Bush vs. what Bill Clinton did. Clinton lost his license to practice law due to some of the wrongdoing he committed. Bush has merely been accused of wrong-doing. There's a double-standard here.

I should say so. The Republican Congress eagerly and enthusiastically begain impeachment proceedings based on the idea Clinton had lied about an affair. Yet, this Republican Congress has done nothing about Bush's KNOWN manipulation of intelligence data (Downing Street memo, anyone?) his flagrant violation of human rights in the condoning of torture and now this wiretapping thing which is the SAME thing that Nixon got in trouble for.

Yep. Double standard. If you're a Democrat, a BJ is a hanging offense. If you're a Republican? Government corruption is not even worth investigating (save by Republican controlled investigators).
hex_16
Jan. 26th, 2006 02:32 am (UTC)
And I say to you:

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Benjamin Franklin


I also thought I'd point out that you (thru no fault of your own since it's a common mistake), have misquoted Mr. Franklin. The original quote reads with emphasis my own:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
(Deleted comment)
chandri
Jan. 25th, 2006 07:35 pm (UTC)
Well... school's cheaper...?

So far, that's all I've got. o.O
( 12 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

reeciebastion
chandri
Chandri MacLeod
Fantasi.net

Latest Month

April 2017
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com