"The constitution is not a negotiable piece of parchment to be ignored or abused at the presidents whim" - Senator Ran Paul.
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.Via Washington Examiner
190 comments:
What happens is that the rule is broken in some minimal way, which we all agree is no big deal at the time and then from then on every increasingly serious breach is justified by the previous precedent (President) until the rule is myth. When you violate a principle, "he did it too" should never stand. "He" was an asshole.
The above described process is called lawyering.
The entire Constitution seems to be on temporary hold until our first black president leaves office.
Let's talk about his hair instead!
/Althouse
Extraordinary measures are necessary to deal with the crisis.
That's the standard reply liberals give to those who oppose their unconstitutional power grabs. Needless to say we're always in a crisis.
What happened? Are they confiscating our guns?
Let's talk about Althouse talking about Rand Paul's hair instead!
/chickenlittle
@phx
No, it's just a tiny little thing.
The president is only usurping the power of Congress and acting like a tyrant.
No problema.
Oh, God!
Meade has decided to display his profound ignorance on two sites simultaneously.
This could be a landmark instance of laughable stupidity.
phx thinks the abrogation of our 4th amendment protection is something to be made light of. Why? Because THE AGENDA!
Rand Paul hair is more predictable? than the constitution right now.
Let's talk about Meade talking about Althouse talking about Rand Paul's hair instead!
/Meade
___________________
Here's the cite to back up my original jest: link
Here's the challenge, Meade: can she even write about Rand Paul w/o mentioning his hair? You're the proofreader, so you tell me.
@Meade
The fact that you feel really really guilty about black people and that you're really really sorry about it... sorrier than any white boy who has ever lived has ever been...
Doesn't really validate your opinions or make you morally superior to other men.
Certainly more reliable.... Rand Paul's hair is.
Certainly more reliable.... Rand Paul's hair is.
No -- it's out of control. This is why Holder will "process" Paul's kinks.
"Here's the challenge, Meade: can she even write about Rand Paul w/o mentioning his hair? You're the proofreader, so you tell me."
Here's a challenge, chicken little: can you click on her tag for rand paul? You're a scientist, so count the number of posts in which she mentions Rand Paul's hair.
You're a scientist, so count the number of posts in which she mentions Rand Paul's hair.
Ha! You made me look!
And what did you come up with? Must be in the millions, huh?
Shit, my dub recording session for tonight has been cancelled due to the huge snow storm forecast for the area.
I had been wasting time here while I ate lunch. I've been avoided rehearsing.
Now, I'm stuck with Meade and his guilty white boy thing.
God help me!
Maybe Rand Paul would consider joining the Old Dawgz.
Doubt it. Why would he want to be in a cover band with a bunch of old impaired racists? He probably has better things to do. Like comb his hair.
+/
We've been recording original tunes, now, Meade.
So, you're a little behind us.
Congratulations. You managed to kiss your own ass again over your imagined virtue. And call another man a racist.
I knew you could do it.
The defense of the constitution is racism!
--Meadeschmuck
Sorry - vacuuming animal hair off keyboard.
Or, as Althouse can't help from (constantly) putting it every time the name Rand Paul comes up: "tousling his ringlets".
And, Meade, trust me...
I'm not trying to steal your girl.
But, given your limitations, I can understand the fear.
Tell me again how much you love black people, Meade.
I can never get enough of that one.
You are my hero!
No -- it's out of control. This is why Holder will "process" Paul's kinks.
Ha ha!
#IseeWhatYouDidThere
Lem, good job of addition by subtraction.
Lem, good job of addition by subtraction.
Indeed. I noticed it too.
Elsewhere, the math amounts to multiplying by dividing.
I really am glad citizens will hold the Obama administration's feet to the fire on matters of privacy. I'm not sure of the particulars of the issue under discussion (I didn't see the RP video yet) but as far as I'm concerned the burden of proof lies with Obama.
The entire Constitution seems to be on temporary hold until our first black president leaves office.
Obama is certainly the worst President we've had in a while when it comes to ignoring the Constitution.
But Republicans are never going to be taken seriously until they stop pretending to be innocent. Your Presidents have been ignoring the Constitution for generations, too.
Republican politicians need to have the basic honesty to admit that Bush was a shit President, and that America needs to reject HIS policies along with Obama's not-so-different ones.
chicklit is back! You did the math? What did you come up with, cl?
Have to agree with Revenant here.
I really don't see the point of voting at all unless someone like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz runs.
Otherwise, it's just more of the same.
Sorry, I should have referenced:
chickenlittle said...
"Here's the cite to back up my original jest: link
Here's the challenge, Meade: can she even write about Rand Paul w/o mentioning his hair? You're the proofreader, so you tell me.
February 12, 2014 at 12:51 PM"
"I really don't see the point of voting at all unless someone like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz runs."
President Hillary.
President Hillary = Rubio, Christie, Ryan, McCain, Romney, etc.
No difference.
If you say so.
I voted for 3 of those 5 guys. Guess I'm...
Ready For Hillary!
Meade said...Althouse can't help from (constantly) putting it every time the name Rand Paul comes up: "tousling his ringlets".
The evidence suggests that you help edit out such comments from the majority of her Rand Paul posts because the written record shows that she published such ubiquitous thoughts just once.
The more interesting experiment will be to watch going forward...
Lem wrote: Senator Ran Paul, Kentucky.
Lem, would you mind correcting that typo so as not to suggest a failed campaign? Thanks
Oh, I see Meade is again bored with his wife and her commenters and decided to visit Lem's place.
This is so humble: "can you click on her tag for rand paul?" Meade's begging for pageviews for Althouse. Do they not have streetcorners in Madison?
Meade,
I think you should consider apologizing for your TMR remark. Totally unlike you and far too broad brush besides.
Revenant said...
Republican politicians need to have the basic honesty to admit that Bush was a shit President, and that America needs to reject HIS policies
I also agree with Revenant on this one.
@ARM
The always and ever predictable "Blame Bush" argument.
Tell me again how clever you are.
I never get tired of that one.
Obama tried to take down the second amendment. Failing that he settled for the fourth.
Lem said...
Obama tried to take down the second amendment. Failing that he settled for the fourth.
That buys us some time before he gets to the 22nd.
President Hillary.
Oh goody, it's the "sure we make things worse but the other side's even worse than that" argument again.
What's your goal here, exactly? That if we drag out the decline long enough, you'll be dead before everything falls apart?
The always and ever predictable "Blame Bush" argument.
No, the "blame Bush" argument is "everything that's wrong these days is Bush's fault".
"Bush did many things that were wrong" isn't the "blame Bush" argument. It is the "I actually have a brain in my head instead of a small pile of dried monkey shit" argument.
@Revenant
I am not a Bush supporter, nor was I ever.
In fact, I'm not even really a Republican, although the assumption seems to be that my opinions place me in that camp.
That's the problem with the "Blame Bush" argument.
So, which of us is it who has dried monkey shit for brains?
Shouting Thomas said...
So, which of us is it who has dried monkey shit for brains?
The question really answers itself.
The question really answers itself.
Clearly.
But not in a direction that flatters you.
Hey I can currently writing a story about my friends and I when we were in the seventh grade. Is it ok if I use some of your comments as dialogue.
Thanks,
Your Pal,
Trooper York
In fact, I'm not even really a Republican, although the assumption seems to be that my opinions place me in that camp.
My only assumption is that you're someone who pitches a fit whenever anyone criticizes Bush. And that's not so much "an assumption" as "a direct observation". :)
Anyway, as fun as it is to watch you play the redefinition game with "blame Bush", this is really pretty simple. Are you:
A. Someone who agrees Bush was a shitty President (not "the shittiest President evar" or even "the shittiest candidate in 2000 and 2004" -- just "a shitty President")
or are you:
B. Part of the problem
Pick one. Or keep whining about how black our blackguard of a black President is, damn his black heart.
You're lying now, Revenant.
I've never defended, or even voluntarily mentioned, Bush in a posting.
In fact, I've commented here and at other sites at some length about the disastrous consequences of Bush's use of Fannie Mae to push liar's mortgages.
I'm a pretty avid reader of Steve Sailer's site. Sailer has eviscerated Bush for his role in the mortgage/banking meltdown, his stupid immigration policies, and his enthusiasm for pointless wars.
You got anything sensible you'd like to say?
@Revenant
You are so predictable.
When are morons like you gonna figure out that your resort to racism prattling over every issue says something about you (and it's not so nice), and not your opponent?
Stupid, manipulative questions don't deserve an answer.
I'm the opposite of a pussy. I'm a tough bastard, and I'm not at all susceptible to manipulation, particularly by racists who always try to bail themselves out of a predicament by calling other people racists.
My official political ID is that of an orphan. Nobody wants to represent my or my family's self-interest, and that's been true for a very long time.
Since that is the case, I'm on my own. This isn't such a bad thing. Self reliance is always a good way to go.
@Revenant
You must be confused.
I'm not available for the purpose of taking orders from you, racist boy.
Now, find something useful to do with your time.
Pick one, Tommy. :)
On a side note, I kind of love how a guy who "isn't a Bush supporter" is throwing a multi-post tantrum over people saying Bush was a shitty President.
Oh, but wait, you did criticize Bush for that one thing he did at the very end of his term, so that totes means you're not in his camp. I will deeply apologize for the error to the first commenter I see who is new enough here to not know you're full of it. ;)
To describe anything I've written in this thread as a "tantrum" suggests a lack of acquaintance with the intricacies of the English language.
Not surprising from you.
So, you've devolved into abject stupidity.
Not the first time. Nor will it be the last.
Is there anything to your prattling other than desperate bleating over losing an argument?
If so, I can't see it.
As I said, I'm wasting some time because my recording session was canceled due to a big snow storm.
But, I think you really are too vapid even for the purposes of time wasting.
You've got to do better than this.
So many words to avoid such a simple admission about an ex-politician. :)
As I said, Revenant...
I wish you could do better than this.
It's approaching dinner time, and my willingness to waste time on fools has just about vanished.
I'm going to work this evening.
Do you have anything to say that is marginally interesting and not just plain stupid and manipulative?
t can't be stopped until you say the guy in power right now must stop it. Admitting that some past President did something wrong is the justification not the cure. When citizens stop the guy in power in their own time - as in impeach his ass or demand the other branches act to stop him, then and only then will the corrosion stop. You can't stop Obama by saying Bush was a bad President too. That's rewarding the behavior.
Shouting Thomas said...
I'm a pretty avid reader of Steve Sailer's site
Now there's a surprise.
Now there's a surprise.
Believe it or not, ARM, I'm able to read a whole bunch of stuff without necessarily agreeing with it. This is an intellectual capacity that you probably are unfamiliar with.
That said, Sailer is one of the best writers on the internet.
What you got going? Besides the pompous twit act?
@john, apologize to who for what?
Let me remind you, ARM, that on this very site you insisted that it was impossible for me to make a living as a pro musician.
You've been reading parts of my bio for some time now. I'm a church musician, and have been my entire life. Are you aware that churches pay their organist and choir director?
Apparently not.
I worked in the multimedia biz for 25 years. In fact, I was there at the beginning of the dotcom boom. The term "multimedia" includes, believe it or not, "music," which is a form of media. Are you aware that businesses pay people to produce music for multimedia?
Apparently not.
I'm pretty much the oncall guy as keyboard sideman for touring blues bands in my region. Not long ago, I supported a black musician who's a Handy award winner and recently performed at the Kennedy Center.
Maybe you don't understand how this biz works?
Would you like for me to continue? There's quite a bit more. The visible part of my resume on my websites is a tiny part of what I do.
Shouting Thomas said...
Would you like for me to continue?
Yes.
Another time.
My recording session has been rescheduled for Friday so I'm going to spend the evening rehearsing.
I'm having pork stew and sauted brussels sprouts for dinner.
I'll regale you with my exploits on another occasion.
Shouting Thomas said...
I'm having pork stew and sauted brussels sprouts for dinner.
Thanks for the update. Brussel sprouts, not a fave.
Before I go to my studio for the night, allow me to tell you that the Old Dawgz is my labor of love and an opportunity to play for fun and fellowship with my close friends.
If it becomes a major income producer, great. If not, my pals and I have a great time together. We're trying to move to a creative platform, but that is a very difficult transition, particularly at our age. People our age don't go out much.
I'm pretty sensible about the club scene. It's the Wild Wild West. If I get paid there, that's a big plus. If I don't... what the hell... I'm not hurting.
Meade - this:
Blogger Meade said...
I am SO grateful they self-identified as scrunched up-faced crybaby losers and removed themselves to their own comment clubhouse at Lem's.
Reading - much less managing - the comments sections at Althouse Blog instantly became 100% more pleasurable once they huffed off.
Expressions of racism and sexism aren't just evil. They're boring.
If that's not you, I am sorry. If it is, you are tarring yourself with that scrunched-up face crybaby losers we're all racists here remark, yes?
@Bagoh 6:15. This.
ARM refuses to comprehend.
Meade wrote: Reading - much less managing - the comments sections at Althouse Blog instantly became 100% more pleasurable once they huffed off.
"Huff" is an interesting choice of verb. I would have expected "flounce."
My recollection is that after Althouse closed comments, comments resumed in the comment section of a poll Althouse put up. That was interesting because it showed the IP addresses of every commenter, including multiple names using the same IP address. That was eye-opening. I didn't think that sort of thing went on.
The whole point of the spying program under Bush was to detect and stop terrorism. Now? within the prism of IRS targeting and other lawlessness and lies pouring out of the current administration, it's easy to understand that the NSA data collection will be used for political spying.
Trooper York said...
Hey I can currently writing a story about my friends and I when we were in the seventh grade. Is it ok if I use some of your comments as dialogue.
I am happy to sign a release form. It may be my best shot at immortality.
Blogger chickenlittle said...
My recollection is that after Althouse closed comments, comments resumed in the comment section of a poll Althouse put up. That was interesting because it showed the IP addresses of every commenter, including multiple names using the same IP address. That was eye-opening. I didn't think that sort of thing went on.
Wow. Does that mean DBQ and I have been found out?
Annie is slumming actually conversing w/ her 20 commenters. Desperate times call for desperate measures. She probably has to shower more often.
Did Rand Paul just assert that he believes in a living constitution? Go Rand Paul!
I would vote for Rand Paul just for the entertainment value of watching him have to defend the Patriot Act once in office.
Speaking of clitorectomies, I was thinking --- Oh! Oh! Don't act like you didn't go over there yesterday, you're not fooling anybody and whether, like me, Insty faked you out or you went over on your own, and whether or not you are smart enough to be or not to be a lawyer, you, like me, recognized halfway through the post that the trestle up ahead was out and the train was about to go over the edge and down into the gorge in a flaming cascade of disaster but you couldn't stop rubbernecking and stayed to watch the whole thing and were not disappointed --- anyway, I was thinking that if there are millions of nubile Nubian nubs rambling around unattached in the Sudan and there are millions of deserving young American women trapped in the bodies of young American not-men then it should be possible to set up a sex-change ex-change of some sort which could put these unwanted appendages to a productive use. Waste not, want not.
And if it proved to be mechanically infeasible to put the little men into the new boats then we could improvise as Americans do so well and turn them into tongue studs or take two and make a nice pair of earrings or just put one in a little glass bottle and hang it around the neck of the medically metamorphisized not-men-anymores so they could twiddle it at appropriate moments. With so many options this side of the exchange seems pretty much cut and dried. So to speak.
As for our part of the bargain, well there are millions of unread copies of The Female Eunuch sitting around gathering dust on the bookshelves of wannabe Greers and Abzugs and Steinems and Friedans just begging for attention, just like Greer and Abzug and Steinem and Friedan, and a bad book makes a campfire just as well as a good one.
My plan is in the early, pre-op stages and obviously needs more research. I wonder if I could get a grant?
Chick said "My recollection is that after Althouse closed comments, comments resumed in the comment section of a poll Althouse put up. That was interesting because it showed the IP addresses of every commenter, including multiple names using the same IP address. That was eye-opening. I didn't think that sort of thing went on."
Whaaaat? Potemkin comments section? Is there actually just 2 or 3 people?
No doubt Ritmo and AnUnreasonableTroll have been dispatched to muddy the waters because Rand Paul is actually a Republican - the not so loyal opposition.
I don't doubt for an instant their puppet masters are scared to death of him.
When citizens stop the guy in power in their own time - as in impeach his ass or demand the other branches act to stop him…
Great assumption in here that the judiciary has a case against intercepting patterns of electromagnetic radiation. Is there an actual, legal argument you're aware of or did you assume the purpose of the courts is a political one?
No doubt Ritmo and AnUnreasonableTroll have been dispatched to muddy the waters because… blah blah blah…
Awww, that's so cute! You use the word "dispatch" because it suggests remuneration. So cute!
I don't doubt for an instant their puppet masters are scared to death of him.
Are you familiar with emotional states other than fear? Ever? Any?
Great assumption in here that the judiciary has a case against intercepting patterns of electromagnetic radiation.
So what's your take on the government intercepting ink stains on lignin? I'm not talking about Lena Dunham.
Is there a clear distinction (besides gravitas) between intercepting the corpuscular vs. intercepting the ethereal?
Rhythm and Balls said...
No doubt Ritmo and AnUnreasonableTroll have been dispatched to muddy the waters because… blah blah blah…
Awww, that's so cute! You use the word "dispatch" because it suggests remuneration. So cute!
It does?
Actually it means you were sent because you and your masters feel obliged to destroy him, because cogent rebuttal eludes you.
I don't doubt for an instant their puppet masters are scared to death of him.
Are you familiar with emotional states other than fear? Ever? Any?
I'm not the one that's afraid.
Am I?
Too bad you can't view disagreement with anything other than fear and loathing.
Actually, Lena Doneham is more like ink stains on pulp.
Hi phx, "as far as I'm concerned the burden of proof lies with Obama." Glad to hear it!
Obama will meet this BOP by saying "because" or "fairness" or "I can do whatever I want" or some other achingly stupid statement that will be framed as clever and witty and jolly good sporting fine holiday fun for the whole family. Then the compliant press and the rest of the left will all chime in with "it's the law of the laaaand" and "Boooosh did it toooooo" etc. like there's been a credible response to the constitutional issue raised by Rand Paul that meets the BOP. And of course there hasn't been. As others (above) have noted, you deal with the administration in power at the moment, just like the left did when Bush was in office. Were you, or would you have been, deterred by "buh buh buh Clinton did it too"? Of course not. And let's be honest, Republicans stopped rolling out that excuse pretty quickly ... because no one gave it any credence. Republicans were presumed to be grown ups who could handle themselves without constant back up press assistance. Interesting presumption, that.
Chick - read Simon (yes, that Simon. The conservative one) on ink stains and lignin. If someone takes a book or a letter to their friend's house and uses public property to get there, it is not illegal for the government to observe that. Likewise, it's hard to see how a court would say that it's wrong for the government to use a device, that shows the patterns of your cell phone's signals sent through the outdoors (i.e. over public airwaves), the fact that you're emitting them, and whom else is simultaneously emitting them in your direction.
Opening them up for a view or audio of the contents may or may not be a different matter.
Too bad you can't view disagreement with anything other than fear and loathing.
IN the interest of Michael's(?) request to be civil, I'll forego the urge to remind you that nothing intelligent was said in your "disagreement" and instead let you know that you had no "disagreement". You're just banging on about a political end to this, which is not the point. What if conservative judges packed into the federal courts by conservative politicians AGREE that they can't find a reason to prevent the gov't (or anyone) from detecting EM emissions from your phone through the public space? What then? What is this nonsense about "masters"? Do you live your life according to "masters"? I don't. There's a logic to any actual arguments about what the government may or may not do. But you do not understand them, let alone engage them. But you can bet the courts, OTOH, and regardless of ideological "affiliation" of those courts' "masters" (since you like the word), will.
@john, I didn't say we are all racists here at Lem's. I was only talking about the racists here at Lem's. And the sexists. And crybabies here at Lem's. Why would I owe them an apology and why "tar"?
Likewise, it's hard to see how a court would say that it's wrong for the government to use a device, that shows the patterns of your cell phone's signals sent through the outdoors (i.e. over public airwaves), the fact that you're emitting them, and whom else is simultaneously emitting them in your direction.
This would make an excellent defense for a paparazzo accused of catching photons reflected by the child of a famous person in public! There is no such thing as an expectation of privacy anymore.
It doesn't appear that the punishers cared whether those feathers were dark, light or red, as long as they made the person look like a chicken.
I resemble that remark!
I would vote for Rand Paul just for the entertainment value of watching him have to defend the Patriot Act once in office.
Honestly, ARM, I'm not entirely sure he would.
Preventing photos of a kid is a tough way to go but at least you have as a defense the somewhat protected legal status of children. Also note the disparity of penalties for child pornography versus sexy photos that an adult didn't intend to make public.
Did you have a law degree? I still am confused by what your legal understanding is? (Not that it matters, just curious).
Paparazzos are assholes in many ways, most of them constitutionally protected, unfortunately. (Personally, I don't see why they can't be prosecuted for harassment when closely following their targets). But again, you note photos, which ARE content. Recording cell phone emission patterns without viewing the conversations contained within them is NOT content.
Content, man. If people are going to legislate cell phones and internet they might have to start learning the difference between content and contact patterns. If you're going to stop terrorists at all (and argument stands independently of that) I think we're going to have to learn the difference. It's an important one, no? It's certainly a useful one.
Rhythm and Balls said...
What is this nonsense about "masters"? Do you live your life according to "masters"? I don't
No, you just happen to be passing by when an item like this comes up.
Sure.
Either that, or you are one of those Lefties who "monitors" as many of the blogs as possible until you can find something that requires your particular brand of non sequitur.
Rhythm and Balls said...
Oh geez Meade with the PC over-reach. "Tarring" was used as a verb because that act made it easier for the feathers to stick to the intended object of humiliation. It doesn't appear that the punishers cared whether those feathers were dark, light or red, as long as they made the person look like a chicken.
Are you sure you're the genius you seem to think you are, Ritmo?
Did you have a law degree? I still am confused by what your legal understanding is? (Not that it matters, just curious).
I didn't say, but I'll admit that I know next to nothing about the legality of intercepting electromagnetic waves. I know more about the equivalence of different electromagnetic waves, and how they interact with matter.
Say, I'm scratching my head here but didn't we get into a big fight once about the "niceness" of Joe McGinnis intercepting light waves bouncing off of Sarah Palin and her family from his "perch" next door? I believe he wrote down his observations and tried to sell them. I believe I recall you shilling for him, and me objecting. I could check my electromagnetic domains for the remains of that conversation.
Jesus Christ!
I take my headphones off for a minute and wander back to the computer and it's still going on!
And Meade is still playing the White Knight.
Save us, Meade! Please save us! Save us from the plague of "ists!"
You can say a lot of things about Althouse, but she is one hell of a smart egghead. How in the hell does she hold a conversation with Meade?
The guy is a dummy. No wonder she's testing the waters for a new civil rights crusade for house husbands. That has to be some scene when she introduces Meade to her stratospherically high IQ legal colleagues.
Now, back to work. We're supposed to get two feet of snow tomorrow, and I'm supposed to travel to a gig. Don't think that's gonna happen. A lot of cancellations being announced.
Ed - you have no legal understanding of things. As with most things. Any understanding on your part is completely lacking.
Find a judge, lawyer or any conservative with a legal argument against obtaining a record of cell phone waves bounced off between your phone and Mohammed Atta's and then we'll know that you're not just a hack who just takes his marching "orders" from Limbaugh/Hannity/Levin etc ad nauseam.
Sometimes I don't know how basic we have to go with you. Do you even know what a "court" is? What a "judge" is? What a "legal argument" is? Do you know what "radio waves" are? If telescopes directed toward the heavens observe "radio waves" coming at us from far-off galaxies, do the alien civilizations emitting them have standing to sue us for breach of constitutional liberties in federal court?
Sometimes I think your rudimentary mind actually gets an inkling of how ridiculous its own patterns are. If anyone is a poster child for most human thought and behavior being subconscious and sub-rational, it must be you.
Try reading a book. It will make you fear the American system less.
I'm sure you're pretty dumb, Meade.
I'm also pretty sure that you're not sure of anything other than the things that someone else told you to be sure of.
Try reading a book. It will make you fear the American system less.
Laughed over that one. I've decided not to get pissed at you any more. I'm going to be an entirely new Old Dawg.
Ritmo, if you're going to continue to insist that we read... of all things... books...
Then I insist on a subsidy. Can I have your credit card number?
So I'm guessing that's a "no", CL. Thanks for taking the round-about way of answering the question.
I'm a pretty cheap date, too.
I do Kindle, so I get a discount.
I've been reading this scholarly tome.
Many books you can get at little to no cost these days, Old Dawg. As an artist you should be aware that the copyrights for many of the oldest and best works are finished, and all you need now is your trusty computer to crank up for GOOGLE books or you could really bust out the big bucks for a $99 Kindle or Barnes and Noble device and download them for free to 99 cents each.
There's nothing to get mad about. Rand Paul is doing his job and the courts will do theirs. I think the courts will validate much of the law, though, based on what a very conservative and formerly favorite commenter of Annie Oldheist has said. Check out his blog Stubborn Facts and see if I'm right and if he still hasn't changed his very reasonable conclusion.
It's not a political argument for me. I think there's a political case to use against the president. I just don't see how anyone can do anything with it legally. Randy's free to file suit. I doubt he will though, since for him it's about getting the political traction. No one cares to look at the legality. No one wants to admit that there's really not much "there" there. I'm sure you'll find a trifling remedy here or there, but the bulk of the practices will be substantiated.
You're welcome, Ritmo. Anytime. And thank you for avoiding my question.
Ritmo, when you lecture edutcher in that tone (re your 9:22) I feel an urge to chirbit you in the pedantic scold voice -- the same one I used to recite Althouse's scolding of poor edutcher.
Don't do this to me!
As to the matter at hand...
The political reality is that Obama time is winding down, and the best thing to do is to just let the clock run out.
Your question is itself a change of subject back to the very old and boring non-issue of the non-entity Sarah Palin and how she makes money dramatizing her boring life and boring issues thanks to the likes of dupes willing to indulge her drama like yourself.
I also notice this is your second change-of-subject since you've decided to ignore the content/transmission pattern distinction and glob it into the nonsensical point that they involve electrons in some way.
So go ahead and answer a question for once (instead of ignoring it twice) and maybe you'll get answers to your own diversionary questions.
The political reality is that Obama time is winding down, and the best thing to do is to just let the clock run out.
Right. And watch the practices "in question" continue full-bore if a Republican is elected in 2016.
@R&B: I did think of an interesting legal question though but I'm too lazy to check Simon's blog -- we had a falling out a while ago -- nothing personal but political (I think it was over gun control or something). Anyways, my question was does the Federal government any more or less rights than an individual does when it comes to intercepting the ether? Aren't an individual's rights broader a priori ipso facto sum pro quo quid than the Federal Government's rights? Wasn't there an amendment dealing with this?
Dear dawg, Rabel...
I denounce myself for laughing my *ss off.
Right. And watch the practices "in question" continue full-bore if a Republican is elected in 2016.
Agree. All the more reason to circumscribe his rights which is a polite way of doing what Jesse Jackson said earlier but more crudely.
Ritm: You're the one purporting to have legal expertise here. Why don't you tell us about your formal training?
Right. And watch the practices "in question" continue full-bore if a Republican is elected in 2016.
Most likely.
Any agency that acquires specific powers will fight to relinquish those powers.
Why not do a chirbit of Ed? Has he said anything even remotely thought-provoking, today or at any other time?
You talk of quantum mechanics as a way to avoid answering questions about the difference between electronic content and electronic transmission patterns, and then tell me I'm pedantic. Well, isn't that something?
Why are you protecting Ed from any accountability? Is it like protecting Bush? Protecting Obama? Wouldn't it be better to stop sheltering him from the consequences of his poor reasoning and (honestly) somewhat stupid comments?
You are subsidizing his uncompetitive participation in the marketplace of ideas. He is, in effect, getting a socialist hand-out from you, his Big Brother, as a bone of protection.
If he were the rugged individualist that capitalists claim to love, you would not do this to him.
Give him the tough love that makes conservative men so independent! Incentivize him to come up with properly thought-out ideas!
Come on, Chickens. You can do it! Let that little bird fly on its own!
Anyways, my question was does the Federal government any more or less rights than an individual does when it comes to intercepting the ether?
Who says that the federal government would do anything to hinder a private individual from deploying a device to intercept the patterns of cell phone transmissions between people through the public airwaves? It wouldn't. It couldn't. That's the beauty of this.
I never claimed legal expertise, or training. But I have some practical understanding of some basic concepts. I think this is basic enough. The gov't is not intruding on anyone by noting that cell phone A sent a signal, though public airwaves, to cell phone B. If two people were sending passenger pigeons to one another, the gov't would be doing nothing wrong by noting that, either. Neither would any private individual observing the transaction.
Pretty basic but it involves computers and "big data" so Randy can rally the troops of yokels and make think Obama's a nefarious Wizard of Oz. What's more troubling is that other people are unthinking enough to go along with that silly trope.
I'm sure some minor abuses are occurring here and there and that courts could curtail a snip or two. But come on. The bulk of what's going on won't change and the people have gotten too damn lazy to even bother to question why that is. It's rather basic, though.
Well to answer you question R&B (and I guess Simon's), I agree, it would not be illegal for the government to merely observe someone carrying a letter. I would start to worry when the government decided to observe everyone carrying letters every where, and since the technology exists to snoop inside electronic transmission (unlike "seeing inside" a letter), there is that worry too. Aside from the legal issues, there's a huge trust factor which Erich Holder and Barack Obama have blown.
"Erich Holder"
Get it?
@R&B: I already did several light-hearted Mr. Ed chirbits. You just weren't listening.
You could worry but the fact is that the only salient issue is whether that observation occurs from public space. Yes it would look weird to have a G-Man on every corner with binoculars or a transmission interception device but the fact of the matter is that stake-outs are simply not illegal, as long as you're doing them properly. You have a right to be out and about and observe what you do in public. And so does the government. From the measliest little cop to the president. What is it about America that prizes spreading ignorance… even in the government? We can't stop people from observing things.
The trust factor only matters which side of it your on. Many to most people hate Obama for doing this and many to most people hate Bush for doing it. But neither guy was doing anything blatantly wrong.
Collecting publicly observed data is not a crime.
@R&B: I only chided ed for his unswerving loyalty to Althouse. I consider him on "my side." You and Althouse took this sadistic step of demonizing the guy. I never did that nor would I.
If Inga were here she would bring some sanity to this thread.
I don't demonize anyone willing to say/do something intelligent and/or civil.
Everything that comes out of ed's keyboard is the flimsiest of political cheap shots, even when the subject isn't political. He will call Swiss cheese political. To him, chocolate milk is political. Can't I ever tire of that extremely boring and tedious obnoxiousness? Ever? I feel that if I open my refrigerator right now he'll claim it had something to do with the Kennedy assassination. When is enough enough?
EMD said...
Honestly, ARM, I'm not entirely sure he would.
Once he is in office and faced with the possibility of a terrorist attack on his watch the equation will change substantially. I would guess that Obama would love to get rid of a lot of the surveillance state apparatus, based on his prior opposition. He doesn't want to get blamed for the next domestic terrorist attack. Cowardly but understandable. Like social programs once they are in place it is hard to get rid of them.
If I turn on my kitchen sink faucet, he's liable to bring up Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick.
I mean, come on. Can't we require him to bring a sense of humor or true imagination or wit into at least a particle of the things he says?
Rabel said...
If Inga were here she would bring some sanity to this thread.
Ed and Inga were a match made in heaven.
Chick, what is your latest chirbit? Will you post it?
I now pronounce you ed and Inga.
ed and Inga Make a Porno.
@deborah: It was "These Are Kolob Nuts" starring Crack Emcee shilling for 7-Up. You hated it, remember? :(
Edutcher is a senile conspiracy theory bumpkin. Now that sanity prevails, I suggest y'all go fuck yourselves.
ed and Inga Make a Porno.
There's a market for every sub-genre of porn, isn't there?
I discovered last week that there is an audience for "fart porn."
Not me! I have a scholarly interest in such things.
I don't know, Rit. You and Inga were hot and heavy at one time...you wouldn't have any home videos to share, would you :)
Edutcher is a senile conspiracy theory bumpkin.
That's why you're so well matched, Inga.
You and Ed could do fart porn, Inga.
Doesn't even require that you touch one another!
Are you sure I've heard it? My memory is hazy sometimes, but still.
If Inga were here she would bring some sanity to this thread.
LOL.
Whatever happened to Inga?
Does she still hang out at Althouse?
Everybody's here!
How about a chorus of "Kumbaya?"
You people must bore yourselves half to death, these threads are getting nuttier by the day. Aufwiedersehen for another year or so.
Say hello to Turley for me.
Did somebody send a telepathic message that summoned Inga from the depths of Hades?
I will Rabel. I love it over there, NICE people, lots of liberals.
Mount that broomstick and fly back to central HQ, Inga
Inga, you responded so quickly once your name was mentioned...you must be bored stiff to be reading here.
Deb!
I don't think I'd ever make videos of that sort of thing anyway. It's too, well, too Fred Durst. Too Dustin Diamond.
Unless a guy is James Deen he's probably best off not getting too publicly and/or visually pornographic.
:) @ Rit
@Ritmo
Fat old farts need sex and porn, too!
After Althouse frees the house husbands, fat old farts will be her next civil rights crusade.
You are some kind of "ist," but I'll be damned if I know precisely what kind.
But it's bound to happen. In this day and age. The more personable you can get with your public persona, the better off you are. And I mean "better off" only in terms of success. I wouldn't know if it benefits someone personally or spiritually.
But I don't like to kiss and tell. I mean, I do, but only if I can anonymize the names.
That's hard to do with video. I mean, I suppose you could blur out any (every?) identifying feature. But then, what would be the point?
Nah. Videos are best left to the Fred Dursts and Dustin Diamonds. And we all know what infamy that brought them.
I'd like to think I'm more James Deen than those guys but who knows and the camera never lies.
Inga said...
I will Rabel. I love it over there, NICE people, lots of liberals.
Inga, where is this magical land? I need more liberals in my life.
California, ARM. California.
AND…. the Netherlands. What a damn paradise that place was.
My girlfriend is from Europe and wants us to live there. But I say only if it's in the Netherlands.
Anyone who says liberalism sucks has never been to Amsterdam.
Prague, too, possibly. I still have that place to check out. If nothing else, at least I'd have some colorful and nicely shaped architecture to check out. Maybe more quirky than liberal but still not bad. I'll find out and then let you know.
But I say only if it's in the Netherlands.
They certainly suck a lot of 420.
Is that the attraction.
ARM,
Res ipsa loquitur.
Whoa. Deen was dating Joanna Angel?
That's pretty hot. RIght now I'm less ornery than usual but am going through a mad bit of a goth girl porn phase when the mood strikes.
Maybe I just haven't done enough of them.
@Inga
The Weird Sisters need another hand to toss the frogs into the pot and stir.
I can hear them calling you...
Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble!
420 is all good but really is the libertarianism all the way around. I mean, you look at the puffy eyelids on most of these Dutch and assume they all do some weed, but honestly the attraction wears thinner once it's legal. But I saw all kinds of libertarianism. They barely even bother with obeying stop lights and pedestrians and bikes and cars and trains all share the same pretty space of well-maintained brick or cobblestone road, very peaceably at that. Somehow they all know how to negotiate everything well and no arguments break out.
The architecture is splendid, too. Quaint and cottage-y but in a fun and exciting way, especially with all those canals. You can take a riverboat cruise… it's all good. And true to their libertarian roots, they're huge capitalists. Very heavy seafaring traders going back centuries to the first companies… which were Dutch. Innovators all the way around.
The whoring is interesting, too… but moreso visually with all the thin red neon lights and the way things are arranged in rows around canals. As a guy, you can see the appeal to consumer psychology because the glass properties are small rooms and each chick in it looks almost like a toy on the next rack of the toy store, the way the rows of streets jut out in zipper-like formations. Lol.
Inga said...
ARM,
Res ipsa loquitur.
Thanks Inga. We may be a bunch of sexist racists but we still miss you. (Maybe not Ed.)
@Ritmo
I agree that societies that deal with whoring in an open and sensible way have their shit together a lot more than we do.
I want to visit Amsterdam. One of the few places in Europe I haven't been.
I think one of the other things that struck me was that with the well-maintained roads, I actually saw a crew welding a recessed track in the middle of traffic, and they didn't even bother to demarcate out a boundary with yellow tape or whatnot. That would never fly in America. It was a busy weekday morning and kids were walking mere feet from the welding arc sparks, and no one freaked out about being in danger of burning up. The traffic just continued around it as usual. You can assume they'd finish the job competently and very quick, as well.
Also, the olliebollen were great. And the french fries. With mayonnaise. And the Indonesian food (former colony of theirs).
It's an awesome place.
Whoring is right out in the open on Rue St. Denis in Paris, too.
Henry Miller's old haunt.
I visited, once again, out of purely scholarly literary motives.
You should definitely visit it. They really know how to deal with things. Sure it's liberal (moreso libertarian - I didn't see any loud protests) but they're quiet and humbly proud of it. Me and my girlfriend walked through the red light district before it got a bit wilder, at night, with crowds of people.
I recently read that they proposed paying drunks in beer to clean up their parks.
I could live in Paris for a while.
American musicians (a lot of them my friends) do very well there.
Many do a lot better than they do in the U.S.
Rhythm and Balls said...
I think one of the other things that struck me was that with the well-maintained roads,
Everybody has different tastes in other countries. I really liked Switzerland for similar reasons but I would live in Italy, which is a mess. I am comfortable with messes.
If you enjoy utter chaos, hot weather and whoring of every kind right out in the open (including street walkers of peculiar categories), Manila and Cebu are a riot.
Cheap, too! Except for the air fare.
Whoring will happen, simply because there's a common and implicit relationship between sexual/gender value, attraction and financial power and that's that. Most people aren't lucky enough to have relationships between people who consider themselves complete emotional/social equals, and as every American male knows, women here are just as crazy for power as their American men. So we make that relationship become underground or implicit.
So I checked it out just for interest's sake. I couldn't stomach the idea of paying to be with some exotic and perhaps microbiologically exotic public toy like that, but in the abstract it will happen. So it was interesting to check out the phenomenon and the way they set it up was more of an artistic spectacle than anything else.
By the way, can anyone explain to me why it is that no one simply acknowledges that Kim Kardashian is just fat?
One quarter of my ancestors were French and for some time I have had an irrational desire to go and live in the French countryside for an extended period.
I have no real idea of what that would be like or how I would do it, but it's there.
Biology, I figure.
I'm glad you got yourself a European girl Ritmo. I sse you took my advice ;)
I happened to be in Warsaw right after the commies got the boot.
It was a wild party.
The hookers were into the Nancy Sinatra "These Boots Are Made For Walking" attire.
That is blond wigs, thigh high boots and mini-skirts.
One of the more peculiar tourist sites in Warsaw is a tiny synagogue that, amazingly, was the only structure to survive WWII intact.
The rest of the city was flattened into rubble.
Another quarter are from the Bakaa Valley in Lebanon.
I don't feel the pull, but I do like a lot of mint and lemon juice in my meals on occasion.
Well, if that was your advice (it might have been, couldn't remember exactly! but it makes sense) then it was damn good advice!
Until then I'd been with Latin women, who are passionate and fun. But not as many European. Lately I'd been on a European kick… even met a South African (white) but I guess that's technically not the same. I thought an English girl would be stuffy but I love how fucking polite they are. Mick Jagger was right… they're obsessed with conversation so he couldn't stand them on the telephone but that courteous contrast to east coast rudeness is exactly what I needed. They also appreciate up-front honesty so I'm in very good.
I don't really always get their humor and sometimes they over-intellectualize things more than we do, but they definitely have their bawdy and fun side.
Everything's good. Hope things are well with you.
@Ritmo,
Yes, they are sweetie. Very good actually. Thanks for asking and good luck with your European maiden.
Bed time.
No casting spells and curses while you stir the pot with the Weird Sisters tonight, Inga.
I thought you'd climbed on your broomstick for the flight back to Hades.
Yeah… a good English girl will keep you in good stead. The nice thing about Europeans is that they don't mind taking care of people - that includes their S.O.s So it's as it should be in that regard. I think a Latin woman might love the idea of being good to her man in the abstract, but that passion can be a bit crazy-making. Usually it's the opposite, though. I think American women partially go crazy because we're still Puritan enough to discourage emotional expression in general, and I think that fucks up women's brains to have to be like that. I have other theories about what's wrong for them in America but I digress.
The good think about English girls however, and I realize I'm extrapolating based on a data point of 1, is that they're European, but didn't have the disaster of WWII. Yes, it took its toll, but generally they were the forebears of civilization before us. They finished their VIctorian phase and appreciate a good party nowadays. So many in the streets drinking, but in a sociable way. I mean, they dress WELL! Very well! I went to a tailor or haberdasher and splurged quite a bit. No one in America makes shirts and suits like that lot. Not a one. You might as well go to, well, I don't want to offend anyone.
But, point being, English girls actually had queens and royalty and don't fixate on it the way power-hungry U.S. women do their symbol of Hillary Clinton. They've been humanized by the experience of monarchy and queens and empire and influence, if that makes sense. It's like everything good that you could have in a culture, they have. Except the food. Good food they got from some of their colonies.
But if you want a sweet, polite, extremely well behaved and very well spoken woman who will raunch the fuck out of you in the bedroom, go English.
I'd think you'd really enjoy living in a police state, Inga, so that you could inform on your neighbors.
But, hey, as I said, it's beddie bye time.
Nurse Ratched has left the building!
ST, read my 11:28 before beddy-bye and then you'll have sweet dreams. Especially the last paragraph.
Cheers -
Thanks for the tip, Ritmo.
I've never check out the British broads.
Post a Comment