tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post8616905649142412708..comments2023-10-23T10:45:36.274-04:00Comments on Common Nonsense: Anatomy of a Dishonest EditorialMargalishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05113704757631863541noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post-87960646171427636512008-01-23T22:50:00.000-05:002008-01-23T22:50:00.000-05:00I appreciate quibbles and your comment. No need to...I appreciate quibbles and your comment. No need to apologize. Being factually accurate is a good goal. I'm the type of person that quibbles a lot so I can't complain ;)<BR/><BR/>It's not even quibbling. What I wrote was not correct. Now it is more correct. These types of comments are helpful.Margalishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05113704757631863541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post-71479953810833906772008-01-23T22:30:00.000-05:002008-01-23T22:30:00.000-05:00Yes, I agree that the article has intentionally fa...Yes, I agree that the article has intentionally false implications. As I said, it was just a quibble---the article is, for all practical purposes, lying. (So I'm not really sure why I bothered commenting. Er, sorry.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post-35824355827437429562008-01-23T20:44:00.000-05:002008-01-23T20:44:00.000-05:00I suppose that quibble is valid.However the implic...I suppose that quibble is valid.<BR/><BR/>However the implication of the piece is that, unlike "most Americans", Democrats like Dodd want a court to approve foreign-to-foreign wiretaps, which is false. I'll update the post to reflect that.<BR/><BR/>Why Democrats will likely cave is a mystery to me as well. As has been pointed out in many places, even the media uses that word, "cave", to describe Democratic actions. The knock on Democrats is that they are weak, spineless do-nothings with no convictions and they seem eager to confirm that.<BR/><BR/>Maybe they are afraid that they will be blamed for a terrorist attack, or maybe they simply enjoy telecom lobbying dollars.Margalishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05113704757631863541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post-61910195573416019522008-01-23T13:29:00.000-05:002008-01-23T13:29:00.000-05:00I will quibble a bit and say that the editorial do...I will quibble a bit and say that the editorial does not actually outright lie. The editorial's claim that the bill would allow wiretaps "that happen to pass through U.S. switching networks" is technically true. It's just misleading, since that part of the bill is uncontroversial. Sort of like saying that the "Omnibus Mandatory Sodomy and Puppy Petting Act" would guarantee our right to pet puppies. Sure, it would, it's just that it does a few other things that are a little more controversial.<BR/><BR/>I agree that the Fourth Amendment should be respected, regardless of whether it's politically wise. But I must admit to being rather baffled as to what political (as opposed to monetary) benefit the Democrats could obtain from caving (as I feel sadly certain that they will). I can believe (although I do not know) that a majority of Americans would be willing to trade certain constitutional protections for security. But I find it hard to believe that there's a great outcry out there, among social or fiscal conservatives, or even the average Bush supporter, horrified by the thought that large telecom companies might have to have their actions reviewed by a court.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post-43334142463306040262008-01-22T18:47:00.000-05:002008-01-22T18:47:00.000-05:00Yes, Qwest lawyers asked Justice Department offici...Yes, Qwest lawyers asked Justice Department officials to provide the proper documentation that the requests for warrantless wiretaps were legal and the Bush Administration refused. So Qwest lost out on a huge government contract.<BR/><BR/>The telecoms that did go along are now lobbying to be immune to all pending and future lawsuits.Margalishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05113704757631863541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29535945.post-62353441982421352982008-01-22T15:13:00.000-05:002008-01-22T15:13:00.000-05:00To sum up: any telecom company that went along wit...To sum up: any telecom company that went along with Bush now want lawsuit protection from so called "legal acts?" <BR/><BR/>Didn't Quest lose a government contract because they didn't want to take part of the wire tapping?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com