The Commentariat -- July 2, 2013
David Nakamura of the Washington Post: "President Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush, laid a wreath at the U.S. embassy [in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania,] in a solemn memorial for victims of a 1998 terrorist bombing that killed dozens." ...
... Nedra Pickler of the AP calls the joint event "an unprecedented chance encounter a world away from home.... While the two U.S. leaders didn't say anything publicly, their wives engaged in a warm and chatty joint appearance at a summit on African women. Initially the two presidents weren't even planning to meet while in town, but first lady Michelle Obama joked as she sat next to her predecessor: 'They're learning from us.'"
... Nicholas Kulish & Michael Shear of the New York Times: "After receiving the most ecstatic welcome [in Tanzania] of his weeklong trip to Africa, President Obama on Monday called for a new partnership with the continent, one that would help sustain its recent run of tremendous economic growth while broadening the rewards to as many people as possible."
David Herszenhorn, et al., of the New York Times: "President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela said Tuesday that he had not yet received an application for political asylum from Edward J. Snowden..., and that he would not use his plane to ferry Mr. Snowden to Caracas. Still, Mr. Maduro, who is visiting Moscow, seemed to hold out the possibility that Venezuela might ultimately agree to shelter Mr. Snowden. Speaking to legislators and reporters at the Russian Parliament, Mr. Maduro said that Mr. Snowden deserved protection under international law." ...
... MEANWHILE, Rory Carroll of the Guardian: "Ecuador is not considering Edward Snowden's asylum request and never intended to facilitate his flight from Hong Kong, president Rafael Correa said as the whistleblower made a personal plea to Quito for his case to be heard.... The president, speaking at the presidential palace in Quito, said his government did not intentionally help Snowden travel from Hong Kong to Moscow with a temporary travel pass. 'It was a mistake on our part,' he added." ...
... AND, Kathy Lally of the Washington Post: "Fugitive Edward Snowden has withdrawn his request for Russian political asylum, a presidential spokesman said Tuesday, apparently because he was unwilling to go along with President Vladimir Putin's requirement that he stop any activity damaging to the United States." ...
... Charles Pierce makes sport of these developments. CW: As for me, I continue to believe that Ed's Traveling Circus will makes the last stop of its tour a blockbuster U.S. appearance. ...
... ** Frank Rich: Americans just don't care about their privacy; in fact, many want to share their private travails with others. "After the news of the agency's PRISM program broke, National Donut Day received more American Google searches than PRISM. There has been no wholesale (or piecemeal) exodus of Americans from Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Skype, or any of the other information-vacuuming enterprises reported to have, in some murky fashion, siphoned data -- meta, big, or otherwise -- to the NSA. Wall Street is betting this will hold. A blogger on the investment website Motley Fool noticed that on the day PRISM was unmasked, share prices for all the implicated corporate participants went up." Thanks to Diane for the link. ...
... CW: I must admit I'm not as sanguine about NSA spying as are the "average Americans" Rich captures in this excellent piece, but his conclusion -- "little short of a leak stating that the NSA is tracking gun ownership is likely to kindle public outrage" -- is exactly right. Rich doesn't mention it, but there is a great irony in Ed Snowden's revealing his identity, a move that is rare among whistleblowers. Snowden claims he leaked the details of the NSA's spying ops because he was outraged by the invasion of individual privacy. But Snowden could not help but want to be famous, even as it put him at great risk. It must have galled him in those first days after publication of the first stories to see Glenn Greenwald basking in the glory, when he -- Ed Snowden -- should be the star. ...
... Edward Snowden, via Wikileaks: Barack Obama is violating his right to seek asylum. "Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum." CW: "Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Snowden refers in his statement, states that "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
... Man Without a Country. Andrew Roth & Ellen Barry of the New York Times: "President Vladimir V. Putin said on Monday that Edward J. Snowden, the former national security staffer accused of espionage, would not receive political asylum in Russia unless he stopped publishing classified documents that hurt the interests of the United States. At a news conference here, Mr. Putin said that since it appeared Mr. Snowden was going to continue publishing leaks, his chances of staying in Russia were slim. Mr. Putin also pushed back against efforts by the United States to persuade the Russian government to extradite Mr. Snowden, making it clear that Russia would not comply. 'Russia never gives up anyone to anybody and is not planning to,' Mr. Putin said." Thanks to Barbarossa for the link. ...
... Sergi Loiko of the Los Angeles Times: "Snowden ... met Monday morning with Russian consular service officials and handed them an appeal to 15 countries for political asylum, according to a Russian Foreign Ministry official who spoke on condition of anonymity. The official didn't name the countries, but said that Russia was among them.... Putin stressed that Snowden is not a Russian agent and that he is not cooperating with Russian special services." ...
... David Nakamura & Karen DeYoung of the Washington Post: "At a news conference [in Tanzania] Monday during his African tour, [President] Obama said he has asked aides to look more closely at the revelations in the story, and he declined to comment on the specifics. But more generally, the president said all spy agencies gather information beyond that which is publicly available from large media organizations such as the New York Times and NBC News.... In Asia, Secretary of State John F. Kerry said he was taken by surprise when E.U. foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton questioned him about the reported eavesdropping." ...
... Steve Benen doesn't exactly put it this way, but it's clear to me that NSA director James Clapper lied about lying to Congress. How can you "misunderstand" a straightforward question that you knew in advance would be asked? ...
... Stephen Castle & Eric Schmitt of the New York Times: "The leaders of France and Germany added their voices on Monday to the growing outrage over reports that the United States has been spying on its European Union allies, raising new suggestions that talks on a new trans-Atlantic trade agreement may be at risk.
** "A House Divided Against Itself...." Steve Benen on the GOP's warning sports leagues against helping people learn about ObamaCare. The losers: everybody but Mitch McConnell, intimidator-in-chief. & his gang of irregulars. "If Republicans can successfully sabotage the law, they win -- even if you and your family lose. We're watching one of those unusual dynamics in which federal officials actively and deliberately try to undermine other federal officials in the hopes of sabotaging federal law. And no one seems to find this scandalous, or even surprising."
War on Libruls. Jamelle Bouie in the Washington Post: "What's missing in the Republican Party is [a] willingness to compromise for anything, even if it benefits the particular interests of individual lawmakers or the interests of the party writ large. And this seems to stem from an attitude that emerged during the 1994 elections and has only grown since -- the idea that conservatives aren't just opposed to liberals but that they're at war with liberalism." ...
... "The Koch Club." Charles Lewis, et al., of Investigative Reporting Workshop: "Koch Industries, one of the largest privately held corporations in the world and principally owned by billionaires Charles and David Koch, has developed what may be the best funded, multifaceted, public policy, political and educational presence in the nation today. From direct political influence and robust lobbying to nonprofit policy research and advocacy, and even increasingly in academia and the broader public 'marketplace of ideas,' this extensive, cross-sector Koch club or network appears to be unprecedented in size, scope and funding. And the relationship between these for-profit and nonprofit entities is often mutually reinforcing to the direct financial and political interests of the behemoth corporation -- broadly characterized as deregulation, limited government and free markets." ...
... Jane Mayer of the New Yorker hits some of the highlights of the report, including the pledge the Kochs got Tea Party Republicans to sign which commits them to blocking all meaningful climate change legislation. ...
... Charles Pierce: "The academic and intellectual superstructure that grew out of the Powell Memo years ago is stronger than ever, better financed than ever, and utterly self-perpetuating. No victory won by any progressive president at any time ever should be seen as being a permanent one. You can ask John Lewis if you don't believe me." CW: here's more on the Powell memo. Pierce's reference to John Lewis, of course, is to the Supremes' gutting of the Voting Rights Act.
** Louis Menand of the New Yorker writes an excellent, long article on how the Voting Rights Act of 1965 destroyed "the central pillar of Jim Crow." CW: Should be assigned reading for Paula Deen.
Nelson Schwartz of the New York Times: "The biggest, most profitable American companies paid only a fraction of the taxes they would owe under the official corporate rate, according to a study released on Monday by the Government Accountability Office. Using allowed deductions and legal loopholes, large corporations enjoyed a 12.6 percent tax rate far below the 35 percent tax that is the statutory rate imposed by the federal government on corporate profits. The findings come amid rising criticism of the tactics that some big companies use to lower their tax bills."
Laurie Goodstein of the New York Times: "Files released by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee on Monday reveal that in 2007, Cardinal Timothy F. Dolan, then the archbishop there, requested permission from the Vatican to move nearly $57 million into a cemetery trust fund to protect the assets from victims of clergy sexual abuse who were demanding compensation. Cardinal Dolan, now the archbishop of New York, has emphatically denied seeking to shield church funds as the archbishop of Milwaukee from 2002 to 2009. He reiterated in a statement Monday that these were 'old and discredited attacks.' However, the files contain a 2007 letter to the Vatican in which he explains that by transferring the assets, 'I foresee an improved protection of these funds from any legal claim and liability.' The Vatican approved the request in five weeks...." ...
... Margaret Hartmann of New York: "Dolan certainly doesn't come out looking great, but did repeatedly urge the Vatican to defrock priests who sexually abused children, only to be met with years of silence in some instances. The Wall Street Journal reports that in one case, Dolan's bosses wanted to suspend an admitted sex offender for just ten years, but he pushed for him to be defrocked.... The Vatican barred the priest from ministry indefinitely."
John Aravosis of AmericaBlog: "Russian President Vladimir Putin signed into law yesterday one of the most draconian anti-gay laws on the planet. The new law, coming only seven months before Russia is to host the Winter Olympics in Sochi, would ban anything considered pro-gay, from gay-affirmative speech, to gays holding hands in public, to even wearing rainbow suspenders. The law also contains a provision permitting the government to arrest and detain gay, or pro-gay, foreigners for up to 14 days before they would then be expelled from the country."
Congressional Race
Jessica Taylor of NBC News: "Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes made her bid official on Monday, with the Democrat announcing she'll challenge Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in 2014.... For Democrats who face a daunting Senate map that puts them in a considerable defensive crouch, Kentucky is now their best offensive opportunity: Grimes decision finally gives them a top recruit against the Republican McConnell, who faces dwindling approval ratings and a lukewarm reception among conservatives." ...
... More from Alex Altman of Time. Both the ads embedded in his story are fairly funny.
Local News
Tim Eaton of the Austin, Texas, American-Statesman: "Thousands of orange-clad abortion rights supporters packed the south lawn at the Capitol on Monday, cheering and fighting GOP-sponsored legislation that would make it more difficult for women to get abortions. The star of the show -- state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, who helped derail an abortion bill in the last special session of the Legislature -- addressed the crowd after the chants of 'Wendy, Wendy' subsided."
Sure wonder why all but one of these guys are positioned to protect their own privates.Tara Culp-Ressler of Think Progress: "Flanked by a group of other male officials, Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) signed a contentious two-year budget bill into law on Sunday evening. The governor vetoed 22 amendments to HB 59 before approving it, but he left intact several provisions that will severely limit women's reproductive access. The new budget, which takes effect on Monday, includes at least five new anti-abortion provisions."
Annals of the Fourth Estate
Driftglass: "Like it or now, in our brave new world of Truthinews, the job of fact-checking, source-vetting and the basic editorial function of bullshit-testing has been outsourced to you the reader. So on the plus side, congratulations on your promotion! On the minus side, your new job duties do not come with a raise, a park[ing] space or dental coverage." ...
... Driftglass also points to this piece by the Daily Beast's Michael Moynihan. Moynihan shows how the MSM begets conspiracy theories. And employs lousy "journalists."
News Ledes
Orlando Sentinel: "Jurors heard testimony this afternoon from a medical examiner who said that the injuries George Zimmerman suffered on the night he shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin were 'insignificant.'"
New York Times: "The Egyptian foreign minister was reported Tuesday to be the latest in wave of high-ranking officials to quit the government following days of mass protests that have shaken President Mohamed Morsi's hold on power, and the president denied that a 48-hour ultimatum by the country's powerful military signaled an imminent coup." ...
... Al Jazeera story here. ...
... Al Jazeera Update: "The Egyptian president, Mohamed Morsi, has demanded the army withdraws an ultimatum to resolve the nation's political crisis, saying that he will not be dictated to. Morsi insisted on his 'constitutional legitimacy' on his Twitter account on Tuesday night, hours after the Army published a plan to dissolve parliament, rewrite the constitution and hold new elections if he could not end protests against his rule by Wednesday." ...
...Washington Post Update: "President Mohamed Morsi was under growing pressure Tuesday to offer political concessions, facing a Wednesday deadline set by Egypt's powerful military, a phone call from President Obama urging him to be responsive and an announcement by the Islamist Nour party that it supports both the army's threat of intervention and a call by protesters for early elections. Addressing the nation in a televised speech late Tuesday, Morsi acknowledged that he had made mistakes during his year in office as Egypt's first democratically elected president. But he appealed to Egyptians to give him more time to deal with the country's problems."
AP: "U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Tuesday thatboth the U.S. and Russia are seriously committed to having an international conference on Syria and setting up a transitional government to end the bloodshed and 'save the state of Syria.'"
AP: Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, "a Vatican accountant arrested in a 20 million euro ($26 million) smuggling plot, acknowledged Monday during questioning that his behavior was wrong but said he was only trying to help out friends, his lawyer said." CW: See also today's Commentariatfor Archbishop Dolan's little financial scheme.
Share Article
Reader Comments (29)
Don't understand why anyone would think NSA is not tracking gun ownership, since they seem to be tracking every other fucking thing. It's just a matter of sorting the data.
@James: You're absolutely right. I'm sure they vacuum up gun sales, etc. LaPierre is so 1990's. He's OBE (Overtaken By Events).
Mercy, he loves him some over the top drama. I'm sure he's already cast DeCaprio in his role in the movie. Its hard to tell where the narcissism starts and the naiveté ends. I'm pretty sure all countries cyberspy on each other and of course one has to make outrage noises if it comes out. The world is dangerous and complex - its not Kumbaya out there. Shoot me, but I am quite comfortable with the US being in the game with others. The domestic spying is another matter that bears discussion. Although, as I have said before, corporate data gathering hasn't caused much of a ripple. I'm not ready to throw out the baby with the bath water.
(to the obvious strains of violin music) Snowden: "No matter how many more days my life contains, I remain dedicated to the fight for justice in this unequal world. If any of those days ahead realize a contribution to the common good, the world will have the principles of Ecuador to thank,...
"http://news.yahoo.com/edward-snowden-breaks-silence-threaten-u-disclosures-210531789.html
Just watching the crazies:
Hunter at Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/):
“One of the few uncertainties left about the modern Republican Party is the precise date and time they will devolve into cannibalism. For those of you that are making your own predictions, here's actual Republican vice presidenting candidate Sarah Palin answering a Fox News viewer's Twitter question (yes, I know) on whether she might consider abandoning the dirty rotten liberals in the GOP and forming a new "Freedom Party" for the nation's real conservatives…”
Ah yes, Ecuador, that noble light of liberty shining down upon us. A bright example of the principles to follow if the human race would one day like to see a better world where the common good reigns supreme.
Let's all emulate Pres. Rafael Correa and his idealistic views of journalists as "assassins with ink."
The current President has a pretty healthy record of media manipulation or imposing a climate of self-censorship for fear of reprisals.
http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2012/ecuador
Does Snowden know about this, or is he drunk with his own world of idealism?
And now this civil rights trailblazer seeks asylum in Russia, the land of free speech, healthy civil activism and the freedom of the press...
And now of my favorite quotes of the Snowden Saga thus far produced:
"He must stop his work aimed at harming our American partners, as strange as that sounds coming from my lips." -Putin
If only for the entertainment value of those who enjoy the dynamics of international relations, the Snowden Saga is certainly stirring the pot.
Yet it should be said, Putin's main motive in this statement seems to find an attente between the US and Russia regarding Snowden. But reading between the lines, Putin fears this surveillance renegade could inspire a similar defection within the Russian security apparatus (yes, heaven forbid, it exists). If the Russians deem Snowden a national threat in that capacity, maybe he should be fearing for his safety.
Hillary Clinton too old to be President? So says 70 year old Senator Mitch McConnell (and others). Doesn't he know women generally live longer than men? McConnell in reference to a Clinton or Biden presidency said it would be, “a rerun of ‘The Golden Girls,’ "
See utube: http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=IFa0FIixcDE&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DIFa0FIixcDE
And NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/30/us/politics/republicans-paint-clinton-as-old-news-for-2016-presidential-election.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/07/01/snowden-in-new-statement-accuses-obama-of-using-old-bad-tools-of-political-aggression/?wpmk=MK0000200
Welcome to the way the big boys and girls play hardball, Eddie. Did you notice you're out there leading the parade, but very few are following? That you're the story now, not what you disclosed?
Re the Powell memo, 3 observations:
1. The overuse of quotation marks -- an affectation of the arrogant, it's their way of diminishing language "regular" people use.
2 His headings: "What Can Be Done About..." not "Working With..."? or "Reaching Out To..."?
3. Good god, what a gasbag.
So many assholes, so little time to kick them all.
Asshole number one: NY Cardinal Timothy (save the money, fuck the children) Dolan who, while Archbishop in Milwaukee came up with a scheme to protect church funds while sticking it to men and women who had been molested by priests and other church officials on his watch (and for many years prior). A man of god, right? More like man of mammon.
And a serial liar as well, as the Milwaukee document dump has demonstrated. A letter to the Vatican outlining his plan to save church assets counters his long standing claim that no such scheme was ever put in place.
And just to show where the Vatican's real priorities lay, the church, under then Cardinal Ratzinger, took a mere five weeks to act on Dolan's scheme. It took over five years, according to the Times article, to defrock a known serial child molester. Can't have the church embarrassed, now, can we?
So Dolan was promoted to the highest position in America and Ratzinger was promoted to pope. Gotta love it.
Oh and speaking of assholes, how 'bout the current Milwaukee Archbishop, Jerome Listecki who's trying to claim that the poor church can't really take all the blame because thinking has changed on the topic of sexually abusing children. Say what? Oh, you mean that back in the day it was okay to rape children but it's not cool anymore? So happy that the church is catching up with basic human morality that's been around for, oh, about a million years.
Perdition. That's what these fuckers deserve.
At the risk of being branded a troll.........
The fact that most Americans don't care about their loss of privacy may very well mean they don't understand the true implications of having their every move available, not only to the government, but to many private entities. And even if that's not so, their not caring doesn't mean they SHOULDN'T care.
Who needs the NKVD, or Stasi, with their networks of informants when we can track everyone's most personal communications? No need for search warrants, no need for probable cause, no need to have people looking around warily for signs that they can't trust the person standing next to them. Simply identify the sort of person you want to target, for whatever reason, and then go round 'em up.
Please don't tell me I'm being unnecessarily alarmist. We've done this very sort of thing in our country before. And it's happened in Europe, where people genuinely DO care about their privacy, and genuinely ARE outraged about the fact that the US government is tracking their communications/habits in the same way it's tracking American citizens.
Trying to make this story about Snowden - whether this is being done by members of the MSM, bloggers, or Snowden himself - is to miss the point entirely. The people who take it on themselves to report and opine have a responsibility to report on the right things, and in this case the right thing is to report on the rise of Big Brother. We have no private thoughts or actions any longer, and we should find that truly disturbing.
And if I challenge you, Ms. Burns, it's not because I'm trying to stir up trouble; the trouble has already been stirred. I challenge your opinion because I believe it's worth challenging; that you have a mind, and you use it. I pray you will use it to focus your readers' attention on the real damage being done to our society and our lives as individuals.
It's ironic. You have a link on this site to the ACLU Torture Accountability page. Here's what the ACLU has to say about domestic spying:
"The fear of terrorism has led to a new era of overzealous police intelligence activity directed, as so often in the past, against political activists, racial and religious minorities, and immigrants. This new surveillance activity is not directed solely at suspected terrorists and criminals. It's directed at all of us. Increasingly, the government is engaged in suspicionless surveillance that vacuums up and tracks sensitive information about innocent people. The erosion of reasonable restrictions on government's power to collect people's personal information is putting the privacy and free speech rights of all Americans at risk."
So many assholes, part the second.
Asshole number two: Mitch (healthcare, schmealthcare, the GOP needs a win, dammit) McConnell. Really, we could put Jowl Boy down for Asshole number three, four, five, and up to about seventy two.
Threatening the NFL and other sports leagues with the Wrath of Mitch if they dare to help promote a law that was passed by congress? At least he knows how to hit the NFL where it lives, attacking its "apolitical" brand, and by extension, its pocketbook.
First, if a sports league was thinking of helping to promote the passage of a bill, that would be political. Helping to publicize a bill after its passage is not political. Would the GOP mind if the NFL helped promote public education of a law that squelched background checks on gun purchases?
Never mind.
On one hand I'm thinking that the NFL big wigs shouldn't give a used jockstrap about a couple of senators braying about Saturday being the best day to watch football. College football is popular but professional football, on its worst day, commands tens of millions of eyeballs and hundreds of millions of dollars. But that's because they're in the business of making money, not helping educate Americans about a way to lead healthier lives. And if they believe that pissing off a couple of big mouth senators might cost them a couple of bucks, well, to hell with healthcare.
So it's win-win-lose for the GOP, the NFL, and the public.
A check is in the mail to Alison Lundergan Grimes. It won't be so easy for McConnell to "Ashley Judd" her.
Noodge,
I don't think that anyone here is unaware or unconcerned about the implications of domestic spying.
I've posted several comments to the effect that the attention paid to (and possibly sought by) Edward Snowden has put the real problem in the shade. This is the result of laziness on the part of the media, bad decisions (or poorly thought out ones) on the part of Snowden himself, and a somewhat lackadaisical public, a fair number of which don't really care (or seem to) all that much. And a fair number of which are likely glad this sort of thing is going on, the ones who say things like "If you have nothing to hide, what's the problem?" Can't say I'm too thrilled about that sort of thinking.
None of which is to say that this isn't a serious issue. I can't speak for everyone out here but I'm willing to bet that no one here, least of all Marie, thinks a national conversation about the limits of domestic government spying is a bad thing.
I do think that this is not the sort of thing that can be easily walked back. The technology to implement domestic and international surveillance has been around a long time and the will and/or perceived need to use it will not abate any time soon. This is human nature we're talking about here, something not easily remolded.
Just my opinion, of course.
@Noodge, when you state a POV & explain it, as you have done, you're not trolling. I don't care if you agree or disagree with something I've written -- as long as you don't mischaracterize it. As it happens in this case, I respect and agree with some of your arguments.
The difference between Google watching my activity & sending me ads & the NSA watching my activity & creating a file on me is obvious. Google can annoy me, but it can't arrest me.
I'd be marching behind Greenwald if I were a reporter, because then I would legitimately be contacting people whom I wouldn't want the government -- or anybody -- to know I was contacting. I see the PRISM program as less of a privacy issue than a First Amendment issue. I don't care if the NSA finds out I'm writing to an old boyfriend, but I do care if they find out Charlie Savage is talking to some functionary at State. On the other hand, I hope they find out what, say, rabid militiamen & hoodlums are up to.
In the end, I think Snowden's revelations are of most use to journalists & their sources. Now they know they have to find more extraordinary means of exchanging information.
There's no irony in my posting links to articles & sites that express different points of view, including ones with which I disagree. I do it on purpose. I don't waste much time on right-winger opinions, but if they're funny or egregious enough, I throw those in, too.
I agree that the Travels of Snowden are a distraction from the underlying issue he initially raised (and has now wandered from), but I find them an entertaining distraction. I can hardly wait for the movie! I do hope it ends in something less than tragedy, if for no other reason than I hope that punk doesn't get to enjoy martyr status.
It is not remotely true that "we have no private thoughts or actions." This is the sort of belief that throws people off. No one -- even in the most despotic regime -- can stop you from thinking or believing something, even if s/he can stop you from asserting it. As for actions, has anybody stopped you in the last month from doing any lawful thing you wanted to do? I doubt it. And unless you're famous, very few people noticed what you were doing. We have a great deal of autonomy, and people who tell you otherwise are trying to frighten you. Evidently, it worked.
Thanks for writing.
Marie
To hop on Akhilleus' wagon.
Noodge, though some commenters have reacted to Snowden's simplistic libertarian twerpiness, (I among them, who find that ideology dangerously half-smart no matter where it rears its half-empth head), most who share opinions here have also expressed great concern about the surveillance itself, which is conducted by both public AND private entities.
Intentionally or not, whether we like it or not, the internet and modern telecommunications have stripped us of much of our privacy; technology has again opened Pandora's Box, and so far we have done little to harness the harmful spirits that have escaped. We have not even thought too seriously about how to go about it.
I for one think it's past time that we do. But note the ACLU statement you referenced. That body is again, in my judgement, seeing only half the picture. We should be as worried about corporate data mining as we should be about the government's.
The government's spying at least purports to have a laudable goal, that of keeping us safe....and in what remains of our democracy we do have some control over its actions. Corporations, whose sole purpose is to make a profit, do not even pretend to have our interests in mind...and even stockholders, not to mention most of the rest of us, have little or no control over their actions.
Even worse in my view is added danger of painting the government evil as the ACLU statement suggests, insofar as it weakens the argument for a strong central government--just what the Right wants-- that serves (poorly enough) as our only protection against the amoral profiteers who already possess too much power.
Do we need to ignore Snowden, as much fun as his odd odyssey is to follow, and turn our attention to ways we can ensure reasonable privacy in the internet world? Ultimately, yes, perhaps while keeping one eye on the daily entertainment Snowden's predicament provides. As a story, it's hard to ignore.
Agreed though, the real problem is not Snowden; it's the use to which we're putting our technology (and the way our technology is using us), but the ACLU, by pointing a finger at only a small part of the problem, has done little to help us sort things out.
Akhilleus,
Thanks for the input. It may be "just your opinion," but yours is one of the opinions I most respect 'round here, and one of the reasons I continue to come back here. Believe me, if I had no respect for the opinions on this page, I wouldn't waste my time on them.
Ms. Burns,
The point isn't whether I've been stopped from pursuing legal activities. The point is nothing is more fundamental than the right to be left alone, and the USSC has found that right to be implicit in the first, fourth, and fifth amendments. We are fast approaching (if we haven't reached already) the day when nothing we say or do is unremarked by people in positions of power.
That would be bad enough if those people were limited to those in government. In that case we would have, ostensibly, some recourse as citizens. But these days many of those people are the Booz Allens of the world, who are not answerable to the people they are monitoring in any way. And the fact is, if you DO do anything to draw attention to yourself, it would be a very easy thing for either the government or some private entity to go back and reconstruct every minute of your private life. Check out the evidence in the Aaron Hernandez murder trial, then remember you don't have to shoot someone to draw attention to yourself.
As for fear, I try to live by the words of our greatest 20th century president, who told us the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. I'm not afraid of the government - or anyone else - knowing what I think. I've communicated my opinions on this matter to President Obama and all my Congressional representatives. But it was my choice to do so; the government has no right to my opinion on this, or any other matter, if I want to keep it private. So they need to keep their noses out of my phone calls and my e-mails.
I have, however, seen fear acting on our people and our body politic. It manifested itself in the way the Patriot Act was pushed through so quickly (The Republicans bash the ACA by saying nobody read it before they passed it, but that sure as heck didn't bother them with the Patriot Act). We did this out of fear of terrorism, and many of the people who continue to support this wholesale surveillance of the entire American population are still motivated by that fear. And while I certainly do not wish to see any more terrorist attacks on American soil, I do not think the fear of such an attack is justification for taking away our privacy rights.
Mr. Winkes,
I agree we should be just as worried about private entities and the loss of our privacy rights as we are about the government. But that doesn't change the fact that we should still be concerned about the government. And however laudable the government's stated goal may be, the ends do not justify the means.
Julie,
"Hillary is old!"
Really? That's all they got?
It would be one thing if she was limping around, bent over, clutching an ear trumpet and falling asleep at important meetings, like a certain pretty old Republican president long ago granted sainthood by conservatives, but Hillary was last seen trotting the globe as Secretary of State. So what if Marco Rubio knows who Jay Z is. The question is, does he know the president of Ubeki-beki-beki-stan. So Republicans have younger candidates? Great. Who are they? Rand Paul? Bobby Jindal? Ted Cruz?
Please.
(btw, thank everyone in MA for Ed Markey. Good job.)
@Noodge: the idea that "we have a right to be left alone" is way overblown. It's true that a limited right to privacy is explicit in the Fourth & Fifth Amendments & implicit in the First. But one cannot live in society & suppose one has an unfettered right to privacy. Citizenship provides certain rights & with it certain responsibilities. Adherents to the "get off my lawn" philosophy usually change their tunes when they need the police or medical assistance or someone to help them figure out how to collect Social Security. It's true that many Americans are pretty lax when it comes to the responsibilities part, and that's a shame. The rest of us pay for their irresponsibility.
No one, and I mean no one, has a "right to be left alone." It ain't in the Constitution, and it ain't in the unwritten rules of social interaction -- in our society or in any other in history. To insist otherwise is, IMO, childish, narcissistic and neurotic.
As I write, I have another computer teed up so I can write a letter to the federal government, sending them a chunk o'dough along with an explanation as to why I didn't send the $$ a few weeks ago. You know, I'd rather not do either. I'd rather be left alone. I'd rather keep the money & not have to make nice to unknown bureaucrats who don't give a rat's ass about my excuses. I could just skip the whole thing & hide in my hidey-hole. But that's not a sensible, responsible choice. And eventually my exercising my "right to be left alone" would catch up with me, and I'd be in a heap of trouble.
When Obama said we have to balance privacy with security, he was right. I just think we're a bit off-balance and have been for some time.
I think you'll be happier if you get over the false idea that your privacy is sacrosanct. Read Louis Menand's piece on the Voting Rights Act. We're a lot better off -- rights-wise -- now than we were back when FDR was president. Everything is relative.
Marie
@Noodge; All that clap trap from Marie means you are in her sights and she will torture you, mischaracterize your posts, and finally ban you from this website- right after she threatens to shut it down and calls for a massive pity party...
Hey, I have the perfect candidate for Republicans in '16. A guy perfectly suited to their brand of faux toughness. He loves guns, hates minorities ('specially Mooslims), doesn't take any shit from the media (what there is), and just signed a bill banning even thinking gay thoughts. Plus, he lives almost next door to Sarah Palin! (almost)
The GOP candidate for president in 2016: Vladimir Putin!
Why play at being authoritarian when you can have the real thing?
For me, corporate data mining isn't benign. True, I can't be arrested by a corporation - yet. The majority on the current Court is blatantly encroaching on the Legislative Branch of the US. They just negated Congress entirely in striking down sections of the Voting Rights Act. The states now have carte blanche to manipulate the outcomes of elections. This court has afforded broad powers to corporations as well as personhood status. I think it is a mistake to minimize the nexus between corporate money and power over our everyday lives. If it weren't for the massive egos among the five, they might have already abdicated to the Koch brothers. As Charles Pierce refers to Wisconsin as the "wholly owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers", other state legislatures are subject to be Kochized. The Court majority lovingly advocates for States' Rights over justice. These corporations gather our most personal data and sell it multiple times to ????. I don't like being spied on by the NSA, but I am more fearful of Judicial and Legislative support for increasingly powerful corporations who fund campaigns and candidates in the manipulation of my personal liberties, finances, health care...... For me the real implications of the injustices wrought by those 5 pricks keeps me awake far more than the capture of my phone number or e-mail.
"...the protection guaranteed by the amendments (of the Constitution) is much broader in scope. The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect . . . They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations. They conferred as against the government the right to be left alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
Louis Brandeis
I'll side with Brandeis over Obama.
Re: Nobody poked me in the eye;
@Noodge; I liked the way you framed your point of view. I don't think one of us here at RC are particularly crazy about the data collection by our government or our corporate "friends" (can you "like" a corporation on Facebook? I don't know. I am not Facebooked.) Facts are the government has been collecting data on you since you got your SS# back in high school so you could work at the local gas station. How else are you going to get the check in the mail at the right address?
I fly the flag of privateer myself. I have a moral code that I follow and hold myself to level of social responsibility that suits that code.
For the most part I live way inside the coloring lines and I like it that way. Collect info on me all you want; I'm just another file for the collectors to wade through.
Let's say you like to go to the city and by chance bombs have been placed to blow up you and your loved ones as you enjoy the Statue of Liberty. Would you rather the cell phone data was not collected concerning the plan?
If the data collection really bothers you, give up the collection device. Not fair? Nothing is free. Frank Rich's essay is right on the money. Data given is data taken.
JJG,
The data are not given. The contents of my e-mails and phone calls are not the business of anyone except the person to whom I address the communication. Do you think the government ought to be allowed to scan all your snail mail looking for key words without a warrant?
And no, I don't want to give away my right to privacy in the hopes that perhaps it may someday stop a crime, in just the same way I don't want to give away any of my other rights. That's the old, "if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about" argument. The trade-off just isn't worth it.
And that's the last I'll say on this.
@Noodge: Good. It's getting tedious.
Noodge is missing an important point here, & it's my fault for not pointing it out, though both Diane & JJG have alluded to it.
First, on Brandeis. It's worth noting that when young Brandeis & Warren first articulated a right to privacy on which Noodge hangs his/her hat, it was in response to their horror at the intrusiveness of that newfangled device, the Kodak Brownie camera. How far we have come from Brownies.
I wrote that the difference between Google & the government was that Google couldn't arrest me. But there's another difference -- a critical one -- that I should have mentioned.
Three days after my husband died, I scratched up my car. I tried hosing off the car to see if maybe the marks were additions rather than scratches. No luck. So late last week I took the car into a local body shop & they gave me a $700 estimate for the repair. So I thought, "Gee, maybe I should just buy a new car." I Googled several makes of cars, & now of course every time I click on a commercial site -- including the papers that broke the NSA stories -- Guardian & the WashPo, I am treated to graphics of adorable cars.
If the NSA wanted to know whether or not I was looking for cars, they would have no trouble finding out. But here's the difference. They don't want to know. They don't care. So they are not bothering to access my car-hunting habits. Or anything else about me.
There you go. Google uses the information I involuntarily "share" with them. They use it in real time and they use it rather intrusively. (The cars spin around & zoom in & out in the ads. If I accidentally cursor over the ads, they blow up & obscure the print I'm reading.)
The government, by contrast, does not access that information, unless some law enforcement official suspects me of wrongdoing. In fact, if the police thought I might be running a carjacking ring, I'll bet they'd have to get a warrant to check out my car-clicking activities.
So who is more intrusive? Google or the government? I'd say Google. I don't know what data the NSA is collecting on me because I don't notice it. And neither do they, because they're not reading what they collect.
Yeah, I know I asked for the ads. Google doesn't provide its convenient service gratis, & the papers don't either. I have to pay for the use of these services by looking at car ads. It's a cost I'm willing to incur.
As I said, I think the FISA laws are too loosey-goosey, but the fact is that the government is not now breaching my private correspondence & it probably isn't breaching yours, either.
Marie
P.S. I took the car to another body shop. The guy looked at it & said, "Just a minute." He came back with a rag soaked in lacquer thinner, wiped down the scratch marks & almost all of them dissolved. He said he'd fix up the others, if I wanted, for $300, but I hadn't scratched through the paint, so no hurry. I'm not looking for a new car any longer. Could someone inform Google?
Dear Google,
Marie doesn't want a new car. Just a lacquer soaked rag.
So fuck off.
Thank you.
An unsolicited addendum to what has become tedious for some: I would trust that all who think privacy rights absolute and sacrosanct also contribute generously to Zero Population Growth, as I see the two issues to be obviously and inextricably linked.
@ Marie: The second body shop experience is the best news I've read since I began this thread. Bring that guy with the lacquer soaked rag a nice bottle of booze after you pay him the $300 and he'll be your car- go- to- guy forever.
Your other experience with car ads is exactly the kind of thing my husband was telling me about today. He was looking for some body gear that roofers wear to protect them from falling ( although he is getting too old to be fooling around on our roof, I say). Suddenly he is getting flash emails from various and sundry with ads for ladders, for body gear, for ropes,etc. So helpful, so annoying, so intrusive––all depends on how you look at it.
@Marie and AK
My goodness. I find myself laughing uncontrollably over your scratched car (although I know what a hassel it must have been) and AK's note to Google.
A day before the Massachusetts special election myself and a friend were out canvassing for Markey. At the end of the day I managed to have a minor accident which resulted in me having to search for a new car. Like you, I googled for days researching potential cars. I too noted the numerous car ads that showed up on various commercial sites I visited (including Realitychex).
A few weeks before the car fiasco I was researching birding sites for Ecuador and Bolivia (before Snowden news hit), and noted all sorts of ads popping up for Ecuador travel (guess Bolivia is not on googles radar). In this case it was helpful to me since the places being promoted are probably best avoided.
The car issue is settled. Travel destination is still to be determined. I'm thinking we may want to avoid airspace of Bolivia and Ecuador.