Comments on: There Isn’t Enough Lipstick . . . http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/ Firedoglake weblog Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:59:56 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: parrot http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484779 parrot Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:28:16 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484779 <p>It is un-Constitutional on its face. Just hope that the Congress gets its act together and demands an explanation from this so-called President about how this could be legal…or can we just get on to impeachment of this administration NOW!</p> It is un-Constitutional on its face. Just hope that the Congress gets its act together and demands an explanation from this so-called President about how this could be legal…or can we just get on to impeachment of this administration NOW!

]]> By: Les Lambert http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484216 Les Lambert Wed, 31 Jan 2007 07:43:04 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484216 <p>can you say “Zampolit”?</p> can you say “Zampolit”?

]]> By: accountability http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484189 accountability Wed, 31 Jan 2007 06:43:31 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484189 <p>What I would like to understand is where do these bills come from?<br /> Who makes them up… meaning, who thought of it?<br /> why did they think of it? what conversation was taking place where when someone thought/said this seems like a good idea?<br /> And why are these things announced after the fact? Is that even legal?<br /> (HA!… like that matters to them.)<br /> I really don’t get it.<br /> I cannot believe that the person who signed the bill came up with the idea on his own. Though, since it is destructive and adds another stick to the camels back, perhaps I am wrong.</p> <p>How do these things get started and get finished, and why are there not hearings or discussions with the congress before this can be made law?</p> <p>Sorry for the ignorance, not a lawyer, newbie here.</p> What I would like to understand is where do these bills come from?
Who makes them up… meaning, who thought of it?
why did they think of it? what conversation was taking place where when someone thought/said this seems like a good idea?
And why are these things announced after the fact? Is that even legal?
(HA!… like that matters to them.)
I really don’t get it.
I cannot believe that the person who signed the bill came up with the idea on his own. Though, since it is destructive and adds another stick to the camels back, perhaps I am wrong.

How do these things get started and get finished, and why are there not hearings or discussions with the congress before this can be made law?

Sorry for the ignorance, not a lawyer, newbie here.

]]> By: Brian Boru http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484168 Brian Boru Wed, 31 Jan 2007 05:58:46 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-484168 <p>Didnt’ we used to call these people comissars?</p> Didnt’ we used to call these people comissars?

]]> By: maddy http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483966 maddy Wed, 31 Jan 2007 03:20:44 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483966 <p>I would say that it is time for him to be fired by the donald. Kicked to the curb so to speak along with the rest of the party offal.</p> I would say that it is time for him to be fired by the donald. Kicked to the curb so to speak along with the rest of the party offal.

]]> By: mrJJ http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483964 mrJJ Wed, 31 Jan 2007 03:19:13 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483964 <p>FBI turns to broad new wiretap method</p> <p>The FBI appears to have adopted an invasive Internet surveillance technique that collects far more data on innocent Americans than previously has been disclosed. </p> <p>Instead of recording only what a particular suspect is doing, agents conducting investigations appear to be assembling the activities of thousands of Internet users at a time into massive databases, according to current and former officials. That database can subsequently be queried for names, e-mail addresses or keywords.</p> <p>Such a technique is broader and potentially more intrusive than the FBI’s Carnivore surveillance system, later renamed DCS1000. It raises concerns similar to those stirred by widespread Internet monitoring that the National Security Agency is said to have done, according to documents that have surfaced in one federal lawsuit, and may stretch the bounds of what’s legally permissible. </p> <p><a href="http://news.com.com/FBI">http://news.com.com/FBI</a> turns to broad new wiretap method/2100-7348_3-6154457.html?tag=alert</p> FBI turns to broad new wiretap method

The FBI appears to have adopted an invasive Internet surveillance technique that collects far more data on innocent Americans than previously has been disclosed.

Instead of recording only what a particular suspect is doing, agents conducting investigations appear to be assembling the activities of thousands of Internet users at a time into massive databases, according to current and former officials. That database can subsequently be queried for names, e-mail addresses or keywords.

Such a technique is broader and potentially more intrusive than the FBI’s Carnivore surveillance system, later renamed DCS1000. It raises concerns similar to those stirred by widespread Internet monitoring that the National Security Agency is said to have done, according to documents that have surfaced in one federal lawsuit, and may stretch the bounds of what’s legally permissible.

http://news.com.com/FBI turns to broad new wiretap method/2100-7348_3-6154457.html?tag=alert

]]> By: clueless http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483962 clueless Wed, 31 Jan 2007 03:18:45 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483962 <p><a href="#comment-483806"><em>MsAnnaNOLA @ 121 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-483789"><em>Oklahoma kiddo @ 106</em></a></p> <blockquote><p>Five government officials, including ex-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, also have testified that they discussed Plame and her CIA job with Libby before July 10.</p> <p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070130/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_trial;_ylt=An2G20oZ7m22ybITXK4NoPOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ–">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....0bQ–</a></p></blockquote> <p>Ok why didn’t he plead out again…I mean won’t it be a longer sentence for the guy who doesn’t cooperate?</p></blockquote> <p>OR, maybe he and Fitz have an agreement: Let me batter you (AND the White House) in court, and I’ll take it easy on sentancing. But at least you (and I) get to fuck this White House over!</p> MsAnnaNOLA @ 121

Oklahoma kiddo @ 106

Five government officials, including ex-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, also have testified that they discussed Plame and her CIA job with Libby before July 10.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..0bQ–

Ok why didn’t he plead out again…I mean won’t it be a longer sentence for the guy who doesn’t cooperate?

OR, maybe he and Fitz have an agreement: Let me batter you (AND the White House) in court, and I’ll take it easy on sentancing. But at least you (and I) get to fuck this White House over!

]]> By: clueless http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483959 clueless Wed, 31 Jan 2007 03:16:29 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483959 <p><a href="#comment-483806"><em>MsAnnaNOLA @ 121 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-483789"><em>Oklahoma kiddo @ 106</em></a></p> <blockquote><p>Five government officials, including ex-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, also have testified that they discussed Plame and her CIA job with Libby before July 10.</p> <p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070130/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_trial;_ylt=An2G20oZ7m22ybITXK4NoPOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ–">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....0bQ–</a></p></blockquote> <p>Ok why didn’t he plead out again…I mean won’t it be a longer sentence for the guy who doesn’t cooperate?</p></blockquote> <p>Man it sure does seem like he’s taking his lumps pretty heavy so far. Curious strategy.</p> <p>Maybe he figures he’s fucked either way, so he’s sliming the White House - ‘no pardon, fine I’ll go to trial and expose all your shit. Either way, I’m fucked. By you.’</p> MsAnnaNOLA @ 121

Oklahoma kiddo @ 106

Five government officials, including ex-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, also have testified that they discussed Plame and her CIA job with Libby before July 10.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..0bQ–

Ok why didn’t he plead out again…I mean won’t it be a longer sentence for the guy who doesn’t cooperate?

Man it sure does seem like he’s taking his lumps pretty heavy so far. Curious strategy.

Maybe he figures he’s fucked either way, so he’s sliming the White House – ‘no pardon, fine I’ll go to trial and expose all your shit. Either way, I’m fucked. By you.’

]]> By: Judy http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483957 Judy Wed, 31 Jan 2007 03:14:05 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483957 <p>So much for the party that hates bureaucracy. He wants to shrink government by creating this new office that will require another budgetary stream within an agency’s budge.</p> <p>I think Congress has to approve changes in agency structure and this is a major change in agency structure. Are the policy office appointees subject to the same Senatorial scrutiny as the other high-level appointees?</p> So much for the party that hates bureaucracy. He wants to shrink government by creating this new office that will require another budgetary stream within an agency’s budge.

I think Congress has to approve changes in agency structure and this is a major change in agency structure. Are the policy office appointees subject to the same Senatorial scrutiny as the other high-level appointees?

]]> By: michael72 http://firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483953 michael72 Wed, 31 Jan 2007 03:10:51 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/30/there-isnt-enough-lipstick/#comment-483953 <p>great post, scarecrow, I appreciate your past efforts (having lived in CA for 10 years and being quite knowledgeable about environmental/energy issues) and your writing about this today. </p> <p>there isn’t enough lipstick in all the macy’s stores in the world that can dress up this pig….and make him/her kissable or attractive. bleck!!<br /> my god can america survive this kind of assault?</p> great post, scarecrow, I appreciate your past efforts (having lived in CA for 10 years and being quite knowledgeable about environmental/energy issues) and your writing about this today.

there isn’t enough lipstick in all the macy’s stores in the world that can dress up this pig….and make him/her kissable or attractive. bleck!!
my god can america survive this kind of assault?

]]>