Yes, he made his millions chasing ambulances and driving up all of

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

are calling Obama and saying NO to his stimulus package. I guess all his fearmongering didn't get to them! Where are all those people who are so helpless that only Obama and his stooges can help them? White House phone lines don't seem to correlate with his thoughts. Interesting!

You're right Obama, they didn't send you there to do the same thing OR to screw them over, both of which you are doing......over worse!

I don't understand why you condone corporate welfare/tax cheaters. Not surprised -- just don't understand.

Next time you make some colossal blunder at work, here's your excuse: "I was rushed". Apparently, that's good enough for the feds, who have sent around 10,000 checks to dead people...some of whom were never even in the Social Security system. Wonder where they're getting the names?

Of course, we knew that the fraud, abuse and waste would be gargantuan since the government has never been able to handle our money without fraud, waste and abuse.

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/your_money/consumer/090514_Dead_People_Get_Stimulus_Checks

The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans � most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.

It's the largest database ever assembled in the world, said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is to create a database of every call ever made within the nation's borders, this person added.

For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has detailed records of calls they made � across town or across the country � to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others.

The three telecommunications companies are working under contract with the NSA, which launched the program in 2001 shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the sources said. The program is aimed at identifying and tracking suspected terrorists, they said.

The sources would talk only under a guarantee of anonymity because the NSA program is secret.

Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, nominated Monday by President Bush to become the director of the CIA, headed the NSA from March 1999 to April 2005. In that post, Hayden would have overseen the agency's domestic call-tracking program. Hayden declined to comment about the program.

The NSA's domestic program, as described by sources, is far more expansive than what the White House has acknowledged. Last year, Bush said he had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop � without warrants � on international calls and international e-mails of people suspected of having links to terrorists when one party to the communication is in the USA. Warrants have also not been used in the NSA's efforts to create a national call database.

In defending the previously disclosed program, Bush insisted that the NSA was focused exclusively on international calls. In other words, Bush explained, one end of the communication must be outside the United States.

As a result, domestic call records � those of calls that originate and terminate within U.S. borders � were believed to be private.

Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA's domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.

Don Weber, a senior spokesman for the NSA, declined to discuss the agency's operations. Given the nature of the work we do, it would be irresponsible to comment on actual or alleged operational issues; therefore, we have no information to provide, he said. However, it is important to note that NSA takes its legal responsibilities seriously and operates within the law.

The White House would not discuss the domestic call-tracking program. There is no domestic surveillance without court approval, said Dana Perino, deputy press secretary, referring to actual eavesdropping.

She added that all national intelligence activities undertaken by the federal government are lawful, necessary and required for the pursuit of al-Qaeda and affiliated terrorists. All government-sponsored intelligence activities are carefully reviewed and monitored, Perino said. She also noted that all appropriate members of Congress have been briefed on the intelligence efforts of the United States.

The government is collecting external data on domestic phone calls but is not intercepting internals, a term for the actual content of the communication, according to a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the program. This kind of data collection from phone companies is not uncommon; it's been done before, though never on this large a scale, the official said. The data are used for social network analysis, the official said, meaning to study how terrorist networks contact each other and how they are tied together.

AT&T recently merged with SBC and kept the AT&T name. Verizon, BellSouth and AT&T are the nation's three biggest telecommunications companies; they provide local and wireless phone service to more than 200 million customers.

The three carriers control vast networks with the latest communications technologies. They provide an array of services: local and long-distance calling, wireless and high-speed broadband, including video. Their direct access to millions of homes and businesses has them uniquely positioned to help the government keep tabs on the calling habits of Americans.

Among the big telecommunications companies, only Qwest has refused to help the NSA, the sources said. According to multiple sources, Qwest declined to participate because it was uneasy about the legal implications of handing over customer information to the government without warrants.

Qwest's refusal to participate has left the NSA with a hole in its database. Based in Denver, Qwest provides local phone service to 14 million customers in 14 states in the West and Northwest. But AT&T and Verizon also provide some services � primarily long-distance and wireless � to people who live in Qwest's region. Therefore, they can provide the NSA with at least some access in that area.

Created by President Truman in 1952, during the Korean War, the NSA is charged with protecting the United States from foreign security threats. The agency was considered so secret that for years the government refused to even confirm its existence. Government insiders used to joke that NSA stood for No Such Agency.

In 1975, a congressional investigation revealed that the NSA had been intercepting, without warrants, international communications for more than 20 years at the behest of the CIA and other agencies. The spy campaign, code-named Shamrock, led to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was designed to protect Americans from illegal eavesdropping.

Enacted in 1978, FISA lays out procedures that the U.S. government must follow to conduct electronic surveillance and physical searches of people believed to be engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States. A special court, which has 11 members, is responsible for adjudicating requests under FISA.

Over the years, NSA code-cracking techniques have continued to improve along with technology. The agency today is considered expert in the practice of data mining � sifting through reams of information in search of patterns. Data mining is just one of many tools NSA analysts and mathematicians use to crack codes and track international communications.

Paul Butler, a former U.S. prosecutor who specialized in terrorism crimes, said FISA approval generally isn't necessary for government data-mining operations. FISA does not prohibit the government from doing data mining, said Butler, now a partner with the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, D.C.

The caveat, he said, is that personal identifiers � such as names, Social Security numbers and street addresses � can't be included as part of the search. That requires an additional level of probable cause, he said.

The usefulness of the NSA's domestic phone-call database as a counterterrorism tool is unclear. Also unclear is whether the database has been used for other purposes.

The NSA's domestic program raises legal questions. Historically, AT&T and the regional phone companies have required law enforcement agencies to present a court order before they would even consider turning over a customer's calling data. Part of that owed to the personality of the old Bell Telephone System, out of which those companies grew.

Ma Bell's bedrock principle � protection of the customer � guided the company for decades, said Gene Kimmelman, senior public policy director of Consumers Union. No court order, no customer information � period. That's how it was for decades, he said.

The concern for the customer was also based on law: Under Section 222 of the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling habits: whom a person calls, how often and what routes those calls take to reach their final destination. Inbound calls, as well as wireless calls, also are covered.

The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has no hard definition of violation. In practice, that means a single violation could cover one customer or 1 million.

In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree.

The NSA's domestic program began soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to the sources. Right around that time, they said, NSA representatives approached the nation's biggest telecommunications companies. The agency made an urgent pitch: National security is at risk, and we need your help to protect the country from attacks.

The agency told the companies that it wanted them to turn over their call-detail records, a complete listing of the calling histories of their millions of customers. In addition, the NSA wanted the carriers to provide updates, which would enable the agency to keep tabs on the nation's calling habits.

The sources said the NSA made clear that it was willing to pay for the cooperation. AT&T, which at the time was headed by C. Michael Armstrong, agreed to help the NSA. So did BellSouth, headed by F. Duane Ackerman; SBC, headed by Ed Whitacre; and Verizon, headed by Ivan Seidenberg.

AT&T, when asked about the program, replied with a comment prepared for USA TODAY: We do not comment on matters of national security, except to say that we only assist law enforcement and government agencies charged with protecting national security in strict accordance with the law.

In another prepared comment, BellSouth said: BellSouth does not provide any confidential customer information to the NSA or any governmental agency without proper legal authority.

Verizon, the USA's No. 2 telecommunications company behind AT&T, gave this statement: We do not comment on national security matters, we act in full compliance with the law and we are committed to safeguarding our customers' privacy.

Qwest spokesman Robert Charlton said: We can't talk about this. It's a classified situation.

In December, The New York Times revealed that Bush had authorized the NSA to wiretap, without warrants, international phone calls and e-mails that travel to or from the USA. The following month, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group, filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T. The lawsuit accuses the company of helping the NSA spy on U.S. phone customers.

Last month, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales alluded to that possibility. Appearing at a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Gonzales was asked whether he thought the White House has the legal authority to monitor domestic traffic without a warrant. Gonzales' reply: I wouldn't rule it out. His comment marked the first time a Bush appointee publicly asserted that the White House might have that authority.

The domestic and international call-tracking programs have things in common, according to the sources. Both are being conducted without warrants and without the approval of the FISA court. The Bush administration has argued that FISA's procedures are too slow in some cases. Officials, including Gonzales, also make the case that the USA Patriot Act gives them broad authority to protect the safety of the nation's citizens.

The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., would not confirm the existence of the program. In a statement, he said, I can say generally, however, that our subcommittee has been fully briefed on all aspects of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. ... I remain convinced that the program authorized by the president is lawful and absolutely necessary to protect this nation from future attacks.

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., declined to comment.

One major telecommunications company declined to participate in the program: Qwest.

According to sources familiar with the events, Qwest's CEO at the time, Joe Nacchio, was deeply troubled by the NSA's assertion that Qwest didn't need a court order � or approval under FISA � to proceed. Adding to the tension, Qwest was unclear about who, exactly, would have access to its customers' information and how that information might be used.

Financial implications were also a concern, the sources said. Carriers that illegally divulge calling information can be subjected to heavy fines. The NSA was asking Qwest to turn over millions of records. The fines, in the aggregate, could have been substantial.

The NSA told Qwest that other government agencies, including the FBI, CIA and DEA, also might have access to the database, the sources said. As a matter of practice, the NSA regularly shares its information � known as product in intelligence circles � with other intelligence groups. Even so, Qwest's lawyers were troubled by the expansiveness of the NSA request, the sources said.

The NSA, which needed Qwest's participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard.

Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies. It also tried appealing to Qwest's patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA representative suggested that Qwest's refusal to contribute to the database could compromise national security, one person recalled.

In addition, the agency suggested that Qwest's foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government. Like other big telecommunications companies, Qwest already had classified contracts and hoped to get more.

Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.

The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them, one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events.

In June 2002, Nacchio resigned amid allegations that he had misled investors about Qwest's financial health. But Qwest's legal questions about the NSA request remained.

Unable to reach agreement, Nacchio's successor, Richard Notebaert, finally pulled the plug on the NSA talks in late 2004, the sources said.

decision without thinking about all she might miss with her kids. My mom was at a lot of the things I did in school. However, my dad was at work. He was supporting his family by making a living. He was making our situation better by working that overtime so we could afford stuff. Would I have liked my dad to be at my tennis match.....sure. But the reality is that even though he wasn't there watching, he still was literally the one supporting me and I appreciated and loved him for that.

As for Palin, did you ever think that maybe....just maybe she is willing to sacrifice time with her kids to make a better country for them as well as all of us? Have they asked Obama about sacrificing time with his kids? No....because we all just assume Michelle will take care of the kids.

And, yes, those dang whacko liberals like Robert F. Kennedy and those of his ilk should be ashamed of themselves for connecting the presence of thimerosal in vaccines and resultant autism and attempting to STOP it. Who cares about the children who are already here? The most important thing is that we make sure not to hurt those inanimate cells in a petrie dish.

And, yes, it's certainly has been proven that there can be side effects associated with the smallpox vaccine where a small percentage of people might get sick and die. We COULD maybe let the people CHOOSE whether they want the vaccine or not (if enough of it ever actually EXISTED to protect the entire country), but, no, free choice isn't a very "red" thing to do. So the only logical thing to do is make sure that we deny the vaccine to all Americans so we can ALL die if terrorists decide to use that as a form of bio warfare. (By the way, I truly doubt that lawsuits will be much of an issue if we're all DEAD.)

Right? I mean, you "red" guys know what should be allowed and denied in the life of every single American, don't you? You've got some kind of special "divine knowledge" where you know what I should be "allowed" to do with my own personal body, who I'm "allowed" to love, how I'm "allowed" to plan my family, when I decide I'm "allowed" to die, and which God I'm "allowed" to worship without being doomed to eternal damnation?

Title of you post is lifted straight out of TT112OldTimer's post responding to Free Speech Rocks. When spinning soooo out of control that the brain becomes blank, you can always resort to plagiary. Hello. Are you listening? Vitriol out, vitriol in. You might be shocked by how much respect you earn with just the simple gesture of extending some. Respect is NOT a 4-letter word.

Common sense is exactly what I used when I decided to attack my own bigoted tendencies back when I was still a teenager. I did not learn any of that from books or courses I took in school. I took it to the streets and reaped benefits beyond measure from those lessons.

Au contraire. The bluster of bigots is easy to bury under fact and logic. No need to be thwarted by that. Their reservoir of insults runs very shallow, but the intellect is a well that one can dig as deep as is necessary. Fact/truth is another arch-enemy of the bigot. You at least had the wisdom not to attempt to ridicule the context post since you knew you would be in way over your head and besides, you are allergic to the other side of the coin. As they say, if you can�t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. It can�t be much fun to find yourself dumbfounded by your own narrow mind. Frustrating too...remember it well.

On the shortcut post: That was your snipe, not mine. Snipe begets tripe. Vtriol out/vitriol in. Garbage out/garbage in. Is there an echo in here?

Not the slightest bit interested in agreement, validation or vindication. I am secure enough by now not to need all of that. But in political contexts, the journey down the road to consensus will never begin in the absence of flexibility, open-mindedness and a good dose of patience.

What part of my posts reflect your tactics do you not understand? You absolutely refuse to look at yourself in the mirror, but you do know enough to be outranged when someone sends you your own reflection. It�s not a pretty sight and furthermore, you become every bit as enraged as you seem to think I am. You are constitutionally incapable of seeing what a spiteful little vixen you become when your brick-wall logic is thrown back in you face.

No surprise there. Bigotry is always blind. Here�s another example you are bound to ignore: You are so driven by your hatred of illegals that you would actually weigh in on the side of transnationals and cast your vote for the party who empowers them to outsource your profession overseas and drive your own wages into the ground.

Well shut my mouth! Could it be that you have finally run out of insults in the face of the realities of logic and have arrived on the threshold of the next level where most other right-wingers eventually find themselves...running for the hills and back into the open arms of the choir members? You are big on clich�. Here�s one for you...you can run, but you can�t hide. Have a safe journey and I am �sending up a prayer� that you find the sanctuary you seek.

Global Warming - Geo Engineering

More and more evidence is accumulating that global warming caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions is occurring at an accelerating rate and that changes to the Earth's climate brought about by this warming are occurring much more rapidly than previously predicted. For example, the loss of permanent sea ice in the Arctic may now be on a trajectory to reduce the summer ice pack to zero by 2040, an outcome that only a few years ago wasn't supposed to happen before 2080. For a short explanation of the science behind the global warming greenhouse effect see Global Warming Science Basics

Along with the loss of habitat for polar bears and other Arctic wildlife that this wholesale melting of sea ice would bring comes the possibility of more rapid movement of glaciers held in check by the sea ice as well as climatic changes brought about by less reflection of sunlight and greater absorption of solar radiation by the exposed sea water.

At some point, the changes in the Arctic may lead to irreversible and unfavorable changes to the global climate such that even attempts at stabilizing or cooling the atmosphere may not be able to put Climate Humpty Dumpty back together again. For example, sea level rise due to a combination of thermal expansion of sea water and melting ice sheets may not be reversible in this century, leading to loss of coastal land and massive dislocation of coastal populations.

Global attempts to reign in man-made greenhouse gas emissions are not succeeding. Countries participating in the late starting and ill-planned Kyoto Protocol are finding it difficult to meet its modest emission reduction targets, while it is now clear that non-participating countries, like the U.S. have no real plans for reducing emissions.

There is also uncertainty as to the scope and requirements of any follow on treaty to Kyoto or whether any treaty or succession of treaties will achieve the desired reductions in emissions in time. Economic mechanisms like cap and trade emission programs have yet to be demonstrated to be effective in the short term for controlling greenhouse gas emissions in the absence of alternative technologies.

Technological changes that will be required to reduce emissions will take decades to implement, if not the rest of this century, due to a combination of lack of progress in developing new technologies and the installed and rapidly growing base of emission sources that run the gamut from 550MW coal fired power plants to rice paddies. Against this backdrop of melting ice, failed treaties, uncooperative governments and lack of replacement technologies, the nascent field of geoengineering has begun to receive attention from the media and policymakers.

Geoengineering or macro-engineering is the deliberate attempt by man to alter the global or regional climate by reducing the amount of solar radiation that is absorbed by the planet, the amount of carbon dioxide (the principal greenhouse gas) that is in the atmosphere or by manipulating ocean currents to redirect heat already in the ocean-atmosphere system.

While geoengineering technologies are often viewed as science fiction or simply not doable in time to stop global warming, some can probably be developed and applied soon enough to hold off the coming global climate catastrophe and within 5-10 years.

Although unilateral action on the part of the U.S. or other nations could be taken, due to logistical and geopolitical issues, it is more likely and desirable that an internationally sanctioned and supervised effort be carried out instead.

Indeed, no single geoengineering technology should be considered as "The Solution" and instead, a portfolio of these technologies should be developed, since any one might have negative side effects or other limitations that would make it unacceptable as a stand-alone treatment.

These technologies should only be considered for use as delaying tactics, to give us time to develop replacements for technologies that produce greenhouse gases. They shouldn't and cannot be considered as alternatives to reducing emissions, since most either have a limit as to how much warming they can offset or they can only address one facet of the problem.

For example, plans have been developed to reflect or scatter sunlight to reduce the amount of solar radiation that is re-radiated as infrared radiation. Some of these plans like those involving aerosols or space borne reflectors and lenses can theoretically be carried out on a scale to match all future emissions generated warming or even to roll back previous warming, while others like the plan to cover parts of the world's deserts can only address a finite amount of warming due to a limited supply of land.

However, these proposals do nothing to stop or reverse acidification of surface ocean waters by carbon dioxide or to remove the threat posed by the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in absorbing infrared radiation should the sunlight reflection/scattering scheme(s) be stopped. Removal of climatologically significant quantities of carbon dioxide from ambient air either by biological or chemical means is not possible with current technologies.

Various geoengineering technologies are discussed and analyzed here including those that attempt to reduce the amount of incoming sunlight that is converted to infrared radiation. Comments are welcomed.

http://www.global-warming-geo-engineering.org/