Sitting here at Blogapalooza on the Hill, and this dude walked in, so I flipped open the camera phone.

Anybody know this guy? Looks familiar.

I’m so glad that George Bush is committed to preserving the freedoms we Americans have, as he often likes to remind us, usually to the point of producing nausea at best, or sometimes violent diarrhea. In keeping with that tradition of reckless freedom-producing, he’s produced another one of those signing statements in the latest Postal bill that will give him sweeping new powers to open your mail without a warrant:

The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a “signing statement” that declared his right to open people’s mail under emergency conditions.

That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it…

Most of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act deals with mundane reform measures. But it also explicitly reinforced protections of first-class mail from searches without a court’s approval.

Yet in his statement Bush said he will “construe” an exception, “which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent … with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances.”

Bush cited as examples the need to “protect human life and safety against hazardous materials and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection.”

Now, I’m sure the conservative nutjobs will once again be okay with this, because, you know, if you’ve got nothing to hide, why would you care. But then again, since many of these people tend to be some of the most sexually repressed members of our society, aren’t they a little concerned about what the Prez might find in their mailbox?

Crossposted at five before chaos.

From the VT Dems:

The Vermont Democratic Party announced today that Jill Krowinski has been hired to serve as Executive Director.

Krowinski, a native of North Tonawanda , New York and currently of Burlington , came to Vermont in 2002 as a Field Coordinator for the Vermont Democratic Party. In 2003 she served as the Director for the Vermont Democratic House Campaign and in 2004 as Field Director for the Vermont Democratic Party.

In 2005, Krowinski worked for House Speaker Gaye Symington (D-Jericho) as her Assistant at the Statehouse. In June 2006, she left the Speaker’s Office to work on Peter Welch’s Congressional campaign as Field Director.

Congrats Jill! Hope the high-falootin’ new job doesn’t make you re-evaluate your taste in movies…

Groovy.

Sociopath/psychopath — the difference is only that a sociopath is less organized than a psychopath.  To get to the Presidency, even by fraud, requires a degree of organization that promotes Bush to psychopath. 

He is a murderer, liar, crook, and he and his administration have destroyed the rule of law, the constitution, and common decency. 

To have anything to do with them is to become an accessory after the fact.

Despite what the wingnuts say, the houses of Congress are based on the the houses of Parliament.

An ancient liberty of the lower house is the right to slam the door in the monarch’s face. 

This is just what the House of Representatives should do when the texas tyrant appears for the State of the Union.

The they should defund the White House itself — except for the Presidential salary which is constitutionally protected.  No staff, no heat, no light. 

From UPI:

And of course, we can’t talk about the “methods” because it might “help the enemy.” Techniques such as:

FBI agents documented more than two dozen incidents of possible mistreatment at the Guantanamo Bay military base, including one detainee whose head was wrapped in duct tape for chanting the Quran and another who pulled out his hair after hours in a sweltering room.

Lest you think this is just a partisan pissing match (and if torture isn’t enough to bug you), the Project on Government Oversight sums up the stakes:

Also to keep in mind, the Executive branch is denying Congress policy documents, not detailed information on what we actually know about Al Qaeda that could tip them off–again, if they were publicly disclosed.  If the Executive gets away with keeping these documents from Congress, then our constitutional system of separation of powers will have totally failed because Congress cannot oversee without basic information such as the policies of the Executive.  Leahy, Congress and the American public should fight for these documents.

Unintentional implications can be funny.

In his verbal dismissal of blogs, bloggers, and blog readers, AP reporter Ross Sneyd seems to have not been too concerned about collateral damage from his rhetoric. On Tuesday’s switchboard, Sneyd and VPR reporter John Dillon fielded a question from a caller who asked whether or not blogs might have an effect on the upcoming legislative session. Now let’s be honest here – the real answer is “who the hell knows” – we’re, after all, in uncharted territory here, and bloggers like myself, Philip Baruth, J.D. Ryan and others are just people with access to software, web space, and who possess a pathological need to type our opinions. Clearly blogs impacted the recent elections, but how much is an open question – just as open as the switchboard caller’s question.

Sneyd attempted to hedge his bet in his response, but quickly started his eyes rolling (here’s a link to an mp3 of the question and its responses):

Sneyd:
  “…I wonder if maybe some folks who are on the blogs think they have a little bit more power than in fact they do. You know a lot of these legislators – I shouldn’t say a lot – there are some legislators who don’t even know how to use a computer, let alone get influenced by the folks who are out there, uh, you know, the political activists. So, I think there may be some impact, but I think, really you have to spend time in the Statehouse to have much of an impact on what the agenda really is.”

Now, for the record, I don’t think Sneyd really believes what he incidentally implies in his response; that only those in the Statehouse can influence lawmakers (constituents can forget those letters, phone calls, emails and hometown personal contacts, I s’pose). Nor do I think he means to suggest that many lawmakers are just too stupid to be able to use email or visit a web page. (more on the flip)

Of course, maybe he does, what do I know?

I aint Markos, so I’m not going to bludgeon the fellow with this as he does when reporters casually dismiss political blogs, but it’s worth discussing why Sneyd would suggest that blogs and the internet are irrelevent when such an assertion is, frankly, demonstrably untrue. On this blog, we’ve had comments and/or diaries from legislators of all stripes; Republican, Progressive, and Democrat (all right, all right, put the knives away – I know that’s not all stripes…). I’ve also received input and story tips via email from sitting Representatives and Senators – and I know Baruth gets a lot more of those sorts of communications than I do.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not trying to toot my own horn. Fact is I just know a lot of legislators, and whatever handful read this particular blog may only do so precisely because they know me, or Jack, or one of the other front pagers. Who the hell really knows. The point is that to suggest that blogs, email and electronic activism in general have no impact just seems goofy on its face, and to do so with such ill-considered, cavalier language is odd.

In fact, John Dillon quickly spoke up to counter Sneyd’s haphazard blog blow-off:

Dillon:
“But on the other hand, I think its a way – the blogosphere – it’s another way that the public will provide feedback to the legislature. And we’ve seen on hot button issues that the email inboxes of the lawmakers get flooded. That happens with Governor’s office – and once an issue starts bouncing around, reverberating online – in the blogosphere – you know, people emailing each other whatever, then it can amplify, and it can become just one more feedback loop, if you will, for the lawmakers. 

And people- its interesting, that there’s sort of this political, I dont know what you want to call it, but sort of the cogncoscenti of political followers in Vermont who are reading 4 or 5 blogs on a daily basis, and what is said on those blogs does have impact at least on the conventional wisdom among those people  – so, in that sense there’s another way that it’ll feed back.”

Dillon’s answer seems like the clear-headed one; blogs are a function of the internet, which is a medium for communication. Things can get communicated through them. There are certainly some people who read the blogs, but how many is hard to say – making their impact hard to gauge, but certainly not as negligible as Sneyd suggests.

I believe this is what most people in and around the Statehouse would say in one way or another, and yet it is in stark contrast to Sneyd’s analysis – a condescension he felt strongly enough not to worry about how far he may have inadvertently spread that condescension in trying to justify it.

Is this just another example of that retro, traditional-media/blog distortion zone? Was Sneyd just having a bad day?

Why do I get the feeling we’re going to be having more and more of these sorts of discussions in the coming months…?

Coming in off the wires…

http://www.bizjourna…