Comments on: Don’t Gag Ma Bell

By: Hmmm

Hmmm — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 06:00:56 +0000

(Sorry for cross-posting)

I’m kind of surprised we haven’t yet had a nationwide pattern of people spraypainting the word SPY on AT&T-logo’ed vehicles and equipment. Seems a natural.

I am just observing, not advocating.

By: selise

selise — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:23:37 +0000

that is surprising and disappointing.

… especially if it was not done at as last resort because of some on-going problem.

By: Sedgequill

Sedgequill — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:24:25 +0000

I formed the impression, based on experience under a different user name, that Crooks and Liars blocks commenting from at least some of the Tor anonymity system’s exit node IP addresses. There are several “progressive” blog sites that do that, and the HaloScan commenting system blocks all Tor-user comments, or at least has the option to do so (you don’t know who you’re missing, Digby, although your traffic numbers may rank high). I usually move along when that happens and don’t go back often.

Some site admins take a radical approach and aren’t concerned about blocking many visitors to get one troll or undesirable. Some seem to resent the visitor’s use of an anonymization tool, as though it conveys distrust; those who think that way don’t appreciate the preference of many users not to have their web activities compiled at the ISP or elsewhere.

By: selise

selise — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:48:33 +0000

good – i’ll hang here after this for a bit and make sure i know which bits you are talking about… sorry i can’t stopy to try to figure it out now.

By: skdadl

skdadl — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:44:24 +0000

PS: I know that Siegelmann wasn’t one of the purged prosecutors, but you know what I mean — that general turf. It was an interesting and effective shift of topic when Davis did it.

By: Leen

Leen — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:43:27 +0000

Glad to hear about Leahy (do not have access to listening right now)

bmaz would take what you call your “pea brain” any day. Thanks for what you do!

By: JTMinIA

JTMinIA — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:40:50 +0000

I just searched around and reread some things, but I’m more confused than before.

How can Leahy be talking about a filibuster when there’s an UC controlling the debate and subsequent voting? Isn’t Dodd, for example, already limited to four hours?

By: bmaz

bmaz — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:40:20 +0000

Yep that is effectively correct. I am doing a more detailed post that will be up sometime in the next 2 or 3 hours, but i got a bunch of junk boiling at one time right now….

By: skdadl

skdadl — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:39:03 +0000

No hurry, selise. There are two exchanges in particular that I think should be added to what’s already available. One is Johnson vs Mukasey, in full (all that’s there now is Mukasey on DoJ retaliation against TPM). The other is Artur Davis’s zingers right at the end of the hearings. Davis was going after the prosecutor purge, three cases especially: Siegelmann, Iglesias, and McKay. Davis really caught Mukasey off his stride, I think, because that subject hadn’t been the one he’d had to work on much before. Davis was really bang bang bang on, which was a great way to end.

Good vids of Delahunt, Schiff, and Nadler are already there. I’m sure there’s more that matters, but those are the ones I was most after.

By: cboldt

cboldt — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:38:32 +0000

This is really encouraging if Leahy intends to join in a filibuster. I really don’t think that fits in with the plan that everyone was expecting for tomorrow.

Leahy’s statement and intention to oppose limiting debate is perfectly in harmony with the path this was set on. It’s no surprise to me at any rate. He’s an exceptionally diligent advocate.

DiFi asked for the yeas and nays.

That’s a formality that creates a roll call vote, when the vote is taken. No votes today, stack of votes tommorrow.