Still, where the rubber hits the road on this issue, while VP Cheney is tying up DC traffic with his prolific motorcade to get his dog over to the vet, is that these gas leases are being aggresively exploited all along the west face of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains in both Colorado and New Mexico as well as the Chaco Canyon region. The gas wellheads required for such enterprise are particularly invasive as they are placed at short intervals, scar the land with extensive access networks, require intensive mechanical service and are maximized by the use of underground explosives. The state of New Mexico has defensively enacted a one year moratorium on new wellheads, which the Feds and their lessees and purchasers are routinely ignoring.

At risk is the pristine serenity of mountain hamlets like Crestone, Colorado, of the San Luis Valley, a mecca of spiritual retreats and home to bison, deer and elk and the mysterious archeologically significant Chacoan Domain. And lo and behold it appears to me that the principle contractor exploiting these reservations is one Halliburton Corporation. Go figure? Oh how to keep the public distracted from such things.

So that’s the news from the great Southwest. Other than that I have been buried under much snow and dallying about trying to survive the mountain life. I think, in retrospect, the journey over here to FDL makes sense especially because of the increased exposure that has followed. It took me a bit to see how this would work though.

I suppose I have been heartened by the contempt citations, if such a thing can be heartening. But then Constitutional Justice has her ways.

Bush is doing all he can on immunity but no one is listening because his lying has caught up to him and his alliance with Cheney just tanks him political capital is spent. So, McCain needs to become the “New Voice” on immunity because he is, after all, gaining momentum so he’ll be heard on this?

Did anyone think when they wrote this?

I say go for it McCain. Listen to the WSJ…You showed up to vote against the Constitution. A vote against the Constitution is a vote against security of American citizens.

Obama showed up and voted for the Constitution, which means he trumps you on security of American citizens.

Really, who at the WSJ thought this argument would work? Goodness, send them to head up the McCain campaign!!!

http://emptywheel.firedoglake……he-courts/

i was so angered by their letter i wrote my response to leahy & spectre in record time, a task made easier by only having to reverse their arguments, i.e.:

“The carrier immunity provision not only makes a mockery of the rule of law but provides unjust and unfair protection to companies who in a time of national crisis had a greater responsibility to ensure their actions complied with existing constitutional protections and promoted true national interests. Years of expensive litigation and potentially ruinous damages is the proper recourse for citizens whose privacy has been sacrificed at the altar of a national security apparatus run amok.”

Anyway, EW you are on fire with the forensic dissection of C. Rice’s rhetoric and now stripping down the code of the WSJ. Maybe its just euphoric recall from last February’s triumphs. In so many ways the WSJ is a talking points memo for Republican interests. The strategy is always deflection–just having something to say to divert attention away from the issue. I have just had too many dialogues with a family member who depends on the Journal for his bluster not to be convinced that this is part of its role.

By deploying misleading information tactically in this way the resources of the alternative point of view are consumed in addressing intentionally anti-constitutional if not irrational inhumane positions. Take for example the meme that because waterboarding is “psychological” and not “physical” it causes no real harm as if any science, complex as it may be, concerning the mind/body nexus did not exist. Its the kind of political theater necessary to maintain a culture of political and economic intimidation.

Still the point is, aside from the technical basis of the standing issue, that there is another way to see and understand the motive of the rhetoric that seeks to justifiy and defend the politics of fear and intimidation while clouding the ultimate issues. You are as adroit as anyone writing today to in deploying this skill.

Keep it up.

So WTF? Why are they continuing? Just to keep from losing ANYTHING at all costs?

(Sorry can’t get the link to TPMuckraker to work, it’s the latest story.)

No recess appointments or other crap this week.

I often point this out but the WSJ editorial is another example of the Right wing strategy of constructing a narrative, then sticking to it, and repeating it endlessly, regardless of how thoroughly and how often it is debunked.

You don’t want that.