My expertise on national security law is nonexistent. My interest in byzantine political scheming is, if possible, even lower. I have hence outsourced my opinion on the matter to trusted friend and neighbor Julian Sanchez; if it pleases you, imagine that everything he writes on the subject has spawned a short blog post reading "What he said".
Copyright © 2010 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Never heard of the guy before or read his blog till now. Seems like pretty conventional left-liberal, but I'm presuming that there is some quirky, "libertarian" streak in him of the kind that some girls like.
Those like me, looking at 13% increases in our marginal tax rate, would much rather have the government listen to our overseas calls and leave us our money. Those who make more overseas phone calls, and earn less money, evidently have different preferences. They also tend to be a lot more sanctimonious.
y81,
I suggest that you do a little more Research on the extent of Gov't wiretapping.
Either that, or, otherwise, you're not as Sharp as you might imagine..
Except that it’s not just the increase in your marginal tax rate, it’s the new round of federal mandates on your employer (or your business if you’re an entrepreneur) and the federal takeover of your health care under Obama that comes with it.
Having the government surveil international communications is a pretty minor “intrusion” in the grant scheme of things.
y38: Right, a left-liberal who ran one of the most extensive Robert Nozick pages on the internet.
By the way, here are links to everything Sanchez has written about FISA.
I think the best posts are the responses to Matt Continetti and to Roger Pilon writing in the WSJ.
I have to say, simply not attempting to understand the not terribly difficult FISA wasn't what I expected from Megan. I assumed she would somehow support as she did the Iraq Invasion (she is the poster person for Pseudo-Libertarians after all). But I forgot how much she is swayed by the zeitgeist. Back in 02 and 02 and, hell 06, it was still cool to support Iraq. Now, not so much. Same with FISA. Oh, that Megan.
Thanks for the reminder... I had done a bunch of work on the Nozick pages that got lost in a crash, but I have been meaning -- maybe this weekend -- to get back to that and revive them.
My expertise on national security law is nonexistent. My interest in byzantine political scheming is, if possible, even lower.
Adding, it's cop-outs like this--opting out of easy libertarian analysis (e.g., Iraq Ivasion, George Bush, Jr., and FISA don't pass the smell test)--which allow Megan to stay in the good graces of (for some reason) influential crypto-right wingers like David Brooks. And Megan knows this. It's essentially Instapundit Lite ("Valerie Plame is, like, so boring and complicated, heavens"). As with other Wingnut Welfare recipients, she'll be just fine. Must be nice having connections and mailing it in.
OK, so this Sanchez is not a conventional left/liberal with some libertarian quirks who wants to raise my taxes, he's a Nozickian who wants to raise my taxes. Is that supposed to make me feel better?
y81,
to aid your Research: "The alliance between the US government and telcos to gather call records involving thousands of US and foreign citizens was constrained by legal worries and fears of public exposure. Even so, it took until 2004 for one unnamed carrier to break ranks and refuse to provide customer data, the paper reports.
Separately, US carrier Qwest refused to provide NSA spooks with access to local communications switches (a move that would have allowed surveillance of domestic phone calls without a court order) in early 2001 - before the devastating World Trade Center attacks in September that year.
Negotiations between the NSA and AT&T in February 2001 allegedly involved replicating a New Jersey network centre to allow the US signals intelligence "access to all the global phone and email traffic that ran through it". The incident has become one aspect of a lawsuit which also brings in allegations that Verizon set up a dedicated fibre-optic line from New Jersey to a large military facility in Quantico. Spooky.
An AT&T technician at the time has provided evidence supporting the allegations. However, other AT&T technicians are due to testify that the project was confined to improving internal communications within the NSA.
News that the NSA eavesdropped on the international communications of terrorism suspects making calls from the US without warrants first emerged two years ago. The latest revelations that this was a development of a much longer running practice that also involved US domestic calls come as the Bush administration is pushing Congress to pass legislation indemnifying telecoms carriers from liability in assisting law enforcement with warrantless eavesdropping programs. Since 2005, the warrantless wiretapping program has become the topic of 40 lawsuits. ®"
is only one aspect of an op that's been carried out for quite a long time..
Mark, whatever. I don't care about the details, so don't bore me. If the government will refrain from raising my taxes, they can listen to all my phone conversations. But you and your comrades are going to raise my taxes--and listen to my phone conversations, as it turns out--while prattling about how libertarian you are and how lucky I am to be able to contribute to your greater good. I'm unmoved.
Shorter y81: Regressive taxation + big government, Soviet-style snooping = Republican Utopia!
y81,
with this: "But you and your comrades are going to raise my taxes--and listen to my phone conversations"..you must be, beyond, Dense.
Good Luck, Pal, if you associate me with progressive taxation & Gov't disregard for the Bill of Rights.
Do me a favor and find anything I posted about a greater good--in the Marxist context that you are trying to convey--
Mark, I don't know anything about you, although I am disposed to dislike people who call me dense. What I do know is that the McArdles, Henleys and Sanchezes of the world advocate tirelessly for a Democratic president and a Democratic congress, which inevitably leads to higher taxes on me. And that, though they prattle about libertarianism, their actual positions on things like SCHIP or gasoline taxes tends to be indistinguishable from conventional left/liberalism. And that they display amazingly high levels of sanctimony and snottiness.
More shorter y81: Me getting a lower tax rate is the only thing that matters, even at the cost of the economy as a whole.
ed,
What this Economy needs is lower Taxes & less Regulation.
y81,
the Reason this: "indistinguishable from conventional left/liberalism" so aptly describes McArdle, and her fellow travelers, is, simply, the majority of their policy proposals come from:
Karl Marx's "10 Planks" to seize power and destroy freedom:
Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose.
A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax.
Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance.
Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels.
Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly.
Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State.
Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan.
Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.
Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country.
Free Education for All Children in Public Schools. Abolition of Children's Factory Labor in it's Present Form. Combination of Education with Industrial Production.
http://www.conservativeusa.org/10planksofcommunism.htm
as opposed to the Constitution, from Article VI:
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding..."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlevi.html
What this Economy needs is lower Taxes & less Regulation.
And more bold, rugged individualists like yourself. I remember my high school Libertarian Club fellas saying the same thing.
Thanks for the insightful comments; now you wanna start knitting dinner?
now you wanna start knitting dinner?
Posted by ed | June 29, 2008 10:17 AM
ed,
care to expound on that? I have no idea what you mean..
Why, did your Google machine break or something?