Comments (89)

Anonymous wrote on August 22, 2007 5:43 PM:

Oh no!!!! Do what he wants and don't ask questions or we're all going to DIE!!!!!!

seamus wrote on August 22, 2007 5:46 PM:

Like all good authoritarians, McConnell blames the victims for their own demise, pro-actively. Just can't win, can we? No matter what the subject of the debate, national security trumps the constitution, according to this hack. What a crock of shit. Terrorists would never have guessed that the NSA was gonna spy on them, but stupid Congress blew the whistle and now 'mericans are gonna die.

JohnW1141 wrote on August 22, 2007 5:53 PM:

I just lvoe the way they simplify it; "we're killing 'bad guys'"..."the 'bad guys' are trying to kill us"

When I was a kid going to the movies to see westerns it was always the goodies vs the baddies.

They talk to us like were frikkin 10 year olds.

gcs wrote on August 22, 2007 5:53 PM:

Silly me, but wasn't our "open society" one of those freedoms "they" hate us for? How can anyone in his right mind take these clowns seriously another minute longer?

M.CT wrote on August 22, 2007 5:57 PM:

The very same Sylvestre Reyes who couldn't tell the difference between Shi'a and Sunnis. No wonder he has nothing to say about McConnell. The guy's way out of his depth here. And the dem leadership wonders why congress has sunk to 18% approval rating? No balls, and no brains either.

Anonymous wrote on August 22, 2007 6:01 PM:

My goodness, these guys have a Col. Nathan Jessup orientation, for sure.

From "A Few Good Men":

"You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.

We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand to post."

I suspect these words will at some point be delivered by the Vice President.

Anonymous wrote on August 22, 2007 6:06 PM:

So the new talking point is, "Shut up and nobody gets hurt." And aren't American already dying in Iraq and Afghanistan? And oh yeah, weren't the Republicanz asleep at the wheel when 3,000 Americans died 6 years ago?

One more time - why would I believe a word these clowns say when they have been consistently wrong for the last 6 years? I'm not irrational.

Richard M. Mathews wrote on August 22, 2007 6:07 PM:

We should take McConnell very seriously. We should not debate this any further. Just let the new anti-FISA law expire, and go back to the old FISA.

bmaz wrote on August 22, 2007 6:11 PM:

200 man hours for a subpoena? What an unequivocal pile of crap. Nothing short of a bald face lie. That is the footwork and elbow grease they are doing, and are supposed to be doing, anyway. If, from that, they develop information on a specific person or entity that rises to a legal threshold level, they then go get a warrant to do so and that process is pretty streamlined at that point. They are granted 99% per cent of the time. They just don't want to be supervised in their illegal and immoral activities. What McConnell is saying here is akin to saying it takes a cop 8 hours to arrest a criminal traffic offender, when what he has done is spend 7 hours and 45 minutes sitting in his cruiser eating donuts and then pulls someone over.

illlich wrote on August 22, 2007 6:11 PM:

The motto of New Hampshire, "Live Free or Die", may explain why that usually Republican-leaning state is deserting the GOP as of late. There are a lot of us silly Americans who understand what's at stake here, and have no qualms about the possibility that our freedoms may mean a less secure society. We all have to grow up sometime and leave the protection of mommy and daddy, and face the dangers of the real world. We all have to die sometime, whether we do it proud and free, or scared and shackled. I always thought it was an American trait to prefer to die free than live under tyranny (and make no mistake-- nullifying an important part of the Constitution is certainly a step towards tyranny.)

NOT FISA confused wrote on August 22, 2007 6:15 PM:

Kagro X has a new post on TNH that quotes Wikipedia on the origins of FISA. Starts with "(FISA) …resulted from extensive investigations by Senate Committees into the legality of domestic intelligence activities". Seems like we're headed in the right direction after all, or would be if we could get the Dems in either house to grow a set of…

SC=brain, as in GET ONE, DEMS!!! Prove you're not W's puppies.

Bushie wrote on August 22, 2007 6:15 PM:

This administration and the fear mindset it perpetrates, has caused more American deaths than our friends at NSA or DHLS will ever save.

Jane wrote on August 22, 2007 6:21 PM:

I lay any effects of disclosure at the feet of a dishonest and secretive inhabitant of the Oval Office. When we had Presidents we could trust we could handle things more on the basis of trust. Bush has shown that he cannot be trusted and so he has to be closely watched.

When you lie about things like WMDs, don't expect to be trusted about warrants.

Legalize wrote on August 22, 2007 6:21 PM:

Is Canada taking applications?

Anonymous wrote on August 22, 2007 6:35 PM:

But remember, it was a Clinton bouncer that looked through approximately 300 FBI files in the White House basement.

So really, what's the difference?

audiophileguy wrote on August 22, 2007 6:41 PM:

It is beyond ironic to see that most Americans can simultaneously accept comments such as those above from Mr. McConnell, while the White House claims on a daily basis that we are fighting to preserve and protect freedom. Unbelieveable! George Orwell's predictions were far more subtle than the reality we are facing today.

Duckman GR wrote on August 22, 2007 6:43 PM:

Jane, you ignoran, oops, sorry, Jane, you nailed it. If the White House were interested in government and the Constitution and the ideals of the Declaration of Independence, they would have worked with Congress to address valid legal questions that had arisen. But, unfortunately, they aren't, and they didn't.

This whole FISA thing could have been dealt with relatively easily if normal and sane people were involved on both sides. But only on one side, and the weaker side at that, not so easy.

tekel wrote on August 22, 2007 7:00 PM:

So people are going to die... OK. Do we get to pick which ones? If so, that sounds like a pretty sweet deal to me.

epistemology wrote on August 22, 2007 7:05 PM:

My question for the fearful Mr. McConnell:

Do you think this administrations outing of a covert CIA agent (Plame) could have reluted in the death of Americans or our allies?

Jeff wrote on August 22, 2007 7:05 PM:

I think you're looking at this all wrong. The Neo-Con Republicans have used fear to get their way for years because it's the one thing they themselves understand. The ones making the decisions in the White Hose today are not a Col Jessup mentality at all. Marines have guts, these guys never served.

There are a lot more combat veterans in the Democratic Houses than there are in the Republican Houses. What the Republicans will never understand is there is true courage in this Country. A willingness to die for our hard won freedoms, to fight for our liberty and our country. Veterans understand this and as a result, they don’t scare so easily.

Nathan Hale said, “Give me liberty or give me death". He did not say, “Take away my freedoms, just don’t hurt me”. Patrick Henry said "I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country", and he meant it! Countless others through our Nations history have refused to take one step back out of fear. This type of courage is lost on a chicken-hawk mentality like those in the White House today. These guys would NEVER consider risking their lives, so the very thought that their fear tactics wouldn’t work is beyond comprehension. "Let us do what we want or the terrorists are gonna gitcha!" has been the line. “You have to give up your freedoms to stay safe! 9-11 changed EVERYTHING!!” These guys would not fight when their country needed them. (I think they like to call it, cut and run). To put it simply, they were afraid to die. They have always assumed the majority of Americans are the same way so they use fear to get what they want.

I think America is tired of being afraid and the chicken-hawk Neo-Con’s just don’t understand why. I think the White house is losing their best weapon. Worse, I think America's fear is turning to anger and it's coming on like an ocean tide. I think Rove knew this. He did what chicken-hawks always do, he cut and ran.

johnnydoughey wrote on August 22, 2007 7:16 PM:

Two thoughts...

1. McConnell is forewarning us that the administration is actually breaking the laws of the nation, but it has to be done to stop the bad guys from killing us...

2. McConnell is forewarning us that the administration is so inept that it is not capable of actually protecting us in any way... that all this secrecy and signing statements and public discourse is only to hide the fact that we are just as open to attack today as before 9/11. We are just attempting to fool the bad guys by scaring them out of doing it...

I myself choose number 3...

Numbers 1 and 2 are both absolutely true....

(codeword: school... as in a place Bush would have actually had to attend and pay attention in if he hadn't been a president's son)

Damian wrote on August 22, 2007 7:21 PM:

Go Cheney yourself, McConnell! You are a traitor, plain and simple.

Michael Lafferty wrote on August 22, 2007 7:27 PM:

Where to begin? Sigh…

Admiral McConnell is not particularly well regarded in the intelligence community, because he comes from the technical perspective, and his outlook conflicts with the human intelligence types.

The very idea of a Director of National Intelligence roils the CIA—among other agencies—because we already had, effectively, a DNI in the form of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. The problem wasn't one of structure, frankly, it was that far less than ideal leaders—some of whom could reasonably be labeled incompetent—ran the agency, and elevated a number of individuals to levels well beyond their demonstrated capabilities and competence. Hmm… 'leaders' like George Tenet, Porter Goss and Dusty Foggo come to mind.

Now we have yet another layer of bureaucracy and 'politics' injected into the fractured and competitive intelligence framework, coupled with the serious, long term damage to it because of the actions of individuals like Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. And, this new structure is headed by an individual unpopular in the intelligence arena, with his own agenda of pushing the envelope to engage in activities, and operate in secret, well beyond any acceptable level. Aided by an anxious administration, and abetted by an apparently neutered Congress.

The provisions of FISA aren't much different than the 4th amendment to the US Constitution regarding search and seizure. The concept is that limits exist to protect citizens against intrusions and misconduct on the part of government. Reasonable exceptions to the requirement of a search warrant have emerged over time - they include provisions to act without a warrant to prevent the loss of destruction of evidence, to prevent serious bodily injury or death, and so on. But the basic requirement to obtain a court sanctioned warrant remains. It was so with the FISA court: provisions were put in place to allow initial actions to preserve evidence that might otherwise be lost, but provided for judicial review. Even these scant provisions are apparently to great an impediment to this slothful, clumsy and inept administration.

How sad that we watch what so distinguishes the United States historically from other nations, chipped away - all while many, if not most, citizens cower in fear of imminent attack.

Attacks which are VERY unlikely to be prevented by the extra-legal conduct of the government. Remember: these are the pathetic members of the team who neither recognized the threat posed by Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, nor took significant, affirmative steps to detect or prevent the attacks which led to such fundamental changes in our behavior as a nation.

Quarterbacked, as I recall, by George Bush, who has said—with regard to the whereabouts and capture of bin Laden—"And, again, I don't know where he is. I — I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him."

What more can anyone say?

Mari wrote on August 22, 2007 7:30 PM:

Pardon me if my trust in this administration is non existent. McConnell stating that not being able to snoop on Americans will result with deaths seems like an excuse not a real reason as my mom used to say when I had cooked up some phony reason for my misbehavior. It seems it took him no time at all to acclimate himself to the Bush subterfuge method of explaining why his agency is breaking the constitutional guarantees of our citizens

HipHopLawyer wrote on August 22, 2007 7:34 PM:

Jeff, you sir, are a genius. Very well said.

Dave Bowman wrote on August 22, 2007 7:48 PM:

Newsflash, McConnell, Americans *are* dying every day in the debacle of this so-called 'war,' so what's your point?

Has anybody ever seen or heard any successful terrorist interdictions that have come out of the FISA program? Any unverifiable claims are likely to be bogus, given how this Administration has been forced to stoop to trumpeting the apprehension of Jose Padilla and the Fort Dix Six as their most successful anti-terrorism efforts on US soil.

OCPatriot wrote on August 22, 2007 7:52 PM:

We might as well junk the Constitution and declare the U.S. a dictatorship, with people like Bush and McConnell in charge to tell us who we neednt' know anything about what spying is going on, what rights are being abrogated, and if we object we're traitors. This is sounding less and less like the American, our proud America, and more and more like a fascist dictatorship. People like Bush and McConnell are pushing us in the direction of fewer and fewer freedoms, and more and more dead military. I have no faith in these scare mongers.

The Edge of Texas wrote on August 22, 2007 7:57 PM:

Jeff, I don't mean to nitpick, but I would like to set the record straight:

It was Nathan Hale who said, "I regret that I have but one life to give for my country."

Patrick Henry said, "I know not what course others might take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

You simply reversed the speakers and their utterances.

As to Admiral McConnell, he appears to have broken the law with his public statements. But, of course, IOKIFYAR.

slideguy wrote on August 22, 2007 8:02 PM:

"With a heavy heart, Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell told a Texas newspaper last week that due to the public debate over revising the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Americans will die."

I was raised in New Hampshire. Our motto is "Live free, or die". There's nothing in there about giving up freedom for the illusion of safety.

Preston Phart wrote on August 22, 2007 8:15 PM:

I read McConnell's words as very, very, very sinister. I mean, come on - "some Americans ARE going to die?" That's a tell of rather biblical scope, you know? Not "probably" or "maybe" or "hopefully Americans WON'T die if I tell you this." No - straight to absolutely, definitely gonna expire.

Wow.

Now: Does Mr. McConnell know something we don't? About a future event, say, that will be blamed on having been forced "for whatever reason" to let a little sunshine in re: modes and processes being utilized to protect our democratic republic? Perhaps, in his thoroughly Satanic way, he's throwing down a threat?

Jeff wrote on August 22, 2007 8:30 PM:

Edge of TX,

Edge of TX,

Ugh.. Caught that myself just after I posted - How embarrassing.

Thanks for the correction.

paul wrote on August 22, 2007 8:35 PM:

McConnell's statement is dishonest fear-mongering, of course (who here thinks that terrorists are waiting for the congressional record to tell them that the US is trying to monitor their communications?). But as others have suggested,9for a military officer it's also an example of shameful cowardice and ultimately unamerican. The idea that liberty is something worth dying for predates the Constitution: the founders weren't kidding when they wrote that little document that starts with "We hold these truths to be self-evident" and ends with "our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."

McConnell is spitting on the graves of every american who died with the intent of preserving liberty, from the founders through the hundreds of thousands who died in World War II to the thousands who have died in Iraq. If liberty isn't worth dying for, it sure as heck isn't worth killing uncounted thousands of citizens of another country for.

Dem02020 wrote on August 22, 2007 8:44 PM:

Maybe I'm the one who's wrong, but I think there's a misunderstooding here, about what NDI McConnell said.
The article states that the NDI...

"seemed to understand that he had gone too far -- but nonetheless reiterated his point"

...which implies confusion or contradiction, in the NDI's words; and then also...

"If McConnell really believes that Americans are going to die as the result of debating the FISA bill, then he cannot possibly mean that "sunshine's a good thing" here. That would entail him blessing the needless deaths of Americans"

...which more than implies confusion or contradiction in the NDI's words.

But I think something is missing here.
The part of NDI McConnell's interview that invites our thinking his words confusing and contradictory, is this:

"...but for whatever reason, you know, it's a democratic process and sunshine's a good thing. We need to have the debate"

I believe (but cannot know for sure) that those words were spoken by the NDI sarcastically.
Read them again, and for a moment assume sarcasm in his voice:

"...but for whatever reason, you know, it's a democratic process and sunshine's a good thing. We need to have the debate"

It would completely remove any confusion or contradiction about his words, if indeed he was being sarcastic when he said that.
And I'm not defending the man, not in what he said, or even against being misunderstood; but he is talking about intelligence gathering, and secrecy; and his overall tone is one of lamenting that these matters are being debated publicly; and why contend that the man contradicts himself, when to assume these words were spoken sarcastically...

"...but for whatever reason, you know, it's a democratic process and sunshine's a good thing. We need to have the debate"

...removes the contradiction, and renders the whole of what the man said, consistent (whether you would agree with him or not).
Anyway, I type this out here, and maybe I'm the one who is wrong, but the instant I read those words the NDI said, about "a democratic process" and "sunshine" and "debate", it came across immediately to me as sarcasm, and not a contradiction.

kilo wrote on August 22, 2007 8:54 PM:

Our intelligence community is fucked. What a bunch of worthless authoritarian-sympathizers that have no business heading these agencies. Hopefully the politically motivated will be outed one by one, which seems to be the case so far. Although we haven't had a clear shot at the top dogs in this administration, we certainly have been dismantling their yes-man infrastructure.

Avvorio wrote on August 22, 2007 8:54 PM:

Oh no. Everything this administration does, if questioned results in death or mayhem or breaching "national security". Even God lets you ask questions. What utter poppycock from this Bushie. McConnell ought to be put in Guantanamo with the rest of the Bushies and be made to tell everything he has done.

His and this administrations' consistent incompetence and greed is what is killing Americans.

Meah Bottoms wrote on August 22, 2007 9:09 PM:

What they seem to forget is that Americans have ALREADY died. Thousands of them The Bush Administration could have prevented these deaths. Why should we listen to them about ANYTHING? 911 did not have to happen. The invasion of Iraq did not have to happen. They are the cowards. Not us.

Their fear tactics are the only thing about them that are transparent. It is really quite pathetic. McConnell's scare tactics do not move me. We need to get rid of these crazypeople, and find a way to right the wrongs that have been committed by this country.

Meah Bottoms wrote on August 22, 2007 9:09 PM:

What they seem to forget is that Americans have ALREADY died. Thousands of them The Bush Administration could have prevented these deaths. Why should we listen to them about ANYTHING? 911 did not have to happen. The invasion of Iraq did not have to happen. They are the cowards. Not us.

Their fear tactics are the only thing about them that are transparent. It is really quite pathetic. McConnell's scare tactics do not move me. We need to get rid of these crazypeople, and find a way to right the wrongs that have been committed by this country.

Ron Genise wrote on August 22, 2007 9:13 PM:

If we're lucky, the little shit McCommical will be one of the Americans to die.

CruzBustamove wrote on August 22, 2007 9:24 PM:

The terrorists hate us for our comb overs.

Dem02020 wrote on August 22, 2007 9:34 PM:

With regard to the FISA, and to whether or not we think it's provisions Constitutional, and to what degree we may suspect that the FISA's provisions were exceeded (in it's previous form), and generally concerning the matter of intelligence gathering and domestic surveillance, and whatever popular debate surrounds it:

I'm no more pleased than you are, at George W. Bush being our President, and Dick Cheney our Vice President; but it is an unpleasant fact that they are.
Further, those two men are not in any imaginable way our defense against another terrorist attack; no, that defense would be found (in such an unfortunate circumstance) in the many field personnel... in the Agents and Officers of the FBI and the various intelligence agencies involved, and in the many other field personnel that we might generally term Federal authorities.

And as they do a job that I (and I hope you) think is absolutely necessary, they do not have for me the unpleasant aspect that Bush and Cheney make; no, as a matter of fact, if there were anyone to credit at all with our safety and defense at this time, it would them, those in the field, as our frontline defense in these matters... and not Bush and Cheney, and the awful hunched-over and cackling appearances they make.

Intelligence is the single greatest tool, in the prevention of another terror attack.
This is true.
And the gathering of that intelligence, and even of domestic surveillance, requires as much leeway as we can give it, if what we get in return are saved lives, safe airliners, safe buses, safe trains, and a bombing-free America.

This is true... it's that serious.

I agree with none of the overblown rhetoric attributed to the NDI in the above article; but I don't have to, in order to still know and appreciate the threat that a terror attack poses to us here in America, and the ease with which such an attack can be executed, with our American buses and trains and airliners such easy and open targets.

I want to put all this debate behind us, and move on... not because the FISA has already been passed and signed into law; and not because I trust George W. Bush and Dick Cheney (because I don't); but because like it or not, those two are the horrible faces of the Office of President and Vice President of the United States at this time...

...but the powers granted by the FISA, are not granted to those two hunched-over business agents for oil and arms.

The power of the FISA is granted to our frontline defense in this matter: the many field personnel that we might generally term Federal authorities.

The job they do is necessary (even if Bush and Cheney are not).
The power is theirs, and they need it.
The threat is real.

The FISA has already been passed.
We need to move on.
Our Civil Liberties are not nearly as threatened here, as we might imagine.

It's not about those two hunched-over cackling demons who have seized the administration of our Federal Government...

We can move on, on this issue.
I'm sure we can.

As a matter of fact, I'm relatively certain that Bush and Cheney love the opposition they're hearing, to the FISA and to domestic surveillance... they know they hold the cards in this matter, and that you and I can't see them... they know that they stand on the ground of law enforcement and terror prevention, in this matter...

...and besides, it gives them a near unlimited opportunity to stand at podiums hunched-over, and leer and grin and cackle at the American People, about "evil" and the "enemy" and "they want to kill you and your children"...

They love doing that.
It's that as much as anything, that I want to move on past.

Roberta wrote on August 22, 2007 9:37 PM:

You know what would have kept all of the details about FISA out of the press, and therefore not into the hands of "our enemies"? Not having to go through a debate about FISA in the first place. And to avoid that debate?

Simply comply with FISA as it was.

The arguments that needed investigations were hamstrung by FISA were specious, because of the sensible provision that warrants could be obtained AFTER the fact.

Of course, this all presupposed investigations that truly are in the interests of America's safety and security. Because any investigation that was shown to be justified for those reasons would have received an after-the-fact warrant with no problem.

So either there are tons of incompetents that are too stupid or too lazy to go through the paperwork required to get the warrants (unfortunately VERY likely, what with the "200 hours" McConnell cited), or those investigations cannot be justified.

I believe they're likely unjustified, but we still have to bring in the incompetence factor. Too much evidence about that to ignore.

ff11 wrote on August 22, 2007 9:40 PM:

So when exactly was it that we, as a nation decided that it was a good idea to surrender our freedom for a hypothetical infinitesimal increase in security?

sunsin wrote on August 22, 2007 9:56 PM:

Has anybody ever seen or heard any successful terrorist interdictions that have come out of the FISA program?

Bingo, Mr. Bowman.

They have found nothing, and their methods have probably been a total f'up. But we can be sure it was a very PROFITABLE f'up to someone or other.

Follow the money. This may be nothing more, or nothing less, than another massive looting of the Treasury by "persons unknown."

It's always about money with these assholes.

Security code "bent," as in the moral condition of BushCo.

owenz wrote on August 22, 2007 10:00 PM:

Silvestre Reyes:

1. Too stupid to know that al Qaida is not a Shiite organization? Check.

2. Refuses to release Duke Cunningham report after Democrats campaign on Republican refusal to release Duke Cunningham report last year? Check.

3. Happy to carry Administration water on just about any intelligence-related activity? Check.

flo wrote on August 22, 2007 10:11 PM:

rove et al are nixonites. They WILL use gov surveillance against Dems.

anon, too wrote on August 22, 2007 10:20 PM:

I think the question for McConnell is this:

So, that means there will be no American deaths if we do not debate the FISA law. How long will that moritorium on death for Americans last, do you think?

articleIV wrote on August 22, 2007 10:21 PM:

I'm afraid alright--I'm afraid these people have failed miserably. They would rather data mine every American's personal information and track our every move than prosecute even one real terrorist. Didn't a report just come out that 60-80 CIA personnel knew that 2 of the eventual 9/11 hijackers were in the country and they didn't tell the FBI? Meanwhile FBI agents were reporting suspicious flight school students and they weren't listened to. These guys are losers and dweebs and somebody needs to say they are are stark naked. How dare he threaten me.

moondancer wrote on August 22, 2007 10:28 PM:

I want him to do one thing. Give me a hypothetical where people die because of FISA oversight. I cant stand this. They lie about everything, but worse tell grade school quality lies. Hey McConnell, you need to take a crash course in lying to Americans. Dont worry there's hundreds of people surrounding you that can help.

EdNSted wrote on August 22, 2007 10:33 PM:

I'm reminded of this Carl Sagan quote from 1994:

"It's a foreboding I have, maybe ill-placed, of an America in my children's generation or my grand children's generation. When all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries. When we're a service and information processing economy. When awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues. When the people - the broad population in a democracy -- when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or even to knowledgeably question those who do set the agendas. When there is no practice in questioning those in authority. When, clutching our crystals and religiously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in steep decline, unable to distinguish between what's true and what feels good, we slide almost without noticing into superstition and darkness. That worries me."

tbhull wrote on August 22, 2007 10:43 PM:

As long as those Americans are Michael McConnell and his ilk, our country will prosper.

acf wrote on August 22, 2007 11:07 PM:

Debating FISA may kill Americans, and not debating and listening to the people about Iraq, in the first place, has killed over 3500 American fighters, and 10s of thousands of Iraqis.

Ebenezer wrote on August 22, 2007 11:13 PM:

I think McConnell is on to something. The Republican slogan for 2008 should be: "Democracy Kills".

It pairs nicely with this Thomas Sowell quote from the May 1 National Review online:

"When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can't help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup."

FMArouet wrote on August 22, 2007 11:21 PM:

Methinks DNI McConnell doth protest too much when he denies data-mining. His "candor" has the scent of a smokescreen, for his "revelations" are for the most part largely public information already, save for his pulling the number "100" straight out of the same place as "WMD in Iraq" and "yellowcake from Niger." Here are two real questions. Will anyone in Congress bother to ask them?

(1) Are NSA and DOJ (or any other agencies) engaged in warrantless datamining of proprietary U.S. databases--with or without approval of the owners of the databases? Are private contractors involved in such activities on behalf of the government?

(2) Is the U.S. government engaging in warrantless data retrieval from U.S. databases--including individual computer hard drives--without the approval of the owners of the data?

If either or both of these activities take place, what are the constitutional guarantees that data vacuumed from U.S. companies or citizens are not used for political gain (as in micro-targeting) or to conduct "opposition research" against domestic political opponents?

biggerbox wrote on August 22, 2007 11:37 PM:

We used to do these things very differently, but for whatever reason, you know, it's a democratic process and sunshine's a good thing

Um, that 'whatever' reason for the enactment of FISA and other regulation of intelligence agencies was, as I hope McConnell knows full well, the horrible abuses of the powers granted his predecessors. It wasn't some hippy-dippy 'sunshine is good' whim, it was the fact that the Church Committee documented that thousands of pieces of mail had been opened by government agents, that assassinations were plotted, and that private, law-abiding American citizens had been spied upon.

We do things differently now because we have documentary proof that we can't trust people like McConnell to do the right thing if we don't watch them closely.

From his comments, it's pretty clear how McConnell feels about that, and that he'd prefer the old days.

I'm with illich, above: "We all have to die sometime, whether we do it proud and free, or scared and shackled. I always thought it was an American trait to prefer to die free than live under tyranny (and make no mistake-- nullifying an important part of the Constitution is certainly a step towards tyranny.)"

McConnell makes me sick to my stomach.

The Oracle wrote on August 22, 2007 11:46 PM:

McConnell also confirmed that traditional, classified intelligence agency activities have been outsourced to private companies...whose employees, one would hope, had to pass a comprehensive security check before being granted access to top-secret, classified intelligence information.

Yeah, right.

Probably these private companies are filled with graduates of Regent or Trinity University, whose only qualification is that they are a "loyal Bushie."

Background security check? "Hah, that's only for civil servants in the federal bureaucracy that handle highly sensitive materials on a daily basis. We're employees of a private company, owned by a major contributor to the Republican Party...trust us."

Even as we learn that some of these private companies have been taking data that's being collected on U.S. citizens and merging this information with voter rolls, to distinguish between those who voted Republican, Democratic or Independent...or didnt' vote at all.

Isn't this illegal? Isn't this something one would expect of a Communist receiving their orders from the Soviet Kremlin, and not from a loyal, patriotic U.S. citizen or company?

Oh, right, everything changed after 9/11.

America, our Constitution, our Bill of Rights had become old and outdated, like a used car, and Bush and Cheney rolled out after 9/11 their brand-spanking new model, the "unitary executive" model, with them in the drivers seat (Cheney riding shotgun?), yelling at the rest of us "Eat our dust!!"

Sorry, George. Sorry, Dick. Eat our dust!!! And don't let the car door hit your sorry asses on the way out.

kentuck wrote on August 22, 2007 11:55 PM:

McConnell is a rat's ass. He told the Congress he could accept their changes to FISA and then wimped out when Bush told him that he couldn't do that. He should resign and if that doesn't happen, he should be fired. He is not competent to look after the freedoms so many Americans have died for. Go to hell, McConnell!

parrot wrote on August 23, 2007 12:01 AM:

Of course, if it were to come out that the law was being ignored prior to September 2001 and it didn't do any good...

Kent Mueller wrote on August 23, 2007 12:13 AM:

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."

Daniel Webster

"The constitution is not a suicidce pact!" AM talk radio

Thanks, McConnell, but I think I'll hang with Patrick Henry and Daniel Webster, along with Bob Barr, Bruce Fein and the state of New Hampshire.

brenathome wrote on August 23, 2007 12:54 AM:

Imagine a world where lots and lots of people ask Bush and his - uh - associates, every single day, repeatedly, "Why did you let 9/11 happen?"

brenathome wrote on August 23, 2007 12:56 AM:

just want to say that the sc = "crush"

Puma wrote on August 23, 2007 1:03 AM:

McConnell is wrong, wrong, wrong. If intelligence systems are working, it shouldn't matter if every last bit of the inner workings of those systems are posted on every wall of every building in the world. This is true of our military, too. If it's working the way that US doctrine calls for, it shouldn't matter if we call up the enemy and let them know that we're doing such-and-such on such-and-such day. We'll still achieve our goals.
Systems or doctrines that can be defeated by inferior opponents are simply broken and need to be repaired... but nothing needs to be fixed in this case. The powers that be simply need to stop blaming their policy failures on perfectly good procedures.

disgruntled family member wrote on August 23, 2007 2:21 AM:

It's because they can sit on their butts and watch monitors and play and have no oversight and take long lunch breaks and have job security and get excellent health care and tell everyone they can listen in and....

Anyone ever work in a union shop? How much time did you spend discussing how you could produce more with what you had and how you could better serve the public verses the time spent attempting to get more pay and less work? Now think hard. If you belonged to a union which also made it pretty much impossible for you to get fired... what would have happened?

these are the people spying on us and protecting us from harm, folks...

Almost weekly, I am reminded of the drunk who lost his car keys and is on his hands and knees, searching for them under a lightpost. Someone walks up and asks where exactly he lost his keys and the drunk points and answers "Over there!". The bystander then asks him why he is searching for them 50 feet away from where they were dropped. "Because there's more light over here!", the drunk answers.

I believe Bush has been using this same logic (only not admitting it) ever since he was sworn in. I cannot help but think this is an outward manifestation of his years of drinking... and we still have 1/3rd of the population continuing to enable... I mean... support him.

Meanwhile, we have a multitude of senators and congressmen who continue to belly up to the bar with him, spinning tales and war stories with each other, hyping their own importance... too ridgid to accept any reasonable solutions from folks outside their own little clique.

What we are experiencing is the classic disfunctional family on a national scale, with consequences which are proportional... IMHO

occasional observer wrote on August 23, 2007 2:57 AM:

The Admiral's right, you know. One of us is going to get a brain hemorrhage trying to relate this legislation to the surrounding spin. Already the health insurance companies are drafting exclusion riders.

PJ White wrote on August 23, 2007 3:21 AM:

What these shameless creeps are so intent on hiding is that they are using illegal, unconstitutional surveillance against their political opponents. Whatever would they do if THAT came to light? Remember Nixon and his boys' burglary into the Demo Nat'l Headquarters? Of course, they view all their political opponents as traitors so in their dim little minds, they are justified. And they use fear tactics because they know that it would work with them. After all, none of these bozos enlisted and fought in VietNam when their country called.

SC: desire. I desire all of them out of the "political landscape" (Sara Taylor) forever. They are traitors and fools.

steambomb wrote on August 23, 2007 4:04 AM:

Give ME liberty or give ME death!

MNSpectator wrote on August 23, 2007 5:55 AM:

My only question is, what brand of adult diapers do these neocons and their enablers use?

Given the number they must go through due to their constant state of blind panic, I want to get in on the windfall. Some manufacturer out there is making money hand over fist...

sam storm wrote on August 23, 2007 6:17 AM:

He is probably worried Dick Chenney will shoot him in the face for talking too much like he did that other guy.

lou wrote on August 23, 2007 6:50 AM:

The terrorists already won according to Mr. McConnell. Bush told us the " terrorists want to change our way of life". I think the terrorist did.

Mr. McConnell is pretty good at repeating talking points. He is not good at protecting Americans..... Our greatest threat is to our Constitution

Offical A wrote on August 23, 2007 6:59 AM:

This is nothing more than intimidation of Congress, standard fare for these thugs. And yet Congress continues to capitulate, thinking if they continue their retreat they'll escape blame. But they won't. They have been effectively pre-blamed.

Security Code: smile, as in "Smile, you're on Candid Camera."

Anonymous wrote on August 23, 2007 7:13 AM:

McConnell: "Sunshine's a good thing"

Cheney: "Well, it temporarily blinds subterranean creatures, as it were, and prolonged exposure causes skin cancer. Quick, to the undisclosed location!"

Anonymous wrote on August 23, 2007 7:15 AM:

Security Code: "profit".

As in "Profit of doom."

RL wrote on August 23, 2007 8:39 AM:

I'm going to go out on a limb, at the risk of offending fellow lib's.

I think McConnell is simply being honest here. I didn't read his words as "Stop the debate". He's just stating the risks of such debate and accepting the necessity of the debate.

It seems self-evident, to me anyway, that the openness of our society was a contributor to the 9/11 attacks. Open debate on national security issues does risk diluting the effectiveness of such measures in the future. It is a real tradeoff that lies at the heart of our democratic principles. (I think the risk is exceedingly small, mostly hypothetical, but it's not a fantasy.)

It might be understandable for the families of terrorism's victims to wish we'd had a police state that would have prevented the attacks. But as a matter of principle, we have to live with the risks of an open society in order to enjoy the benefits. I think McConnell is just acknowledging this reality.

MNSpectator wrote on August 23, 2007 9:20 AM:

Sorry, RL, but I don't buy it.

I understand what you are trying to say, and it's a reasonable hypothesis (mistake #1 when dealing with the Toddler-in-Chief and friends), but the very words chosen belie that perspective.

Had he said, "Increases the risk that attacks might slip through", sure. He didn't. He chose to use "Americans WILL die", a level of certainty only possible if he was masterminding the attacks himself. Since I don't believe that, we fall back to "just scare the rubes enough, and they'll let us do whatever we want".

This was a scripted, lame, and transparent attempt to scare people into throwing away more protections of their liberty, nothing more. The enemy we face had to literally borrow our own equipment on 9/11 to do any significant damage to us, and had to get damn lucky despite our own relative complacency, to boot.

nellieh wrote on August 23, 2007 9:24 AM:

Just more scare and fear from the administration. I wonder if they know the story of the boy who cried wolf? They have come up with this rhetoric so many times before as changing the color code before elections to 'faking' dangerous items at airports to so much other BS that when it is imminent nobody will pay attention like now.

MNSpectator wrote on August 23, 2007 9:24 AM:

Sorry, forgot to finish off that last post with the closer.

Please add: As a "graduate" of the Cold War Era, you can color me "less than impressed".

Doc Rock wrote on August 23, 2007 9:24 AM:

How many Americans, Iraqi's, and others have died because of the secrecy and suppression of debate that permitted the unmitigated deceit which got us into this trillion dollar + megadeath rathole? McConnell's calculus is one-sided and highly politicized. It is also mendacious. Who is the enemy? Al Qaida? Al Qaida long ago learned that we were listening and is much more disciplined in its communications than we are! If not Al Qaida, then our policy makers are dissembling (which they are). We are selling our sacred cow (our freedoms) for a few magic beans based an unrelenting salemanship of FEAR!

Med wrote on August 23, 2007 9:26 AM:

Oh, terra terra terra..... 9/11 was a false flag. The terrorists reside within the government. Pushing the false meme that terrorists somewhere 'out there' pulled it off is simply disingenuous (at best). McConnell needs to be placed on the potential guillotine list should the Republic ever be restored by the people. Of course, he may be excused by some for being incredibly clueless. But I wouldn't excuse him.

dee illuminati wrote on August 23, 2007 9:58 AM:

Now because of the "claim, counterclaim, mistrust, suspicion," the only way you could make any progress was to have this debate in an open way.

While McConnell's integrity and veracity of statements are not generating mistrust and suspicion, there is a pattern of behaviors from those whom he reports to, where there is either willful ignorance or deception.

For those whom questioned the veracity of the statements pre-war Iraq on the weapons of mass destruction, for those whom questioned if there had been ample warning pre-911, for those whom questioned if the use of coercive interrogations were a tool to attack political opposition to poor policy decisions above, and then acted upon in a criminal manner after repeated denials from those who seek trust, after countless Pat Tillghman investigations, missing emails, amnesia or perjury upon the part of the Attorney General, You cite "trust" after "Glen Fine," "John Ashcroft," and others reported ABUSE?

Mr. McConnell in all due respect, it is not your integrity that is at issue.

Carrying that bucket... is a tough job.. and similar with DOI's/Norton fiasco.. know that 'somebody' has to cleanup the mess in the aisle... OK, fair enough...

But lets put the onus of trust where it belongs.

Lets get the shoes on the right feet before we discuss another foot dropping....

Can we deal with reality and put the BS aside? I mean is there really all that many clothes upon the emporer at this late moment?

Official A wrote on August 23, 2007 10:09 AM:

False argument, all to easy in this sound-bite society.

The administration line is always, "If you do _____, Americans are going to die." What they don't say is that if you don't do _____, Americans are going to die.

Americans are going to die. Everybody does, eventually. The real question is whether we die with our civil liberties intact and our Constitution in one piece.

Big Brother is, in my quaint old pre-9/11 opinion, a more ominous threat than terrorism.

Give me liberty, etc.

Former Republican wrote on August 23, 2007 10:57 AM:

Steamboat is right. To spell it out, suppose McConnell is correct. Suppose public debate of an issue with constitutional overtones will result in some Americans dying. Does that end the discussion? Have we become so craven a nation, so terrified of death, that the prospect of some American deaths trumps all other considerations? If so, the spirit of Patrick Henry is gone from the land.

Over the next 100 years, approximately 300 million Americans are going to die. I personally don't think it of critical importance that some of them die sooner rather than later, if that is the cost of preserving our Constitutional liberties. As they say, "Freedom is not free."

Anonymous wrote on August 23, 2007 11:33 AM:

If McConnell/Bush really "cared" about Americans dying, why aren't they doing a much, much, much better job of protecting the lives of American solidiers in Iraq? Why are they still allowing them to be blown-up by IEDs in vehicles that aren't capable of preventing their deaths? Why have they "lost" more than 100,000 weapons that Shite and Sunni rebels are using to kill American soldiers? Why are they arming both Shites and Sunnis and placing American soldiers in the middle of their conflicts? Why, after four years, haven't they been able to recruit, train and retain enough Iraqi soldiers to protect and defend their own citizens? Because their repeated failures in judgement and planning have been far, far greater than whatever "caring" intentions they claim they have about saving American lives. The fact is, these arrogant, ignorant, incompetent screw-ups are incapable of doing anything but getting more Americans killed because when it comes down to choosing between saving face and saving lives, they "care" more about their political lives than the mortal lives of Americans. And in reality, no matter what they really want, they are simply too reckless and stupid to get it done. Everything they've done in Iraq has failed with deadly results and no matter what they say, the only way they can stop the dying is to pull Americans out of harms way. And in refusing to do that, they are demonstrating that their words are as hollow as their heads.

R Hampton wrote on August 23, 2007 11:52 AM:

Five Bahrainis released from Guantanamo Bay may each soon receive a 50,000 Bahraini Dinar grant (US $132,500) from the government. MP Mohammed Khalid said it is crucial the men receive compensation for the suffering and torture they were forced to endure in the US prison camp and so they are able to financially support their families ... Juma Al Dossary, who has dual Bahraini-Saudi nationality, was also among a group of 16 Saudis freed and transferred to Riyadh last month. "Look at what the government of Saudi Arabia has given Juma - a car, monthly allowance, help to find a job and to get married.
-- Geoffrey Bew, The Gulf Daily News

I track our "ally" Saudi Arabia and their three decades-long, global expansion of militant, extremist Wahhabi Islam.
http://wahaudi.blogspot.com

frustrated wrote on August 23, 2007 3:27 PM:

"If McConnell/Bush really "cared" about Americans dying, why aren't they doing a much, much, much better job of protecting the lives of American solidiers in Iraq? Why are they"

Bush is doing the same as most of these clowns do... he is, and has been, putting people in high positions who supported his bid for the presidency. We therefore have wealthy, influencial people with little or no knowledge of their jobs. They are, however, capable of distinguishing a "prime" cut of filet mignon from a "select" cut.

Does this make you feel better?

Just remember... the new administration, regardless of party, will most likely be doing exactly the same thing because, afterall, these are the leaders we want in office. If we didn't, we wouldn't continue to vote for them.

Instead, we would let those clowns in Washington know that if the laws regulating these behaviors, as well as other "separation of the elite from the common folk ethics laws" aren't changed before the next election cycle... all effort will be brought to get rid of the incumbants.

I'm dreaming again, aren't I?

Anonymous wrote on August 23, 2007 7:16 PM:

And the sky is falling ...

ChickenHawkLittle

johnnydoughey wrote on August 23, 2007 8:01 PM:

I just don't understand this...

Why is the secrecy of the way telephone calls and/or electronic surveilance is collected so important for ous safety? any reasonable terrorist would assume that we would be able to monitor these things. If they weren't concerned, they would have all been caught by now.

It is well known that cell phone locations can be traced, that called to home phones can be traced, that ISPs can be traced... that ALL of these technologies can be traced... usually by a ten year old child!

There only 2 reasons for the secrecy police to desire to keep this information from the public.

1. Either much of this information collected has nothing to do with terrorists and would be embarrassing for the secret keepers (there is no accountability anymore, embarrassment is about the most that they will ever suffer) or...

2. Our NSA, CIA, and other secrecy people are not even as smart as a 10 year old kid, let alone the terrorists they are supposed to be protecting us from....

These accused or actual terrorists from the mideast are NOT living in tents and riding camels!

They have had television since the late 40s and early 50s. They have all the electronic gadgets we have. They have doctors, lawyers, and top notch engineers. Iraq had electricity up until we arrived, and were turned down for a bridge building project in Baghdad (they bid $300,000, we gave it to one of our firms for $50,000,000).

Perhaps we need to bring our CIA and spies into the twentieth century... or fire them and hire some 10 year olds... IMHO

(If you don't hear from me again, it's because I've been taken to a secret location and held incognito for giving away state secrets on the internet...)

Peter wrote on August 25, 2007 10:48 AM:

All of this emanates from from the event that defined these times - the 9/11 attacks. These abrogations of our liberties and the wholly fraudulent Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the eternal 'war on terror' will continue unless we accept that 9/11 was an inside job. Similar false flag operations will surely follow as the real terrorists are losing traction from the 9/11 events.

Anonymous wrote on August 26, 2007 7:50 PM:

What is lacking in this discussion is what are they doing with the surveillance? This is just more BS _smoke screen_ to avoid that discussion.

The illegal domestic surveillance is being routed overseas to bypass American law and U.S. Constitutional protections. Once the captured transmissions are outside the U.S., U.S law does not apply is the reasoning. The _big secret_ is that simple.

Habanero wrote on August 31, 2007 10:35 AM:

Back when we were still a democracy, we used to treat domestic spies harshly.

My how the times change.

wkhg eucrvznbp wrote on September 12, 2007 1:18 PM:

xdyptnvu nsch rlnsh zpchvbm dentimz dnrpxvs oxtimnh