Ron Paul understands what is at stake with the FISA "compromise"

I found this in the Congressional Record:

Madam Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt, and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing the Federal Government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens' communications without a search warrant. That U.S. citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the Fourth Amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration's illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that ``No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.'' How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

Madam Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.

Saxby Chambliss favors big business and big government over liberty...

It is true. This man supports the granting of immunity to telecommunications companies that engaged in illegal activity with the Bush Administration. That's right. Individuals who had their legal protections stepped on by these companies would have no legal redress if he has his way.

This is what can be found at his website :

The Senate legislation also provides retroactive immunity for U.S. telecommunication firms who are being sued for their alleged assistance to the government in the President’s Terrorist Surveillance Program after September, 11, 2001. I believe we should provide this relief to the companies to ensure that they continue providing assistance to the government and to protect classified information from exposure in a trial.

So, here is the story he is trying to tell... It is quite likely these companies did something illegal. They committed this illegal act at the urging of our very own government. If we don't give them protection for this illegal act, they might not be so willing to commit illegal acts for our government in the future.

Where does the rule of law come in? Where do the concerns about individual freedom and liberty come in? Never, apparently. At least not when it gets in the way of big government and big business.

Without a change in this position, which will be revealed soon since H.R. 6304 has passed the House with that protection intact, you can bet that not only will I not vote for Saxby Chambliss this November, but I will actively try to promote an alternative choice for the office. Saxby Chambliss, you are a disappointment to everyone who believes in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It is important to also note that John Linder, representing the 7th District (my district), voted in favor of H.R. 6304. I had the pleasure of voting Linder into office back in 1992. He has managed to stay there ever since, while I have not always resided within his district throughout that time. However, given his desire to sell out individuals in this nation in favor of the interests of big government and big business, he can count on never being supported by me again. As of right now, I think I would much rather have Doug Heckman in office, although it is not clear that he is any more in favor of individuals than John Linder is. Although it is important to note that the Democratic Party does not sell itself as the party of individual freedom and liberty.

Ants!

The excavation of an ant colony. It is rather amazing. You will need about 6 and a half minutes of time to enjoy this.

Is a software application a skill?

I cringe when I read a list of software applications accompanied with the question of whether I have any of those skills. It would be better to ask if I have skills with any of those, since software applications are not skills. Software applications are simply tools to be used.

Would you ever see something like this:

Do you have any of these skills?

Hammer, Wrench, Saw, Lawnmower?

I doubt it. More likely you would be asked if you have experience with, or knowledge of the use of, those tools. It is one of the more annoying things in the "Information Technology" world.

Although I am experienced with the driving of multiple kinds of cars, I would not list each model as a "skill." My "skill" would not be "Toyota Camry", "Toyota Corolla", or "VW Jetta." Just like my skill would not be "Active Directory", "Windows Server 2003", "SAP", or "Sun Solaris."

Channel 4 'Get set for digital'

Max Headroom returns to the channel he started at, but he looks a lot older...

REAL Wall-E in LA! (2008)

Another primarily YouTube entry, but it is Wall-E, which is very special to my son.