Wanna spy? W's your guy!
A federal appeals court has taken up the Bush mantle of electronic surveillance, saying that new technologies have to accommodate rules established under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) of 1994:
Read the story here.
This is like trying to install a 5-speed transmission in Ford Model A. The law was written in 1994, before there was a real Internet. Instead of trying to "retrofit" old laws, why not force these lawmakers to go through the process of writing a new bill, submitting it to the Senate and the House, and letting them wrangle over it interminably?
Oh, that's right, I forgot: anything having to do with spying or curtailing freedom gets an automatic rubber stamp from Congress and Bush! Ahhhh, the joys of checks and balances.
Speaking of the incestuous relationship between the judicial and executive branches, notice how the article identifies the administrations who appointed each of the judges quoted. The republican-appointed judges, of course, are all in favor of it, while the democrat-appointed ones called the interpretation a "stretch" of a law that doesn't fit the case.
Sometimes I'm not sure that it's wise to let these judges have a "job for life." What happens when their arteries start to harden and they flake out?
Of course! Run for president.
Read the story here.
This is like trying to install a 5-speed transmission in Ford Model A. The law was written in 1994, before there was a real Internet. Instead of trying to "retrofit" old laws, why not force these lawmakers to go through the process of writing a new bill, submitting it to the Senate and the House, and letting them wrangle over it interminably?
Oh, that's right, I forgot: anything having to do with spying or curtailing freedom gets an automatic rubber stamp from Congress and Bush! Ahhhh, the joys of checks and balances.
Speaking of the incestuous relationship between the judicial and executive branches, notice how the article identifies the administrations who appointed each of the judges quoted. The republican-appointed judges, of course, are all in favor of it, while the democrat-appointed ones called the interpretation a "stretch" of a law that doesn't fit the case.
Sometimes I'm not sure that it's wise to let these judges have a "job for life." What happens when their arteries start to harden and they flake out?
Of course! Run for president.
posted by Aaron at 11:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home