I have a bunch of notes and half-assed theories lying around here for an essay I’m working on about General Michael Hayden’s speech defending NSA wiretapping. But it’ll probably be a while before I get a chance to write that (and by then, we’ll have moved on to the scandal of spy technologies being used to take nude pictures of Hill interns).

So in the meantime, to tide you over, two worthwhile articles from Ars Technica:

NSA wiretap followup: Why computer-automated mass surveillance is a bad idea

Revenge of the Return of the Son of TIA, Part LXVII

Via Boing Boing, truly horrible Star Wars-themed Valentines.

“It is well that war is so terrible—otherwise we should grow too fond of it.” Robert E. Lee is about to be obsolesced by technology, according to this William Saletan article in Slate.

Following up on a discussion with Brian about the Cheney shooting. What’s amusing is that I was listening to a podcast today where the speaker proposed that it would be legal for Bush to walk up and shoot a man on the street as part of his presidential war powers. He didn’t mention whether the vice president gets the same privileges.

Editor and Publisher raises some interesting questions about why it took so long for the rest of us to find out about this. Via Crooks and Liars, which is worth viewing for the shot of Dick with his shotgun.

Reuters reports on a man in Pennsylvania arrested for attempting to conspire with al-Qaeda.

More power to the FBI—they caught someone who clearly wanted to be a Bad Guy. But let’s note, before getting into a tizzy about the terrorists amongst us, that this guy did not exactly pose a threat. He was looking for money from the sting agent; i.e., he had no resources of his own. He was unemployed, with a criminal record.

The article notes what he wanted to do; it perhaps should put a bit more emphasis that this man would be as likely to win a gold medal in Italy as to actually find a backer, or to accomplish what he set out to do.

A major scientific publication discusses possible alternatives for energy production if humanity exhausts its primary fossil fuel.

Nothing new—in fact, rather old, as the publication is the September 28, 1889 edition of Scientific American, and the fuel in potentially short supply is coal.

Kevin Drum raises some interesting questions about the change in meaning of some legal terms when computers are used in the decision:

The nice thing about probable cause and reasonable suspicion and other similar phrases is that they have a long history behind them. There are hundreds of years of statutory definition and case law that define what they mean, and human judges interpret them in ways that most of us understand….

But the NSA’s domestic spying program doesn’t rely on the ordinary human understanding of these phrases. Instead, it appears to rely primarily on software algorithms that determine whether or not a person is acting in a way that merits eavesdropping.

Some fun you can have on your next snow day:

1. Google for the Constitution.

2. Go to the first “I’m feeling lucky” response, which is the US House of Representatives.

3. Click on the full text link for the Constitution.

4. Thrill in horror as the House of Representatives specifically disclaims any responsibility for the content of said Constitution.

What Tom said.

Dahlia Lithwick on the disturbing ways in which Zacarias Moussaoui is right.

I have trouble with the idea of calling Moussaoui a show trial—but then again, what do we really think the odds are that he’s just going to be sent to jail?

Peter Daou documents a week’s events, all of which could be front-page news and political embarassments. His theory: there are just so many that disorganized Democrats and distractable media can’t stick with one long enough to get people to care.

I read this as an indictment of the Democrats, but worth checking out to be reminded how many things pop up in a single week.

TPM notes legal and ethical conflicts in the latest partisan Bush use of the military:

[A]ctive duty personnel […] may not “Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or conventions (unless attending a convention as a spectator when not in uniform).”

Now, we don’t know if these military personnel are appearing in uniform or not. And much of this probably turns on what constitutes a ‘political event’. But to my mind, an event organized by a Republican party official at the direction of the White House political office is by definition a political event. That’s just obvious, isn’t it?

Another question. We know how the White House political office knows who’s a Republican County Chairman. How do they know which active duty military officers in a given area want to make speeches supporting the administration current policies in Iraq? Think about that.

You know, it used to be when you thought about a political party that harnessed every action of government for partisan aim, and judged everyone through that lens, you were talking about Communists. I guess Karl Rove decided he admires Karl Marx after all.

Ah, I remember the good old days when everyone knew whom to despise. Only a few scant years later, and Bob Barr, darling of the impeach-Clinton set, needs a poison taster for his rubber chicken:

“Are we losing our lodestar, which is the Bill of Rights?” Barr beseeched the several hundred conservatives at the Omni Shoreham in Woodley Park. “Are we in danger of putting allegiance to party ahead of allegiance to principle?”

Barr answered in the affirmative. “Do we truly remain a society that believes that… every president must abide by the law of this country?” he posed. “I, as a conservative, say yes. I hope you as conservatives say yes.”

But nobody said anything in the deathly quiet audience. Barr merited only polite applause when he finished, and one man […] booed him loudly.

I was at the Omni Shoreham yesterday—wish I had known to drop by and be the plant in the audience.

Media Matters is tracking the adoption of Bush spin as a way of describing one of his policies:

Following the lead of Fox News and The Washington Times editorial page, an article by the Associated Press adopted a variation of the White House terminology “terrorist surveillance program” to describe the Bush administration’s domestic spying program.

Seems to me, if we’re going to call a surveillance program with a documented success rate of < 0.5%¹ as “terrorist-related”, we could also call lightning a steady source of electrical power, and my past PowerBall wins as a steady source of income.

¹Estimate based on published reports that “thousands” of people have been wiretapped, with approximately 10 terrorist-related connections successfully logged.

The (London) Inquirer, via Scalzi:

A BUSH presidential appointee to NASA told a web designer for the research agency that he would have to go through the site and stick the words ‘theory’ before every reference to the big bang.

According to John, Deutsch has left the building.

Had to look up Jean Chrétien’s name to proofread placement of the accent marks. Apparently, he’s available at auction.

I am currently triurban, dividing my time between Washington, Philadelphia, and Atlantic City. If you’re interested in finding out when I might be where, check out my Google Calendar iCal Exchange calendar.

Power turned on in NOLA for a presidential visit. Then turned off again.