Third Party & Independents Archives

It’s strange how Hillbilly is always there to comment on things Obama is being assaulted with.

I have to think of the vast republican conspiracy that has infected our political process.

She is always there to cast doubt and throw inuendo around. It’s too bad we can’t pin down this vast republican conspiracy that’s reeking havoc onto the democratic party.

McCain is too old to do this type of stuff. Perhaps Hillbilly would consider taking over the republican ticket so she can throw doubt around without offending anyone.

Doug Hattaway, a spokesman for Sen. Hillary Clinton, Obama’s rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, said, “If it’s true, it’s reprehensible, and the Bush administration has a responsibility to get to the bottom of it.”

She’s still running against the Bush administration!

WW, good observation and speculation. That would answer why the State Dep’t. is releasing the information, they finally found out it was Hillary’s operatives and not Republican behind the law breaking. Bet they breathed a deep sigh of relief upon learning that.

Oh, but, wait, has the IG investigated this 3rd incident yet? If not, how would they know it was the Clinton camp? Lots of questions to be answered about this one.

I love it.

Low level employees working for firms employed by the state department have failed to curb their curiosity and have peeked at Obama’s passport records. Two have already been fired, but by all means, lets have full-on congressional hearings, a special prosecutor, star chambers, and perhaps some good old fashioned water-boarding to see if we can get to the bottom of why low-level employees have this insatiable curiosity about public figures. We should call Perez Hilton and Geraldo Rivera as expert witnesses. There’s a mystery lurking here somewhere, and let’s make it a top priority to see if we can figure it out! This is looking bad, very bad indeed, for George Bush and his evil cohorts!

Loyal Opp, you may want to reread this article for some education about procedures there. The IG is responsible for referring these instances to Justice for further investigation. But, the IG wasn’t informed of the first two violations.

Your comment rings as usual, hollow, uninformed, and repulsive of anything that might tarnish team loyalty.

What is the IG?

Oh! Wait! I get it. The Inspector General! The new one? NO? A new one?

I’m confused.

Dagnabit!!!
I’m thinking about the Atourney General.

Oh My!

Q. What’s the difference between the Attourney General and an Inspector General?

A.Retirement.

WW, each agency of the Executive Branch has an appointed Inspector General who is responsible for investigating potential violations of administrative procedures, rules, or laws within the department. Upon investigation, if they find a potential for criminal activity, they are expected to refer the investigation to the Justice Department for criminal investigation by the FBI.

WW, your comments regarding editing are off topic. If you wish to explain what you are referring to, do so in an email to drremer at gvtc.com. Remain on the article’s topic which does not include any author’s editing skills.

Ok. I get it now. Hillbilly can ask anyone of the thousands of people permanently employeed by the federal government to refer and investigation to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.

It shouldn’t be real hard for her to do that because she is responsible for saving both Ireland and Bosnia from complete distruction.

It’s a good thing she has people who will carry her water for her. It’s much easier when she can guarantee employment of loyal followers if they just toe the line and provide the fodder.

Why won’t you consider voting her out, Mr. Remer?

You edited your own response. Fact.

This is probably the blank that they are trying to fill in at the passport office. I thought it was odd before that there is so little mention of details for this period:

“Barack’s father eventually returned to Kenya, and Barack grew up with his mother in Hawaii, and for a few years in Indonesia. Later, he moved to New York, where he graduated from Columbia University in 1983.”
from
http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet.php

David, don’t be so harsh with lil’ old me! I read the article very closely and am only trying to treat the issues disclosed therein with precisely the amount of gravity and seriousness they so clearly deserve!

Believe me. I have no sympathy whatsoever for these insolent low-level employees who peek at the travel records of celebrities. In fact, I heartily condemn them for nosing around like this. Who do they think they are, and what do they think they’re going to find anyway? That Barack Obama has been vacationing with Eliot Spitzer in Cancun during Spreak Break? It’s an outrage! I say damn them straight to hell!

We all know what great friends of the Bush administration they all are working at the State Department. Further, we know that the Bush administration couldn’t possibly have any access to passport records themselves and that if they wanted to pry around in them, they’d need to enlist the help of these nefarious peons who work for contractors hired by the State Department. Peons who then get caught red-handed—the dummies! That’s probably why Bush had to enlist three of them. Just one couldn’t be trusted with the job or to even remember what they’d seen when they peeked at those travel records. Bush’s whole plot is just so obvious it’s like the morning sun shining straight onto our faces!

And although I always seem to miss the liberal outrage and calls for investigations about the flood of State Department leaks over Iraq and the war on terror, I’m sure that the liberals are in fact outraged and calling for investigations across the board on all those matters. If I’ve learned anything about liberals over the years, it’s that they never miss a beat.

Weary Willie, there’s some odd quality of genius at work in your posts that I can’t quite put my finger on… whether a gonzo comic genius or something else I can’t quite say.

Qu’est-ce que c’est frak? VM s3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_Mi3ZEQLBY

from BG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2nuHAFLqa0

I think you probably meant ot post this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7KcpgQKo2I

Maybe he needs a little Deadwood

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeYJYUM1H4g

Or an Obama fanvid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU

Weary Willie, you were warned. Now you’ll be banned for violating our rules.

Loyal Opp, appears I must spell this out so even a 3rd grader can understand and grasp. Amazing.

3 employees in 3 months access the same candidates passport data. Any idea what the odds are against that if they aren’t working with each other or being hired by someone to do what they did?

Why no other candidates files looked at? Why 3 separate employees in less than 9 weeks and none in the entire previous year?

If this were random employee curiosity, other candidates files would have been looked at, and the occurrence rate would not be sandwiched by 3 separate unrelated individuals in less than 9 weeks.

Get it? If not, it sure isn’t for lack of having now presented it in 8th grade terms and connecting all the dots. Glad to help out.

‘If this were random employee curiosity, other candidates files would have been looked at, and the occurrence rate would not be sandwiched by 3 separate unrelated individuals in less than 9 weeks.’

How do you know this?

Don’t we pretty much know where Clinton and McCain have been? Has Obama released his phone & travel records?

Good point, Dawn.

David

Supposedly the matter was handled by middle management people. And for some reason upper tier management was never notified of the incident or the firings. I know this is only speculation at this point but once again the lack of knowledge by upper tier managers just seems all too convenient. From what I understand these alerts are designed to go off when records of high level persons are accessed. Wouldn’t it be natural to assume that the importance and necessity of these special alerts would warrant notification to top level managers?

What did I do?

Breaking News!

Hillary’s passport records were breached.

Add McCain to the list.

It’s no longer a conspiracy against Obama.

Ok… so far we know, Hillary’s was breached by a curious trainee.

The same person who looked at Obama’s looked at McCain’s.

Working for Hillary? A supporter of Hillary trying to make the news and a little money on the side?

When will I be notified if someone breaches my private records? Hopefully before they empty my bank account.

LO-
The real trouble here is that we don’t know what motivated them. There was no investigation, no information passed up the flowchart, and it may be by pure chance alone that the Obama Campaign ever learned about this. Revealing information in these records is a federal crime.

Consider this scenario: a crooked bureaucrat or somebody else approaches one of these contractors and says: if you get me information from this guy’s passport file, I’ll give you this large amount of money or this cushy position somewhere that pays better, as long as you keep quiet.

Could be an agent of an enemy power looking for intelligence. Could be a member of another campaign, or somebody doing work for them. Could be the President or Vice President, or somebody working for them, looking to dig up dirt.

When you consider all the possibilities, you want somebody to investigate. At the very least, you want information on this going up the chain of command, so you know to post something up in the office telling them to keep their paws to themselves.

In the end, you want to know. That’s why we need an investigation.

I don’t get it. Is there something in these files other than a record of where the person traveled? Why is that a state secret or matter of privacy for a presidential candidate? Obama’s biographical material on his early life is less than what he gives on his own website for his wife. Ths site debunks many lies about Obama from the right wing media, but also gives more information on Obama’s early life than he wants us to know:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/obama.asp

What a coincidence that as soon as the Obama story goes public then the state department “discovers” the other 2 candidates files were also breached. So republican.So hard to believe its anything more than a CYA for Rice and her staff.

Sorry to bust your conspiracy bubble, Remer. Poor oppressed Obama is only one of ALL THREE CANDIDATES who had their files breached.

Duane-o, you need to draino your comment for not having observed the article.

It posed questions on a breaking news story. Now some of those questions are being answered. Last night when I wrote this, only an invasion of Obama’s records was being reported.

Unlike some, asking questions and answering questions is my how I approach things, not with prejudged and inaccurate responses like yours above.

In the end, you want to know. That’s why we need an investigation.

And there IS a full investigation already underway by the State Department’s internal investigator—additionally, the Justice Department is monitoring the probe and will step in if the situation warrants.

What do you people want? An independent prosecutor already? To spend a few million dollars trying to figure out why bored low level employees with access to records about public figures like McCain, Obama, and Clinton can’t contain their curiosity? Like I said, maybe Perez Hilton could be called as an expert witness to explain this phenomenon to us.

If there were more—a LOT more to this story—then the situation might warrant turning this all into a massive probe. At this stage, with the State Department’s investigation still underway, we don’t know if these folks aren’t going to prosecuted as well as fired.

What’s more, to state the obvious, in Obama’s case, I love how the automatic assumption is that if this more than just stupid curiosity and something nefarious is afoot that it must be the Bush administration instead of the more obvious choice: the Clinton campaign, who has a lot more to gain by going after Obama. Also, if people in the Bush administration wanted to look at Obama’s passport records, they could easily do so without leaving traces, considering how they control the entire Dept of Homeland Security and other agencies.

I also can’t help but notice that considering the torrential flood of leaks and security breaches over national security that the State Department has been responsible for (including the Plame leak—which was done by Armitage at the State Dept), that THIS is what liberals want to investigate.

ohrealy, Soc. Sec. #, places where educated as a child, timelines which could be maliciously and falsely connected with other events to sow seeds of doubt about a candidate, and more is contained in those records. The Privacy Act protects those records by law and makes breaching those records in an unapproved fashion a misdemeanor. A felony if that information is disseminated.

Loyal Opp said: “And there IS a full investigation already underway by the State Department’s internal investigator—”

Why two months after the fact. Why not when the first or second violation occurred. You have no standing on this defense, since your Rice and others in the State Dep’t. are on the airways and in contact with the candidates and the public admitting this is a major screw up and that they intend to take their duty and responsibility to protect private records very seriously, NOW, that they have been caught incompetent at it, to date.

David,

Then why haven’t you been asking and answering and all that jazz since it came out that Obama wasn’t the only one being snooped on. You’ve had no comments since 3:00 AM, shortly after banning Wearie Willie, then suddenly after my comment was directed to you, you spring back into action.

David, the violations that took place were committed by employees of contractors who fired two of them and discipled one of them. Upper-level people in the State Dept only found out about it Thursday afternoon, after which time they made it public, apologized profusely, and launched a full investigation. All despite the fact that these are hardly high-level breeches of national security of the kind that the State Department is famous for.

But hey, if what you want is to institute higher levels of surveillance of people with access to secret government info, some kind of instantaneous monitoring system to catch them in days instead of weeks, and then to throw the book at them afterwards… I’m all for it.

Let’s start by throwing the book at these low-level employees of contractors. And then we can move on the the folks who leaked info about renditions and NSA wiretaps. Let’s round up the whole bunch and crucify ‘em. I’m glad that we finally agree about something.

Dare I ask? What rules did Wearie Willie break? Is there a comment missing?

Do you really think that Rice should be notified every time an idiot gets into the wrong file? The managers should have some discretion about going to their superiors. If they don’t, their job may as well be abolished.
I do not expect Rice to call each manager every day and ask them either.

The person who had the breach of their file should be notified - if anyone!

j2t2, your comment appears just as prejudiced as the Republican supporters who tried to say this was just curiosity, before the facts obtained and questions had been posed, and answers received.

It appeared too much of coincidence that 3 separate individuals in less than 9 weeks would access Obama’s records only. That fact set raised a number of questions which I outlined in the article.

It is a far greater liklihood, than a conspiracy with malicious intent with prison time as a consequence, that Obama’s records were accessed out of curiosity, IF and only IF, other candidates records were also accessed out of curiosity, AND over a wider time span than just Jan. 9 through Mar. 14.

Many questions remain which must be answered before we know why our tax dollars were not spent as the law required them to be spent, protecting privacy within the Government’s databases. I hope that this was nothing more than 3 or more curious relatively new employees overextending their curious reach. We have quite enough political maliciousness taking place with lies about McCain and affairs, Obama having been raised a Muslim, and Clinton behind everything negative about Obama that may come into public view, true or not.

When the Public takes a curious interest in why Government failed, generally, that failure is corrected pretty damn quick, especially when the failure attaches to one party or another in control of that government failure. That is the purpose of my article, and the MSM coverage on this story. Americans should take their private information in the hands of the government, VERY, VERY, SERIOUSLY! If wrongdoers can access a presidential candidates records, think of the identity theft profit potential in accessing your or my private data in government databases.

Millions of Americans have already had their private data lost, stolen, or otherwise used for nefarious and illegal purposes as a result of wrongful access to databases in government and corporations. Citibank had more than a million American’s account data hacked into, Bank of America, 10’s of thousands, and the list is growing quite long now.

This is very, very costly and serious business when anyone’s private data is accessed by those who have no business accessing it. The State Department did NOT take this seriously after the first instance, NOR the second instance. The STATE Department screwed up huge, and now their pants are down around their ankles for all to see. Doesn’t do much for American pride or competence.

Dawn, this forum is NOT for administrative inquiries. Read our Rules for Participation. Direct such inquiries as stated in those rules to:

david [at] watchblog.com.

or

managing_editor [at] poliwatch.com

“places where educated as a child”, as Barbara Mikelson points out, he went to a catholic school and then a muslim school in Indonesia. His stepfather was in the oil business. His mother was clearly trying to introduce him to different religious philosophies. Then he went to live with his grandmother. Is there something shameful in any of this that Obama feels that he has to hide? Does he have some psychological problem relating to his early life, or does he want to avoid seeming too foreign? The more forthcoming he is, the better it will be. Otherwise, it looks like he is trying to hide what? Too many trips to Bangkok or Dubai?

Dawn said: “Do you really think that Rice should be notified every time an idiot gets into the wrong file?”

Do you really think Rice is the only person in upper management? Personal privacy in government data collecting is ESSENTIAL to the public’s confidence in their government. Thought that fact would have been obvious.

One infraction may be the only clue one gets to an otherwise intense criminal ID theft spanning thousands or millions of records by a sophisticated hacker. This is EXTREMELY serious business and there is NO WAY the first and second instances should not have reached upper management in the State Dep’t. who should have called for an IG inspection immediately to insure the integrity of the data in their safe keeping.

As it stood, the State Dep’t. did not investigate to insure the employee was not an identity thief mole, or political hit person promised substantial compensation for their risk taking. Identity theft is worth billions, and political hit jobs is worth control of trillions. With rewards so high, it is mandatory that our government keep privacy data at the top of their priorities at all times and secure against illegal and unscrupulous access.

Dawn, “Don’t we pretty much know where Clinton and McCain have been? Has Obama released his phone & travel records?”

ITA, I thinkk we should all know where they have all been. Also, many of W W comments were deleted, he is apparently either Eric Cartman, impaired or possibly very drunk, but comes up with shockingly smart replies every once in a while. He has posted here for years, and I think has been banned before. Oddly enough, my responses to his posts are still in the thread. I think he was banned for making fun of VOID, the holy grail here.

“j2t2, your comment appears just as prejudiced as the Republican supporters who tried to say this was just curiosity, before the facts obtained and questions had been posed, and answers received.”

My comments were prejudiced David. I have no trust in the repubs to run a decent campaign based on issues. They have already tried Obama on everything they could dig up on him, his wife and his preacher. Why would I consider this anything but an attempt to dig up dirt on him by his political opponents? David I dont mind being proven wrong but after the past 7 years of government ran for political gain by the administration I have no faith that the subsequent findings of additional breaches are anything but CYA tatics.

I also have no faith in privatizing the responsibilities of the government David which I think this whole passport mess provides yet another reason why privitazation doesnt work.

ohrealy asked: “Is there something shameful in any of this that Obama feels that he has to hide?”

You seem to be saying that a candidate for president has no entitlement to any private information whatsoever. And you miss the bigger issue. Obama is an American citizen, entitled to the same privacy protection of his government gathered data as any other American citizen paying taxes with the expectation that their identities will not be stolen, and their private government data not be made available to those who would use it against us in other ways for personal gain or profit.

Get it, now? If not, it is because you don’t choose to.

Republicans control the State Department, the Republicans screwed up, yet again. It sure appears as if ohrealy’s comments must pretend to not get the big picture in order to defend the State Dep’t.’s incompetence and oversights because ohrealy appears to defend Republicans pretty much no matter what they do, right or wrong.

I could be wrong, it is just how such comments lacking any depth of thought appear.

It would appear that public outcry will force a more thorough and deeper look into what exactly happened, and why it wasn’t addressed earlier.
What is so totally absurd now, is that a number of comments by different contributors are addressing the issue of a government agency, trusted with the care of sensitive personal data, violating the public trust by accessing that personal data. NOW….can someone jump on this real quick and tell me why it is that so many can get incensed by this, but wiretapping America is cool?????? Are they not both a violation of our right as citizens to feel safe and free to have our personal and private space and information secure? And I don’t want the standard canned response about only terrorist connections being the subject of infringement.

j2t2 said: “My comments were prejudiced David. I have no trust in the repubs to run a decent campaign based on issues.”

That’s fair and honest enough a reply, j2t2. I can only reply that Obama’s campaign is partly about ending that distrust and prejudice of every kind.

You may be right however, in not letting your guard down before he is elected. This president has violated many laws and treaties and campaign promises, and these well reported on.

jane doe, I think if you review carefully the commenters here, you will find that those not concerned over the privacy issues in this case are on record in previous comments as not considering government wiretapping of Americans an overriding concern either. And vice versa. I see a great deal of consistency in the commenters to this article on both sides of the issue.

ohrealy, contain your remarks to the subject of this article. As our Rules for Participation state, which you agree to when leaving a comment, off topic comments should be sent to david [at] watchblog.com or managing_editor [at] politwatch.com.

You have now received the same warning WW did before he was banned for failing to observe it.

“ohrealy appears to defend Republicans pretty much no matter what they do” is obviously written by a person who never reads or remembers what other people write, or can even spell Eisenhower, but I forgot, the world began on the day Obama gave his first speech hypnotizing gullible fools into thinking that he was the one, the first coming, and not just another huckster trying to win friends, influence people, and get what he wants, the Presidency of the United States at age 46, highly unlikely.

ohrealy, please provide a comment link to one of your previous positive comments about a Democratic candidate, the Democratic Party, or any party other than the GOP, and I will humbly apologize for saying: “ohrealy appears to defend Republicans pretty much no matter what they do”.

Being human, I err, and unlike most Republican officials I am aware of in office, I will admit such error when such error becomes evident.

As for your description of Obama supporters, sounds like jeolousy to me, that the GOP can’t find a candidate who can be so enthusiastically supported. They support the man because of what he says. McCain is a politician, which means he has been making speeches with words and voting with a word and virtually nothing else for a very long time.

How is it you are so critical of Obama’s followers for attending his words, but, not McCain’s followers. No need to bring Viet Nam up, that was a half century ago. What’s he done besides say words, since then. Your duplicitous standard speaks for itself.

I can respect most of McCain’s supporters who justify their support on the basis of their belief that the U.S. must have hegemonic control over the rest of the world, in order for them to maintain the illusion of security at home. That is an understandable psychology and consistent, meaning that such supporters would likely support a Democratic candidate who held a similar position as opposed to Ron Paul for example, who doesn’t.

What is small and petty, is applying one standard to one’s own party and quite another to any other party. That is just plain illogical team affiliation without reason, integrity, or consistency. Those kind of party supporters regardless of party affiliation will always be viewed by me as small and petty.

P.S., ohrealy, you will hear no criticism from me for C. Rice’s apology to the candidates today and yesterday, if as she says, she was just made aware of the abuses of privacy information.

Doesn’t excuse however, her being responsible for the oversight and communication structure that failed to alert her or other senior management to multiple violations before now. That is an entirely different and legitimate critique, since that failure permitted two employees to be fired before the IG could investigate motive, disposition of the information accesses, and possible links to others seeking the same intent, and we now know their were at least 2 others with similar intent.

David, I completely agree with your response to me, however, I was referring to those making comments on the different news sites. I do believe if McCain had not been included with the two Democrat candidates, this would not be an issue with them, but just more of the same hypocricy. Can’t turn on their own guy, though.

“What is small and petty” is trying to get people banned form your VOID forum for having incorrect opinions. I don’t keep track of the comment numbers, try actually reading the forums, I am a Democrat, and you are not, you are an Obamite.

This is a real old post that might interest you:
“The Rpblcns are ruining this country. They have been a national disgrace for decades, and each one that comes along is worse than the one before. GWBush makes Reagan look good. They both made Nixon look terrific, and they all make Eisenhower look like he was in the wrong political party.
I have said this before, but I will say it again. Before this current idiot was selected by Rpblcn appointees to the SCOTUS, I had always felt that any tax I paid to the federal government was good, since I got the Government of The United States of America for my money. Now it has become a joke. Let the joke end with the midterm elections, strip this worthless obnoxious former drunk of all power, and send him back to a permanent vacation in Crawford, Texas.
Posted by: ohrealy at August 4, 2006 07:57 PM
///
Tim Crow, Linda H., Play Nice, and Allen, YAHOO!
MyPetGoat, womanmarine, Kevin23 , Thom Houts, and dee, Please write here more often.
KansasDem and David R. Remer thanks, as always for your insightful contributions.”

I guess you are not as insightful now as you were 2 years ago, what has changed, has your brain been washed recently?

ohrealy, I humbly apologize for my erroneous comment depicting your affiliation as Republican.

You are right. I am voting for Obama because he appears to me the best candidate for my nation. I am NOT voting for him because he is a Democrat. And if I thought McCain would be better for my country, I would vote for him. NOT because I am Republican. For I am neither Democrat nor Republican when it comes down to deciding who can best lead this nation forward. Too often those parties utterly fail to provide adequate choices for leadership, and history is full of examples on both sides.

ohrealy,

Regarding your comments here referencing Weary Willie being banned, you may discuss that in email to david [at] watchblog.com or managing_editor [at] poliwatch.org. It is not the topic of this article.

You have now received the same warning WW and Dawn received before they rejected it and plowed ahead to violate WB’s rules again, only to be banned as a consequence. Hope this helps you chart a different course of action.

D R R, good luck on getting people to have a discussion with you.

janedoe, thanks for the reply, and sorry for misunderstanding your reference to different news sites.

From my experience, there is just such an enormous difference in approach, perspective, education, knowledge, and wisdom between voters who vote for the candidate regardless of party who best represents their hopes and expectations for government action and behavior, as opposed to those who vote for a Party regardless of what candidates that party puts forth. Huge, huge difference.

I remain hopeful and optimistic because I am witnessing the growth of unprecedented numbers of Independent voters and registrants, who now outnumber either Democratic or Republican registered voters at last tally.

Thanks ohrealy, but, that has not been a problem for many years and won’t be going forward. Unless by discussion you meant agree. Getting people to agree with me has always been an iffy proposition. :-)

If we all agreed, this would be a very boring site.

I think, thus far, this is much ado about nothing.

This passport issue is interesting, but a distraction from the real issues. Obama and his spokespersons are making a bigger deal of this than it really is. He is not the first candidate whose file has been improperly reviewed.

He makes a big deal of this to distract the discussion from the Pastor Wright situation which will never go away; and rightfully so.

As for your description of Obama supporters, sounds like jeolousy to me, that the GOP can’t find a candidate who can be so enthusiastically supported.

With the latest Rasmussen poll showing McCain ahead of Obama by eight points, I question whether Obama’s support, though enthusiastic, is broad enough to inspire jealousy among Republicans. To me, Obama resembles Howard Dean, who also once enjoyed hordes of enthusiastic followers… but unfortunately for Dean, his collapse came too early for him to secure his party’s nomination.

Add to Obama’s recent tanking in poll matchups with McCain, his unfavorables are also skyrocketing. What’s more, there’s still no end in sight to the infighting with Hillary. Recent polls show that as many as 25% of DEMOCRATS will vote for McCain over Obama. And all of this is happening just as McCain is starting to raise large sums of money while Hillary and Obama are spending vast sums attacking each other.

Of course, polls have changed many times previously and will undoubtedly change many times again. But one thing’s for sure: the luster is coming off of Barack Obama very quickly, and whether he’ll recover or continue his decline remains to be seen. Whatever else is going on, it’s now clear that we have a real contest on our hands—something not even many Republicans anticipated just a couple months ago.

What utter absurdity,
C. Johnson…..funny how it isn’t even his decision to launch an investigation. Guess maybe we could all tell Condi to never mind including McCain in the deal………… and if he has enough control in DC to order up something like that, then everyone who has concerns about his abilities to accomplish things should feel a lot better!

Jane, of course senators—whether Clinton, Obama, or McCain—don’t have the power to launch this type of investigation. They could hold (or at least call for) congressional investigations if they wanted, but I haven’t heard any of them calling for that.

What’s offensive about the Obama campaign’s reaction to all of this is that while Obama bases so much of his message as a presidential candidate on not playing politics and striving for unity, he’s immediately tried to play politics with it long before the facts are in and has launched divisive, angry, politically charged attacks.

His spokesman said, “This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years. Our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes.”

He doesn’t know that the administration is behind this at all. How does he know it isn’t the Clinton campaign? Or for that matter, Obama-supporters who just wanted to have a peek at their hero’s private info? He has no idea, so this is nothing but politics as usual—exactly what Obama loftily pretends he’s too good to indulge in.

There’s nothing in Obama’s record to distinguish him enough to think he’s a better choice than anybody else. His claim to the office is that he can unite people, overcome divisions, rise above petty political squabbling. But when push to comes to shove, he plays as dirty as anyone and throws around unproven, politically-motivated accusations. If he does this as a campaigner, why should anybody believe that he’ll behave any differently under the far greater pressures of the presidency? What somebody actually does is far more telling that what they say they’ll do.

Loyal Opp, take off your political prejudicial blinders and read things for what they are.

The statement is nothing more than the logical argument I have put forth that ALL citizens have a right to have their privacy protected by the government when the government collects personal data. This has always been the bargain and exchange between the people and the government’s legal right to collect private information, that they had a sacred duty to protect that information and never abuse it.

““This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years. Our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes.””

This charge is at the government failure “to protect the private information of the American people” of whom Obama is one. There is absolutely nothing unfactual, nor partisan, nor untrue in this statement. It does not even imply that the government was behind the actual seeking of the information (rather silly now that I think about it since the government already has the data and with sufficient rank, the legal right to access it).

Read it for what it says and means, and stop projecting a political conspiracy mind set into words clearly not meant, nor stated in the fashion your apparently prejudiced comment indicates.

Loyal Opp said: “With the latest Rasmussen poll showing McCain ahead of Obama by eight points, I question whether Obama’s support, though enthusiastic,”

Haha! Now if that isn’t comparing apples to oranges. To figure out how much the polls will be for Obama or Clinton AFTER the convention, you must add Obama’s numbers and Clinton’s numbers together as they represent the WHOLE of the Democratic polling and that sum is now, and will continue to be, vastly superior to McCain’s polling numbers on his best day.

Amazing to me that folks continue against all hope to harbor the fantasy that John McCain could possibly beat the Democratic Nominee this November. The numbers just aren’t there, and I mean all the numbers, the big picture, the whole enchilada.

Republicans are no longer trusted with power by the large majority of American people. That is in the polls, even the quiet GOP polls. With McCain’s only strength being his penchant for perpetual war and the majority of American’s weariness of it, it truly is remarkable to me that a sentient being would entertain the notion of a McCain victory in November, regardless of the name of the two Democratic Nominee.

googlumpus said: “If we all agreed, this would be a very boring site.”

Ain’t that the truth. I love this center column the best, I find more divergent views here in a month that I find in either the Red or Blue column amongst Democrats or Republicans in 6 months.

Between Rhinehold’s and Doug Langworthy’s Libertarian perspectives, Dawn’s conservative independent perspectives, my whatever makes sense and logic to me perspectives, Joel S. Hirschhorn’s it’s not the politics, it’s the Constitution perspective, there is much here to disagree and agree about. Most importantly for me, there is much to be learned here.

I had little inkling of what Libertarianism was before coming to WatchBlog for example, and championed it in part as I was learning more. I don’t agree with the Libertarian Party anymore as viable philosophy for our nation’s future, but, I have adopted a fair number of their platform stances as my own, and a fair sum of their reasoning which makes sense to me.

We need some Green Party writers here. I will work on that.

State does a poor job on records. Actually, it is a problem for all government and firms. The internet and information revolutions have made all this kind of stuff easily available and our security systems are behind the curve, especially in government, which is behind the curve in general on techno issues.

There is really nothing you could find out from passport records that people don’t already know about the candidates. The only embarassing thing I can think of would be if one of them tried to renounce his/her citizenship and I think we would have heard about that by now.

So this is a serious information management issue, but not really a political one. Many of the procedures put in place were done in the middle 1990s, when Clinton appointees ran the place.

Since we demand both instant acess and complete privacy, I think this will recurr. Each time it needs to be addressed, but this is not a problem that will ever to ultimately solved.

Loyal Opp said: “With the latest Rasmussen poll showing McCain ahead of Obama by eight points, I question whether Obama’s support, though enthusiastic,”

Haha! Now if that isn’t comparing apples to oranges. To figure out how much the polls will be for Obama or Clinton AFTER the convention, you must add Obama’s numbers and Clinton’s numbers together as they represent the WHOLE of the Democratic polling and that sum is now, and will continue to be, vastly superior to McCain’s polling numbers on his best day.

David, sometimes the ignorance displayed in your remarks surprises me. Sometimes it astounds me. Sometimes, like now, it surprises, astounds and flabbergasts me at once.

These are head-to-head poll numbers in which those polled are given a choice between two candidates—just as they will be given in the general election.

But okay, using your ignorant formula, let’s do just what you say and combine Obama and Clinton’s numbers now to see what either of them will have after the convention. 82% is the number we get. Do you believe that number—of course you must, since you’re the one claiming that this is the formula to use to find out the real number.

This poses a problem as to what to do with the 46% who already say they support McCain. Using Remer-math, we’re already at 128%. Bravo on your latest display of superior logic and reason!

David:

Fri Mar 21, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The passport files of presidential candidates Sen. Hillary Clinton, a Democrat, and Sen. John McCain, a Republican, were improperly accessed by State Department workers, a U.S. official said on Friday.

The official, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter, declined further comment.

Next conspiracy, please.

Loyal Opp, the ignorance is all yours when it comes to reading polls. Rasmussen’s head to head poll incorporates only about 2/3 of the Democratic ‘likely voters’ for either Obama or Clinton (1/3 oppose their Dem. candidate’s rival, ergo phone poll puts them in McCain’s column). While those polled who are Republicans have no split for the nomination and therefore have but one choice, a Republican or a Democrat and therefore report Republican.

Additionally, the Rasmussen poll’s daily tracking results are collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a four-day rolling average basis. The general election sample is currently based upon interviews with 1,600 Likely Voters. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

That above paragraph is significant and quoted directly from the Rasmussen poll. It is significant because the Gallup moving average poll shows McCain 46, Obama 44, with a margin of error of +/-2%, meaning a dead heat between them. But, here’s the kicker, the Gallup poll is made of 4,400 registers voters nationwide.

Making the Gallup poll the vastly more reliable and valid poll: 3 times the sample size, and they use Registered voters as opposed to Likely voters. That is significant because more Registered voters will vote than Likely voters, as Likely Voters are gauged by each respondent’s stated level of interest in the election and they may, or may not, even be registered to vote. Registered voters are by definition prepared by action, not opinion, to actually turn out and vote.

BTW, the Gallup poll also shows McCain over Clinton 47 to 45%, again, a dead heat within the margin of error of +/- 2%.

Cherry picking polls without understanding the probability and statistics modeling underwriting them might sound impressive to folks who have never taken probability and statistics, but, rings hollow to those of us who have and can compare models and results on an objective level.

Jack, funny that you feel passport applicants provide information that is within reach of the general public. Most of us consider our Social Security numbers confindential and demand they be kept that way.
Sic Eagle, it’s too bad that you have such strong over-reactions to the call for attention to this. You certainly call up your close ties to the field of law when it strenghtens your belief. Seems that is only applicable when it suits your fancy, however, just as this is only a Democratic effort in your mind.
I used to work for an agency that recorded and maintained criminal and applcation data. In many years as an employee, I saw several people dismissed immediately for accessing information about family members, ex-spouses, neighbors or etc. 99% were just out of curiosity, but the agency maintained the standards it was held to by public agreement and demand. Those same standards should apply to all government agencies, regardless of level. It should also apply regardless of the “status” or “position” of the person whose information is violated. The fact that all three mentioned are candidates for the office of President, is more significant just because of the enhanced security that goes with the position.
The possibility of conspirational actions is nothing to poo-poo. Let an investigation take place and put it to rest upon findings.

Sicilian Eagle, at the time I wrote the article and posed the QUESTIONS there was NO knowledge of all three candidates records being accessed. The article was based on the information known at the time and given the information available at the time, demanded certain questions be asked which I outlined.

Trying to come back after the fact and say the article was falsely premised based on facts not available at the time the article was written is a bit like criticizing Robert E. Lee as a fool for ever having led the South given the outcome after the fact. He certainly wasn’t a fool for fighting a losing war before the outcome of the war was known.

Your logic leaves a hole big enough for a Mack Truck to drive through. Had the information set available when the article was written turned out to be the entire fact set, questions and investigation of conspiracy would have been fully justified.

In fact, you are still prejudicing the issue. There may yet prove to be an extra employer behind one or more of the employee’s searches. The investigations have not been conducted. But, feel free to prejudge the facts before they are known.

One piece of information remains valid so far, that these were separate instances by separate employees, and therefore the potential for differing motives and intents remains an open question.

Plus, I was dead on when calling the State Dep’t. irresponsible and potentially engaged in cover-up. Why were these instances not referred for IG investigation which was to be expected. Why was upper management not notified of two employees on more than 2 occasions breaking the law and violating SOP in viewing candidate’s data?

These are still very valid questions demanding investigation and answers.

I understand your proclivity to now dismiss the whole issue as not leading anywhere. But, fortunately we have laws and Constitutional provisions for oversight that prevent folks like you having your way for political purposes.

Jane Doe

I said that i think it is a serious breach. It just is not a political partisan thing. There is nothing in those files that anybody could use against a candidate and the fact included (besides SS#) are well known. If someone steals Obama’s, Clinton’s or McCain’s identity, it would be a problem, but if you were going to do that, I would suppose you would try to find someone less prominent. I think if someone walks into a 7/11 with a credit card and claims to be Barack Obama, it won’t be hard to detect that fraud.

The system State uses now was put in place during the Clinton times. The career bureaucrats who run the program have been there through several administrations.

Is it serious and embarassing? Yes, but it is a big stretch to make it political and a major paranoia to consider it anything but some stupid guys playing stupid games, which cost them their jobs.

An investigation cannot turn up anything more than that because the passport files do not contain anything more. Look at that form you filled out to get your passport. That is what they have.

Jack, one last attempt here….realizing that getting into a closed mind is near impossible.
Three citizens…who had passport application information on file, in a government office, were violated by employees (whose employment appears to be seasonal and who are not government employees, but are contracted from an outside agency for temporary or intermittent status) and NOTHING was said for months, until the information inadvertently got out.
It isn’t about the access to the information, it’s about one more attempt to COVER UP what is taking place under the ineptitude of this administration. And you guys are once again keeping the subject of this thread going anywhere and everywhere but where it should be!

David Remer

Ok, Blame Bush:

Read this:

“The third employee, who has not been fired, worked for The Analysis Corporation (TAC), which is headed by John O. Brennan, a former CIA agent who is an adviser to Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign on intelligence and foreign policy.”

I knew that Bush and Barry were in cahoots on this, I swear.

The State Dept. should double check and make certain that all the incriminating hard drives have been destroyed.

Sicilianeagle, that is by the far the most important piece of information to emerge about this yet. An actual link between the culprits and one of the campaigns.

What did Obama know and when did he know it? He needs to put his hand on the bible in front of the camera and give us a full accounting of his actions. I understand that the parties involved here are being polygraph tests. Obama, as the only candidate linked to this scandal, should himself submit to a polygraph test. Again, he is the ONLY candidate with actual ties to these criminal acts.

So we need to know, at this point, if he personally ordered this security breech on the part of his subordinates. And if he didn’t order it, did he create and encourage an environment of lawlessness for others? What does Tim Russert have to say about this?

And if the Obama campaign was trying to break into McCain and Hillary’s records, why were they trying to access Obama’s as well? To alter and hide incriminating evidence about Obama’s travel records? Why would they find it necessary to do that—just who are Obama’s foreign contacts? Very disturbing.

(Of course, this is primarily a parody of standard-operating procedure for liberal pundits).

sicilianeagle, such narrow vision. Who says it must be the contractor who is the employer of the records search. The Cold War should have taught you of some wider potential employers of internal spies. China has spies all over the U.S., and our Intelligence Agencies have made this public. Other nation’s do have an interest in how our elections turn out, you know. There are many potential payers to buy private information on candidates, if there the motives lie outside of the realm of just stupid and curious.

Trying to second guess with any accuracy what was behind these illegal incursions into private data before a thorough investigation is pure speculation, useful only in pointing out WHY there must be an investigation at all, which was the purpose of this article in light of no thorough investigations having taken place before now, despite multiple person and events of illegal behavior. It is a misdemeanor to access records which a government employee has no legitimate business accessing.

Loyal Opp said: “He [Obama] needs to put his hand on the bible in front of the camera and give us a full accounting of his actions.”

IF you want to play fast and loose, LO, Obama is not the only candidate with ties. McCain is very chummy with Bush these days, and the State Dep’t. is under Bush’s executive authority. A very definite potential tie between McCain and the records. Rather absurd however, this line of reasoning of yours, provided a thorough investigation is forthcoming, don’t you think?

David, you’re failing to keep up.

Your beliefs about how chummy McCain is with Bush are irrelevant now that we know Obama is the one with ties to the villains.

FACT: The highest-ranking person among the three conspirators works for a firm owned by a former CIA agent (a spy) who is an Obama advisor. A spy, David! And this case is about spying! It couldn’t be more obvious.

David:

I just want to correct you on one of your statements. IMHO, it is no big deal, but if you are going to use the polls in an arguement, you need to be correct on the concept.

You said,”Making the Gallup poll the vastly more reliable and valid poll: 3 times the sample size, and they use Registered voters as opposed to Likely voters. That is significant because more Registered voters will vote than Likely voters, as Likely Voters are gauged by each respondent’s stated level of interest in the election and they may, or may not, even be registered to vote. Registered voters are by definition prepared by action, not opinion, to actually turn out and vote.”

I think that you misunderstand the likely voters vs. registered voters concept. It appears to me that likely voters are a smaller subset of registered voters. If you are not regestered to vote……how can you be likely to vote? Small point, but before you claim someone else’s ignorance on an issue in public, you should not invalidate your own arguement while doing so. Just MHO.

Here is a nice article on likely vs. registered voters:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/frank_newport_on_likely_voters.php

IMHO Loyal Opposition currently has the point on you about the polls.

Your origional article was good with the exception of the Watergate reference. You jumped the gun, blamed President Bush with sketchy facts that did not hold, made a big security problem into another political fight that did not need to be. I sure will be glad when people finally quit trying to blame people for problems to score political points and start actually trying to solve the said problems. But why should one look for solutions in our political climate?

Submariner, nice try, but using facts and logic can make no difference when arguing with a far left point of view.

Taking David’s arguments for example, in this thread alone he has informed us that

1). The best way to figure out what the Democratic candidate’s head-to-head numbers with McCain after the convention will be is to add together their current poll numbers. Imagine if both were at 50% right now vs. McCain! That would mean that 100% of voters will favor the Democrat after the convention! And if they go over 50%, then over 100% will favor the Democrat!

It’s conceivable, according to liberal logic, that the Democrat could carry the election with 120% of the vote in November.

2). That likely voters are less likely to vote than registered voters. The absurdity of this statement requires and deserves no comment.

3). Bush is responsible for the actions of Obama campaign advisors. Why? That’s never quite explained. It’s all part of the mystical belief system of liberals.

Well it’s certainly good that the gift of comprehension is not a requirement on here, or many would fail to qualify.
Of course this comment will mystify a few…..

How can you add Hillary’s and Barack’s poll numbers when they both have sizable percentages who say they will vote for McCain if their preferred candidate isn’t nominated? David, have you ever been polled? I have. They ask “If the election were held today, and the candidates were Barack Obama and John McCain, for whom would you vote?” They then ask the same question but with Hillary instead of Obama. The same person can say they would vote for Obama, then say they would vote for McCain or Hillary the second time. This is one person. Assuming this person would vote for either Democrat, adding both of his/her answers together gives this one person two votes according to the Remer Voting Math System. But then again, voting twice is nothing new for Democrats, now is it? ;)

Duane-o…..thanks for ending my evening with a rolling-on-the-floor laugh!!
Amazing…

janedoe,

Glad I could help. What should actually give an accurate pisture is to average Hillary and Obama’s percentages and compare them to an average of McCain’s percentages against the respective Dimocrats. That gives McCain a 46.5% to 44.5% advantage in the Gallup poll, a statistical tie. Oh yeah, and likely voters are a smaller subset of registered voters. That’s two of the other questions they ask you. If you tell the pollster you’re registered, he/she proceeds to ask if you are likely to vote. When I initially saw the beginning of David Remer’s post saying you have to add both Dimocrats numbers together, I thought “There’s no way this is really David Remer!” He proved me wrong.

Jane

I agree with you that it is hard to get into a closed mind, but let me ask a couple simple questions.

How would the Bush administration even in theory seek to gain anything by searching passport records from McCain, Clinton and Obama?

WHy would they choose such low level employees to access this data?

I understand that this is an embarassment for the State Dept and the USG and to the extent that Bush is the President, you could say it is an embarassment for him. But the system was put in place during the Clinton Administration and it run by career bureaucrats, who statistically generally vote Democratic. It is a big stretch to make this a partisan political problem.

BTW I understand how much fun it is to smack the president about this thing, but if you want to vote for Bush in the 2008 election, that is your choice. Just do not write his name on your ballot, since any other choice you make will not be a vote for George Bush.

jack…..nowhere did I say that Bush personally had a hand in anything. I did say that nobody saying anything about the violation for so long, was one more thing this administration was guilty of. Don’t imagine that if John Smith, or Ann Jones had their files breached, it would be terribly news-worthy.
Just once…..could you just read what it written rather than putting a dam spin on it and redirecting it to suit you and rest of the Reps??

Jack-
What they might be able to gain is information regarding police investigations in other countries, attempts to renounce citizenship, and other details. Ironically, travel records are not what they would find, since those are kept separately.

But the real scandal, apart from any speculation, for the Bush administration is that things remain poorly run under them, especially in a case where people were fired without an investigation into events and people involved, and especially without the information being passed up the chain of the command and the affect parties informed.

Government will never be ideally run, but that’s no excuse for it be poorly run, or to accept it being run that way.

Stephen

They would find attempts to renounce citizenship. If any of the candidates has tried to do that, they certainly should not be president, but none of them has.

Other details just are not in those records. They are not part of the State Dept’s porfolio. There is nothing in the records that could be useful.

I repeat that the State Dept’s screw up is serious, but it is not a partisan screw up. The current system was set up under Clinton and it is managed by career civil servants.

So, I agree that government is often screwed up. It does not manage technology well. This particular screw up is just another piece of evidence that we have to be careful what tasks we give to the government.

Fortunately, however, State does not keep detailed records on American citizens. The Passport files have the data you filled in when you applied for a passport. It proves you are a U.S. citizen and nothing else.

Duan-o, by the same logic that says the vast majority of Republicans who don’t like McCain are going to vote for him anyway in November because being Republican, voting Democrat is not an option, and staying home is a vote for a Democrat.

Ergo, those Dems polled who are opposed to Obama or Clinton now, will register there dissatisfaction by saying they will vote McCain (in the hopes of tilting the reported poll toward their Dem. nominee). In November, they won’t vote for McCain at all, as they are Democrats, and a Republican is not an option. Especially when they recognize that a third term for Bush by another name is what a McCain vote would represent.

Sicilian Eagle, at the time I wrote the article and posed the QUESTIONS there was NO knowledge of all three candidates records being accessed. The article was based on the information known at the time and given the information available at the time, demanded certain questions be asked which I outlined.

Trying to come back after the fact and say the article was falsely premised based on facts not available at the time the article was written is a bit like criticizing Robert E. Lee as a fool for ever having led the South given the outcome after the fact. He certainly wasn’t a fool for fighting a losing war before the outcome of the war was known.

Like WMD’s?

newbie, nice try at spin but no cigar.

My reply you quote is in response to a critique launched with the benefit of hindsight’s additional information not available when the news first broke. I wrote about the breaking news, and posed questions and possibilities that needed to be addressed.

Tell me, does it make it all OK now that all 3 candidate’s records were accessed by 3 or more individuals on multiple occasions. No need for anyone in DC to answer the questions now?

The new information puts some questions to rest and raises as many, if not more.