Glenn Greenwald's blog mentions Democratic Underground...

[pacalo]

Searching for other perspectives about yesterday's judiciary hearing, I was led to Greenwald's blog through firedoglake:

Feingold: It is a disgrace and disservice to your office and the President to have accused people on this Committee of opposing eavesdropping on terrorists.

Gonzales: I didn't have you in mind or anyone on the Committee when I referred to people who oppose eavesdropping on terrorists. Perish the thought.

Feingold: Oh, well it's nice that you didn't have us "in your mind" when making those accusations, but given that you and the President were running around the country accusing people of opposing eavesdropping on terrorists in the middle of an election, the fact that you didn't have Congressional Democrats in "mind" isn't significant. Your intent was to make people think that anyone who opposed the "TSP" did not want to eavesdrop on terrorists, even though that was false. No Democrats oppose eavesdropping on terrorists.

Gonzales: I wasn't referring to Democrats.

So, apparently, all those speeches Bush officials and their supporters have spent the last year giving accusing people of opposing eavesdropping on terrorists, and all the television commericals making the same accusations throughout the months leading up to the election, were not about Democrats at all, but were about random bloggers who are against all eavesdropping. Where? Maybe on Smirking Chimp and Democratic Underground. That is who they meant when they were talking about opposing eavesdropping on Osama bin Laden. They didn't mean Democrats in Congress. The entire campaign and all of those accusations were directed only to the bloggers who don't want them eavesdropping at all.

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2007/01/grave-and-epic-war-spending-time-with.html

I don't believe I've read any comments on DU that were against eavesdropping of enemies to this nation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Greenwald's statement seemed quite careless to me.

[Connie_Corleone]

1. I've NEVER read a post here against eavesdropping of terrorists.

On edit: Looks like the poster below me is right. Could be sarcasm. I take back what I said about his ass.

[pacalo]

5. The anger here about the eavesdropping is aimed in the right direction.

Knowing how partisan & vindictive this administration is, will they eavesdrop on his political enemies if they say/do something that will deflate their oversized but tender egos?

Example: Ted Kennedy's name is on the no-fly list -- why?

[Lerkfish]

2. it read to me as sarcasm.

didn't you get that impression?

[Democrat 4 Ever]

6. I got Greenwald's sarcasm. He was making the finer point that the

Rethugs were, of course, saying that Democrats didn't want to wiretap terrorists. Gonzo was lying through his teeth and Greenwald was calling him on his BS by pretending that Gonzo was only talking about blogs.

Greenwald knew, of course, that no one, anywhere, but especially on DU, was supporting not wiretapping terrorists - but everyone who loves this country, the Constitution and the American people were against illegal wiretapping - something Gonzo "forgot" to mention.

[pacalo]

9. I've never, ever been accused of not having a sense of humor

but I didn't get the sarcasm. I perceived it as citing DU as an example of those who hold views outside the status quo, the internet loonies.

If I didn't get the sarcasm, how many others missed it as well?

[wicket]

12. Agreed

n/t

[jwirr]

3. DU does not oppose ease dropping on terrorists or criminals.

What we oppose is doing it without oversight from the courts - case by case. This protects American citizens from political harassment by elected officials. Don't they realize that a president could terrorize his opponents with out oversight?

[Nickster]

4. I'm pretty sure you're not "getting" his message correctly.

It's a snarky attack at what Gonzo was saying, if you read the rest of the article, he clearly agrees with what we are saying.

He's dismissing Gonzo's argument and saying that Gonzo's claim is that he was only referring to those "nasty" bloggers and not Democrats. I believe Greenwald's intention was to convey that Gonzo's message of being against surveilance at any cost was being deflected by Gonzo onto bloggers. Not that Greenwald agrees with Gonzo's claim.

[pacalo]

8. Okay, that makes sense.

This is a chatboard between ordinary Americans; we're not journalists but citizens who are genuinely concerned about what's going on, so Greenwald cited DU to infer that Gonzo is overdramatizing the blogsphere.

(Hi, Agent Mike! :hi:)

[Nickster]

10. Exactly. It was a bit difficult to get his meaning from that passage, but looking at it

in context with the rest of his message and from reading his past work, I feel secure with my assesment of his message.

[rox63]

7. I think Greenwald needs one of these...

:sarcasm:

[seaglass]

11. There was a poll on DU that asked exactly that yesterday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3147381

I'm guessing it was inspired by Greenwald's blog entry.

I love Glenn Greenwald, I think what he was getting at is that the opinion that terrorists shouldn't be eavesdropped on is so obscure that it would likely only be found by some anonymous poster on a message board - and clearly this is not what all the Republican ads were about.

[Strawman]

13. It's simple: DUers endorse the Blob Machine, fascists love the Naked Machine

http://www.washingtonian.com/bookreviews/124.html