?

Log in

armchair activists' Journal [entries|friends|calendar]
armchair activists

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

ACLU backs Limbaugh's privacy rights [12 Jan 2004|08:04pm]

bitterwhiteguy
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040112/ap_on_en_ot/limbaugh_painkillers_3

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Rush Limbaugh and the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) don't agree about much, but they're in accord that the conservative radio commentator's medical records should be off-limits to prosecutors.

The Florida ACLU filed court papers Monday supporting Limbaugh's argument that investigators violated his constitutional right to privacy when they seized his medical records in November to investigate whether he violated drug laws when he purchased prescription painkillers.

"It may seem odd that the ACLU has come to the defense of Rush Limbaugh," the state chapter's executive director, Howard Simon, said in a statement. "But we have always said that the ACLU's real client is the Bill of Rights and we will continue to safeguard the values of equality, fairness and privacy for everyone, regardless of race, economic status or political point of view."

State Attorney Barry Krischer had no comment on the ACLU's involvement. Spokesman Mike Edmondson said prosecutors have followed state laws and have protected Limbaugh's rights throughout the investigation. Limbaugh has not been charged with a crime.

Prosecutors say they cannot continue their investigation until they review Limbaugh's medical records, which have been sealed since Dec. 23.

Limbaugh's attorneys have asked an appeals court to keep the records sealed past a Jan. 23 deadline set by the Palm Beach Circuit Court.

Investigators went after the records discovering that Limbaugh received more than 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months, at a pharmacy near his Palm Beach mansion. Limbaugh's former maid told investigators she had been supplying him prescription painkillers for years.

Limbaugh argues that the investigation is politically motivated — a charge that prosecutors deny. His attorney Roy Black says the records would only prove Limbaugh suffered from a serious medical condition and was prescribed painkillers.

Limbaugh admitted his addiction in October, saying it stemmed from severe back pain. He took a five-week leave from his afternoon radio show to enter a rehabilitation program.
post comment

[23 Dec 2003|02:01am]

bitterwhiteguy
Stratfor's Analysis of Saddam's Capture & US Intelligence EffortsCollapse )
post comment

Wesley Clark [13 Oct 2003|11:16am]

chaircrusher
My son is a Dean partisan but exhaustively details what's wrong with Clark. In case you were wondering.

I didn't catch his whole speech here, but a friend of mine went, and apparently Clark went off on Koreans in general, saying "they're crazy." That's certainly not very politic of him.

And if anyone cares, it was University of Iowa NeoCon Law students that got him in trouble for taking speaking fees after he'd announced his candidacy.
2 comments|post comment

[18 Sep 2003|04:43pm]

auditorium
WASHINGTON - The Senate on Tuesday approved Bush administration plans to research new battlefield uses for nuclear weapons and improve the United States' capacity to make and test them.

The 53-41 vote to retain funding for the plan, powered by the administration's Republican allies, set up an unusual intraparty fight on Capitol Hill. The GOP-led House voted overwhelmingly in July for legislation that would strip at least $16 million from Bush's nuclear weapons initiatives.


see how your Senators voted
post comment

California Recall [03 Sep 2003|01:47pm]

tryffid
For those of you in California, you may already be voting No on the recall on 7 October. Move On is basically trying to make sure at least 1 million California actually remember to vote, and that they vote No.

Pledge to vote No by signing this petition, then send it along to friends of yours who may forget to vote:
http://www.moveon.org/pac/recall/?id=-3218124-qmofhl9lRtN3n902PRuCJg
post comment

[21 Aug 2003|11:18am]

auditorium
Howard Dean is speaking at a rally at Westlake Center at 4th Ave. and Pine Street - Seattle from 5:30PM-8:00PM, Sunday, August 24.

Out of curiosity, I might go check him out.
1 comment|post comment

does the texas redistricting fracas annoy you? [21 Aug 2003|11:16am]

optic
https://www.moveon.org/texasads/

(link from talking points)
2 comments|post comment

Campaign funding & public matching funds [15 Aug 2003|09:50pm]

maarten
I'm confused about campaign financing mechanics after reading this article in the Washington Post. [free reg required]

Summary: The article says that Bush is rejecting public matching funds in the primary so he can raise and spend more money, a planned $170M, compared to a spending limit of $46M for others who do take public funds. However, for the post-primary campaign Bush is said to plan to take public funds and limit himself to a $75M spending cap.

My impression is that in the general election phase, public funding is an all-or-nothing: if you accept it, the amount you receive is also your spending cap. (See FEC brochure here, though note that the absolute amounts have changed.)

Here's what I don't get: Bush has no competition in the Republican primaries. What's he going to do with that $170M, especially if he can't spend it in the general election campaign?
4 comments|post comment

From the ACLU [29 Jul 2003|11:32am]

auditorium
Thank (or Spank) Your Representative for their Vote on a Key PATRIOT
Act Provision

Last Tuesday, Congress began its revolt against the USA PATRIOT Act by
passing an amendment that would limit the use of "sneak and peek" search
warrants for your home. These search warrants, also called "black bag"
searches, allow government agents to secretly search homes, confiscate certain types of property and essentially bug computers without notifying the subject of the search that it is happening.

By voting to block the use of these searches, the House has taken an
important first step toward undoing the parts of the PATRIOT Act that invade our freedom. It is crucial that you give feedback to your Representative on his or her vote on this important amendment.

Click here to get information and to send a free fax to your
Representative:

http://www.aclu.org/NationalSecurity/NationalSecurity.cfm?ID=13196&c=24

when you enter your zip it lets you know how your Representative voted.
post comment

ACLU: government snooping stuff [22 Jul 2003|10:40am]

optic
protecting the right to read books without government prying

protecting personal information from government data-mining with no just cause
1 comment|post comment

not dean [21 Jul 2003|11:35am]

optic
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030728&s=chait072803 [mirror]
4 comments|post comment

ad ideas for the DNC [21 Jul 2003|11:29am]

optic
(lens): i would like to see a series of commercials comparing pre-war and post-war mealy-mouthisms from bushies
(lens): id also like to see one showing the speech where he criticised clinton/gore for the buck not stopping there and then his speech handing the buck to george tenet
(lens): and another one comparing his mealy-mouthisms about our fighting men and women with his cuts to military and veteran benefits
post comment

what are you doing? [15 Jul 2003|11:12am]

optic
i was just skimming an interesting metafilter thread (not safe for republicans) about the latest in WMD news, particularly the apparent refusal of some CIA people to accept being scapegoated. that's fun. anyway, some canadian asked the question of americans who oppose bush: what are you doing? here is one person's answer, which i found appropriate for involve.

Is there anything we can do? It will be like turning a battleship - change won't happen quickly, impatient as many of us are. Don't forget, people who have been getting their news from the web and who have been incorporating foreign and alternate media sources have known about much of this for a long time. People who only get news from mainstream media need deprogramming from the steady drip drip drip of sophisticated propaganda that's been building since just post 9/11.

What can we do?
Put pressure on the media. They can and should keep these issues alive. Write and call media encouraging them to be a public watchdog and applaud them for good coverage. Let them know you have expectations and that you are watching their coverage. They have short attention spans and will be distracted by the next story - it's up to their readers and viewers to keep these issues alive. Also, let them know when coverage is NOT ok. Speak out against hate radio and hate TV.

Adopt an opponent. I love heated and strident political arguments, but I am abandoning that in favor of gentle and relentless suasion. I have a half dozen potential "recruits" among family and friends that I am trying to tip. I am sending them articles and trying to leave them lots of room to save face. They united behind their president and now feel betrayed, but view the peace and/or anti-bush crowd with all the negatives that the media and the administration have been heaping on them. Bush persuaded them with daily on-point sound bytes and relentless brainwashing. I am trying to reverse that process with the most likely candidates I know, recognizing that this might need to be done in increments. I have found that sending British news stories is effective - they see Brits as allies, they like Tony Blair, and are surprised and unnerved when faced with the British media and public reaction to all of this.
post comment

ACLU: the "unborn victim of violence" act [15 Jul 2003|09:25am]

optic
http://www.aclu.org/ReproductiveRights/ReproductiveRights.cfm?ID=9988&c=143

This legislation seeks to alter the legal status of a fetus by creating a new and separate offense to punish anyone who injures or causes the death of a fetus during the commission of certain federal crimes.
1 comment|post comment

[14 Jul 2003|11:38am]

optic
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030721&s=editorial072103

On education and his faith-based anti-poverty agenda, Bush has also trumpeted his concern for the poor--and then quietly left them in the lurch by massively underfunding his much-ballyhooed initiatives. Now the Bush administration has taken compassionate conservatism overseas, with much the same results. Except that, in Africa, the consequences will be even more grave. And, thus, the president's behavior is that much more shameful.
post comment

oopth meant for involve [12 Jul 2003|12:11pm]

chaircrusher
http://www.livejournal.com/users/chaircrusher/27906.html
post comment

africa? anyone? bueller? [11 Jul 2003|10:20am]

optic
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030721&s=trb072103

ANSWER is symptomatic of the left in general. A LexisNexis search going back to 2000 finds not a single reference to the crises in Congo, Liberia, Sudan, or Zimbabwe from Noam Chomsky, Arundhati Roy, Michael Moore, Michael Lerner, Gore Vidal, Cornel West, or Howard Zinn. In Congo alone, according to the International Rescue Committee, five years of civil war have taken the lives of a mind-boggling 3.3 million people. How can the leaders of the global left men and women ostensibly dedicated to solidarity with the world's oppressed, impoverished masses not care?

The answer, I think, is that the left isn't galvanized by victims; it's galvanized by victimizers. The theme of ANSWER's upcoming protest, after all, is "Occupation and Empire."


good ol knee-jerk left.
2 comments|post comment

[10 Jul 2003|05:36pm]

bostonsteamer
Three weeks ago, MoveOn launched a petition asking Congress to create an independent commission to investigate whether the Bush Administration manipulated and distorted evidence to take the country to war in Iraq. Over 190,000 of us joined the effort. Now Congress is literally taking up our call: Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) has written a bill that would create just such a commission, and it's already co-sponsored by a wide array of moderate Democrats -- including many who voted for the war. Please ask your Representative to pledge his or her support at:

http://www.moveon.org/wmdpledge/
post comment

right of liberty [10 Jul 2003|03:27pm]

optic
a fascinating interpretation of what the supreme court lawrence decision (striking down sodomy laws) means. (link found on volokh which is LJ-syndicated as volokh).
post comment

ACLU: Support Corrections to the PATRIOT Act [09 Jul 2003|09:22am]

optic
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=13081&c=206
1 comment|post comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]