Me & Diane Feinstein are so close we’re like *that*

February 16, 2006

Ms. Traci Schock
XXXX North XXXXX Avenue
Fresno, California XXXXXX

Dear Ms. Schock:

Thank you for writing to me about recent
revelations that the United States Government has
engaged in domestic electronic eavesdropping without
appropriate legal authority. I welcome the opportunity to
respond.

On February 6th, the Senate Judiciary Committee
held the first of a series of hearings into this matter, at
which Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified about
the legality of the program. He provided none of the
documents the Committee required for proper oversight,
and his assurances alone did not allay my concerns.
Instead, he propounded a radical legal theory of
presidential power largely unrestrained by either
Congress or the courts.

I have carefully reviewed the Constitution and the
laws relating to this domestic intelligence activity, along
with the President's statements and those of the Attorney
General and other Administration officials. I believe that
the electronic surveillance program was not conducted in
accordance with U.S. law. The program, as described,
violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which
requires a court order for surveillance of Americans.
Congress has updated FISA many times since 9/11 in
order to provide our nation with all the necessary tools to
fight terrorism. The Administration has never asked for
the authority to conduct this program.

I believe the Administration also violated the
National Security Act, which requires all members of the
Intelligence Committee to be fully and currently
informed of all significant intelligence activities other
than covert actions. I am a member of the Intelligence
Committee, and yet I was not told about this program
until it was made public.

There will be further hearings in the Senate
Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. Once the facts
are clear, we can decide on appropriate corrective action.

Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will
continue to write to me on issues of importance to you.
Best regards.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Tips on MCing an event

Avoid saying, "uhm." Say it once, I understand. Twice, eh-- it happens. Five-hundred-sixty-two times? Shoot me.

Pay attention

If you're not political, read this. You will be.

My favorite quetions for the Simian in Chief:

"Mr. Bush: In your speech on the Patriot Act in Buffalo on April 20, 2004, you said the following:

" 'Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.'

"Is that the same Constitution that you now say authorizes wiretaps without a court order?"

"Mr. President, the CIA had described waterboarding, used with administration approval on several Al Queda suspects, as the following: 'The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.' If this were done to an American soldier, sir, would you consider it torture?"

"You promised you would fire anyone involved in the leaking of CIA agent Plame's name. Your standard then was not whether a senior administration official 'committed a crime' but rather 'was involved in the leak'. You stated that you considered this a very serious matter and yet you praised Libby following his indictment. Why have you not fired Karl Rove who testified that he talked about Plame's employment with two reporters?"

"Mr. President, you have spoken often and with conviction of your Christianity and how you bring Christian principles to bear on your conduct of foreign and domestic policy. The 2007 budget you have just proposed extends tax cuts that mostly benefit upper income Americans, while drastically cutting programs that help the poor, including sick children. As news sources have pointed out, the cost of these tax cuts is far greater than the cost savings coming from entitlement program cuts. Given the number of times the Bible, and Jesus himself, references lifting up the poor and tending to the sick, how do you reconcile this proposed budget with your Christianity?"

"Given the emphasis you put on accountability as an indispensable virtue for the occupant of the White House, can you name three instances in which you have accepted responsibility or compelled members of your administration to be accountable for some mistake?"

Yes, I still do

Florida Susan gave me some well-deserved guff over the weekend. She overheard me talking emphatically about the wonders of riding a bike and my attempts to convince the poor listener that it is the greatest activity EVER in the history of bipedal locomotion. I could actually hear Susan rolling her eyes as she said, "Oh, so you're still riding then? Funny, I'd read differently."

DAMN ME AND MY BIG TAPPY FINGERS!!!

Alright. I admit it. I haven't been riding as much as I should have been. I was literally and figuratively too big for my britches to be making such statements. Happy? Happy now??

But I'm back on it. Again. I am. Back on the commuter circuit. Back on the insanely horrendous saddle. Back cursing the return of my adult acne. Alas, the training continues.

Overheard conversation

(Trevor and Sydney lying on the floor of Trevor's room, looking at a book)
SYDNEY: (pointing to a picture of a penguin) What's dat?
TREVOR: That's a penguin.
SYDNEY: No, dat's a duck.
TREVOR: ...That's a penguin.
SYDNEY: No, Treber, dat's not penguin. Dat's a duck.
TREVOR: That's a penguin.
SYDNEY: No, dat's a duck.
TREVOR: (Patiently)That's a picture of a penguin.
SYDNEY: (Earnestly, with much sincerity and sorrow that the poor boy is so confused) No, Treber, dat's not penguin... Dat's a duck. (Turns page. Pointing again.) What's dat?
TREVOR: (Taking the middle ground) That's a bird.
SYDNEY: (Earnestly, sadly) No, Treber, dat's not a bird, dat's a goose.