Hacking Hypocrisy

To use the current buzzword from Fox"News", isn't it "interesting" that no conservatives are talking about this.

Nine people were indicted Wednesday on federal charges of accessing President Barack Obama's student loan records while they were employed for a Department of Education contractor in Iowa.

The U.S. attorney's office said a grand jury returned the indictments in U.S. District Court in Davenport.

All nine are charged with exceeding authorized computer access. They are accused of gaining access to a computer at a Coralville office where they worked between July 2007 and March 2009, and accessing Obama's student loan records while he was either a candidate for president, president-elect or president.

U.S. attorney spokesman Mike Bladel referred questions to online copies of the indictments.

Each of eight indictments posted by Wednesday night were brief, saying the charged individual "intentionally exceeded authorized access to a computer and thereby obtained information from a department and agency of the United States" and "intentionally accessed student loan records" of Obama without authorization.

Those charged are Andrew J. Lage, 54, Patrick E. Roan, 51, Sandra Teague, 54 and Mercedes Costoyas, 53, all of Iowa City; Gary N. Grenell, 58, and Lisa Torney, 49, of Coralville; Anna C. Rhodes, 32, of Ainsworth; Julie L. Kline, 38, of West Branch; and John P. Phommivong, 29, for whom no hometown was listed.

Lage told The Associated Press on Wednesday evening he did not know about the indictment and declined comment.

( h/t: Laffy over at Political Carnival )

Here's what gets me:

Arraignments are scheduled for May 24. The charge is punishable by up to one year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000.

The kid who "hacked" Palin's email account potentially get 20yrs for his offense. Does this not sound wrong to anyone but me?

Take a look at how conservatives and Fox"News" approached the Palin incident.





Sean Hannity was even against hacking private information before he was for it.



Of course, conservatives will say that the case involving Obama's student loan records is different due to the fact that no information was shared online. And while that is true, these incidents occurred multiple times up to when Obama had already become President-Elect. Not only that, but these men worked for the Department Of Education and were blatantly misusing government property. One would think the penalty would be pretty stiff for them. Apparently not.

Not to be overtly conspiratorial about this, but one has to question whether this was intended to go beyond just Obama's student loan records. Having a group of nine guys attempting to just find out how much Obama spent on college doesn't seem to make a lot of sense considering all the other aspects of Obama's life that conservatives are going after. I'm sure that this isn't the last we will hear of this story - just don't expect Fox"News" to report on it.

Just A Little Prank, Nothing To See Here

Andrew Breitbart fancies himself a rare creature - someone that takes on "The Machine". In reality he is more than willing to bend the laws of America ( and reality ) in order to prove a point. He's not rare, as the bulk of conservatives think and act in this fashion.

During the National Tea Bagger Convention in Nashville last weekend, Breitbart was seen talking with someone about James O'Keefe's run-in with Federal authorities while attempting to tamper with the phones in Senator Mary Landreau's office.




Yeah, nothing wrong with infiltrating a Senator's office under false pretense with intent to tamper with the phone systems. It was just a little prank.

Let's see a group of Muslim-American activists pull this stunt and see what happens. Breitbart would be screaming that it was an act of terrorism.

Shorter Fox Nation

There's So Much More To This Story

Even though we jump to conclusions when it comes to literally everything any and all Democrats do or say, we respectfully ask that all those with fully operationaly higher brain functions completely ignore the fact that James O'Keefe broke the law and wait for us to render final judgement on this. No need to pay attention to law enforcement agencies, as those are full of liberal bias. After all, we have far too much invested in this guy to let something like a Federal crime get in the way of our agenda.

Club Fed Gets A New Resident?

I know it's more of a contemporary realization of what Federal Prison life is like for high profile inmates is like.......



........but if James O'Keefe goes in for the hard time ( upwards of 20 years according to Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley ) is he going to have it REAL easy or is this going to be real punishment for his actions? I guess we'll see.

Hatred Of The American Way

It's not at all suprising that reactionary conservatives are now against the American legal system since AG Eric Holder anounced that 5 Sept. 11th terrorists will be tried in NYC court. The reason behind this is that conservatives will always laud the greatness of America, that is until a Democrat tries to utilize those great features.

Not long after Holder's statements, Sarah Palin offered up her policy expertise blended with a dash of wild-west histrionics.

Criminal defense attorneys will now enter into delaying tactics and other methods in the hope of securing some kind of win for their “clients.” The trial will afford Mohammed the opportunity to grandstand and make use of his time in front of the world media to rally his disgusting terrorist cohorts. It will also be an insult to the victims of 9/11, as Mohammed will no doubt use the opportunity to spew his hateful rhetoric in the same neighborhood in which he ruthlessly cut down the lives of so many Americans. [...]

If we are stuck with this terrible Obama Administration decision, I, like most Americans, hope that Mohammed and his co-conspirators are convicted. Hang ‘em high.

What conservatives, Palin in specific, don't understand is that it would be more than just political suicide to bring these men here without first knowing that the case against them was air-tight and couldn't be lost. The reality behind this is that justice hasn't fully been served and there has been little more an unwillingness by the previous administration to bring closure for the past 8 years.

But one of the more interesting aspects of conservatives recent lack of faith in America is that some once held the opinion that the US court system was precisely designed for people like this.

The Washington Post shows how Rudy Giuliani's boisterous language about terrorism rarely matches-up with what he actually does in regards to it.

Even in the weeks after Sept. 11, he framed the attacks in the language of crime, describing the hijackers as "insane murderers" and calling for restoration of the "rule of law."

Rudy even praised the judicial system once the '93 WTC bombers were prosecuted. So why the sudden change of heart?

It's blatantly obvious that this has more to do with the fact that the Obama administration is taking action and this is a direct threat to not only the conservative movement but the whole of the GOP. But this story, and all like it, tells us more about how conservatives behave in the face of the enemy.





By and large, conservatives have shown that terrorism works. After all, it only takes one sucessful event - be it only a few victims or on a more massive scale like Sept. 11th - and all the terrorist has to do is sit back and watch the remaining "targets" devour themselves with fear.

Conservatives have, since 2001, used any and every excuse to do either do nothing or do the wrong thing. And now that someone is taking action in a direction once favored by conservatives, the reactionary Right are taking up again the mantle of fear. And that seems to be exactly how they intend to control the American public, through fear that "something somewhere might happen" if these 5 mean are prosecuted by the system that they once claimed to love.

More from Think Progress.

Armed And Misleading

Having grown up in a family where using and owning guns was somewhat of a tradition ( I personally own two shotguns - one hand-made by my grandfather - and two rifles ) I can understand the sporting aspect of it as well as the "self-defense" side of it. However, I don't believe that everyone needs to own one.

I hold this belief for several reasons. I'll put aside the fact that felons have lost the right to own firearms are a part of their punishment by law, but some people don't have the training or the mental capacity to own firearms.

This didn't stop sellers at several gun-shows from allowing people that couldn't possibly pass background checks to buy guns.



New York City Mayor Micheal Bloomberg reports

Our investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

Also, earlier in the year, Max Blumenthal attended gun shows in California and Nevada and showed how the reactionary Right, militia groups, and nazi "enthusiasts" are using these shows to not just pedal their wares, but push their ideological message.



So what is the answer to preventing some "lone-nut" from injuring or killing someone after they have purchased a gun illegally? What can be done to ensure that the hate-speech that is being literally channeled into our homes, our cars, and our places of employment each and every day doesn't trigger some unstable individual who has purchased a firearm illegally from injuring and killing someone? Is the answer to take away every gun from every home in the nation. Absolutely not. But there has to be some sort of reform to the process with which gun-shows operate. Because they are arming people who are potentially dangerous.

Conservatives That Deserve Awards

A nice compilation from Media Matters.



science, history, healthcare, basic tennets of law, and Economics have never been subjects that prominent conservative Republicans ( primarily within the media ) have been proficient in. You can usually tell who they are by how loudly and how often they speak about these subjects.

I'm starting to get to the point where I don't feel sorry for people that watch Fox"News" ( or any blatantly right-leaning program ) and/or listen to conservative talk-radio and consider them a primary, credible, news source. I used to feel bad that they were so willing to absorb all this misinformation and lies and then walk away from a discussion so confused and irrate when they couldn't stand up in a debate.

If this is what they want, I say let them have it.

Bizarre Sex Laws

Did you know that you could have sex with the animal of your choice in Tacoma, Washington? However, if that porcupine happened to be clinically obese, you're in trouble - that is if you get caught. You can't have sex with your boyfriend or girlfriend in Georgia. If an 'underage' couple have consentual sex - in most states - it's considered 'statutory rape'. However, if she/he’s your cousin, you’re both over 65, and that's your sort of bag, head to Utah where you can get married!

If you watch much cable news, you'll notice that there is a preponderance of stories about 'sex'. If you watch The O'Reilly Factor on Fox, there's are LOTS of stories about sex. This isn't proof that the world is devolving into a depraved, man-on-dog, booze-fueled orgy. The only thing that it proves is that O'Reilly ( and those like him ) create the illusion that the country is in such a state because of their compulsive nature to do story after story after story that are sexual in nature.

But, when one take a look, there are lots of strange laws in the US governing sex.

Media Credit: Photos.com


1. Oral sex is illegal in 18 states, including Arizona.

2. In Virginia, it is illegal to have sex with the lights on.

3. It is illegal for husbands in Willowdale, Oregon, to talk dirty during intercourse.

4. Sexual intercourse between unmarried couples is illegal in Georgia.

5. Engaging in any sexual position other than missionary is illegal in Washington, DC.

6. In Connorsville, Wisconsin, it is illegal for a man to shoot off a gun when his female partner is having an orgasm.

7. In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, it is illegal to have sex with a truck driver inside a toll booth.

8. Having sexual relations with a porcupine is illegal in Florida.

9. It is illegal in Utah to marry your first cousin before the age of 65.

10. Sex with animals is perfectly legal for men in Washington state, as long as the animal weighs less than 40 pounds.