See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:05 pm, jeffshultz said:

   Hmmm, anyone know the political leanings of the contract employees?

   Bueller…. Bueller?

2. #2
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:06 pm, jungatheart said:

   Fired? How about arrested. A passport contains all the information necessary for identity theft.

3. #3
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:06 pm, IrishEi said:

   Great. Wait for it: “VRWC!”

4. #4
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:07 pm, 30 pcs of silver said:

   Couldn’t have seen this coming…

   We are three months into 2008. When in 2007 were these files breached? What took them so long to determine the breach? Have my files been breached too? Just kidding on the last one but geez. What the heck is going on there at the State Dept.?

5. #5
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:08 pm, ezupirate75 said:

   MSNBC’s duo of Olbermouth & Abrams ran this story for their entire programs last night. Thinking they were the new version of Woodward & Bernstein they are ready to reconvene the Watergate committee & run investigations. Their rightous indignation was a cover to keep from covering the Obama/Wright story they desperately want to go away.

6. #6
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:09 pm, iamsaved said:

   These are the ones who got caught. You can bet there are more in the State Department (and other agencies) who frequently “peruse” files that contain proprietary data – many under the guise of “doing their job”. The greatest percentage of intrusions are not of a malicious nature but idle curiousity and because they can.

   People are curious creatures and will “peek” if given the opportunity.

7. #7
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:10 pm, radio relay said:

   Where’s Sandy Burgler, when you need him.

8. #8
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:11 pm, Rational Thought said:

   I wonder if mine was breached, too… Well, I’ll just wait for Condi’s call. I’m sure she’ll call me if mine was breached, too.

9. #9
   On March 21st, 2008 at 12:11 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

   Who else is guilty of “imprudent curiosity?”

   Are you talking about Hillary and Bill requesting and snooping at all those FBI files which have much more significant information than passport files (I believe it was 1000 of them) on their enemy list while they were in office?

   But it probably wouldn’t be wise for Hillary “Filegate” Clinton to make too much of a stink about this, don’t you think?

   No, it wouldn’t be prudent, but then again, Hillary is known for her hypocrisy as the rule of law never applies to her, only her enemies.

10. #10
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:12 pm, babbledabble said:

    I just heard McCain’s was too.

11. #11
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:16 pm, IrishEi said:

    12:13pm Eastern State Dept says McCain’s passport accessed, too

    Phew. That was close.

12. #12
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:17 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

    OK, McCain’s files were breached…so is this still a vast right wing conspiracy or what?

    I believe it’s some low level idiot.

13. #13
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:17 pm, Rational Thought said:

    And as an aside, Michelle, can you imagine how many of YOUR files those left-over Clintonistas have been peeking at? I’m sure Condi will be calling you with an apology real soon, too.

14. #14
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:19 pm, John Ansell said:

    Guess Condi was getting close to being asked to join McCain as V.P. and they had to put a stop to it.

15. #15
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:21 pm, rbb said:

    BlameAmericaLast said:

    OK, McCain’s files were breached…so is this still a vast right wing conspiracy or what?

    No, now it’s a Vast Conservative Right Wing Conspiracy…

16. #16
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:23 pm, BrianNY said:

    Didn’t we already learn, during the Clinton years, that this isn’t called a “breach,” it’s called a “bureaucratic snafu?”

    What constitutes a “breach” vs. an employee looking at someone’s passport information? Pay grade?

    I’m already assuming that the strict interpretation of a “breach” is when a “republican” employee looks at a “democrat’s” info, because the other way around is usually called “whistle blowing.”

17. #17
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:25 pm, Gabe said:

    Senior Department officials said they learned of the incidents only when a reporter made an inquiry Thursday afternoon.

    That is odd. Are they saying a reporter learned about a breach before State Department officials did? How did the reporter learn? But who benefits from this information?

    1) Get dirt on Obama’s past
    2) Then claim that SHE is a victim, too.
    3) Blame it on the Bush administration (the average person has no idea how left-wing and BDS the State Department is)
    4) Now use the dirt you have gotten on Obama’s Islamic/Marxist past.

    Hillary is the one who will benefit because why should Obama care so much if his passport file was breached? What does he have to hide?

18. #18
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:31 pm, coffee260 said:

    Of course this is Bush’s fault. He set a sinister tone in Washington. Why with all the spying on American’s and the secrecy. What do you expect in that type of environment!

19. #19
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:33 pm, madchef said:

    BrianNY #16
    I thought that the Clintons refered to these are a “fact finding mission”.

20. #20
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:34 pm, John Ansell said:

    They were just being sloppy Move along.

21. #21
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:40 pm, reine.de.tout said:

    Until I retired, I was a public employee, with access to private records. One of the very first things I learned was that you do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, violate the public trust by accessing records through mere “curiosity”, regardless of how benign your intentions are. Violation of the public trust is never benign. This is completely unethical behavior, and all involved employees should be fired, as well as any supervisor who failed to take appropriate action.

    I note with interest that these employees are referred to as “contract” employees, which makes me believe these were employees of a private company doing work for the State Dept.

    When public agencies do not have sufficient funding to do work themselves, and have to contract the work out, then it is more likely for such problems to arise. Contracts between a public agency and a private company are unavoidable in some cases; however, many governmental jurisdictions (state, local, federal) often try to “get around” being held accountable for the amount spent for a public payroll by underfunding agencies’ payrolls, and then granting lots of money for “contracts”. The governmental entity involved can then say they are holding down the “cost” of public employment (fewer employees, lower payroll), when in actuality, the number of employees and the true cost is “hidden” in contract work. The “contract” employees do not always have the same “ethical” viewpoint toward confidential records that actual public employees are taught to have (or should be taught to have).

22. #22
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:40 pm, IrishEi said:

    From the Kos Kooks–front page:

    No wonder there’s been such a backlog of passport applications at the State Department. The staff has been too busy snooping on Democrats to do their real jobs.

    Yeah. State is full of conservatives. What a bunch of morons.

    I’m curious how’ll they’ll spin this now that McCain’s file has been breached too.

23. #23
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:40 pm, greenfairie said:

    Curiouser and curiouser.

    What I would do if I were president? Make John Bolton Secretary of State and assign his first duty of climbing into a bulldozer and dumping the riff raff into the Potomac. It’s long since past time to clean that madhouse.

24. #24
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:42 pm, ezupirate75 said:

    With McCain’s name added to the list anyone care to bet all of the other candidates will show similiar activity? Maybe the crack reporting team of Olbermouth & Abrams should run a check on Nader’s camp. It is now obvious they were his supporters fishing for dirt so Nader could sweep the elections in Nov. LOL

25. #25
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:43 pm, IrishEi said:

    greenfairie:
    

    Make John Bolton Secretary of State and assign his first duty of climbing into a bulldozer and dumping the riff raff into the Potomac.

    From your lips to God’s ears!

26. #26
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:43 pm, Regulus said:

    My first impression was that it was a couple of Clintonoids in the State Department doing some oppo-research on the False Messiah and getting caught – which might still be true (Hillary being Hillary, having the same people poke into her records would offer “plausible deniability”).

    As it stands, however, with all three candidates being subject to the same treatment, it’s sounding for the moment more like knuckleheads exploiting lax security, coupled with asleep-at-the-switch supervisors.

    But it’s “Bush’s State Department,” so in the end we all know where the buck will stop as far as the donkeys and their media front organizations are concerned.

    And as Ezupirate75 noted in comment #5 above, this is actually a Godsend to Obama vis a vis his “Wright problem.” The shrieks of outrage from his campaign have a definite aura of, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

27. #27
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:46 pm, CommentGuy said:

    State Dept seems to think they have their own total agenda no matter which party is in office.

    That place is like trying to herd cats.

28. #28
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm, Gabe said:

    According to one official, such breaches have happened several times before with nonpolitical celebrities. On at least two other occasions during the last eight months, contractors were fired for accessing records of Hollywood celebrities, the official said.

    So this happens to everybody. Therefore, what is the big deal? Why is Hussein Obama so worried? If he has nothing to hide, why the worry?

    Anyway, is there really a constitutional right to privacy? Liberals are always stating that ALL government business should be open to “curiosity.” I live in Fairfax County, VA and you can look at anyone’s tax bill, property assessment, county workers’ emails, even house plans. It all falls under FOIA requests. Fairfax County even sends tax officials to every neighborhood to take photos of the fronts and backs of houses.

    But then Hussein Obama gets hysterical when someone looks into his file. What is he hiding for such a reaction? At the same time, liberals, like him, want all info about CIA and military operations to be public. There is no such thing as “privacy” then. Hussein Obama is such a hypocrite.

    Anyway, this will suddenly stop being a major story for the MSM now that we know McCain’s info was breached.

29. #29
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    I’m sure the NY Times will be outraged at someone looking into personal records, oh wait, no, they are only outraged if Homeland Security is listening to al Qaeda phone calls.

30. #30
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:54 pm, BrianNY said:

    As long as we’re on the subject, were any “typical white peoples” (like Obama’s white grandmother)passports breached?

    I apologize for making this a “black and white” issue, but race seems to be a front page topic these days.

31. #31
    On March 21st, 2008 at 12:56 pm, digitalintrigue said:

    But it’s ok for Schumer to snoop Michael Steele’s credit file.

32. #32
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:01 pm, KCK said:

    Hey, hey, hey. As far as I know there were no indictments on that FBI file thing. Hillary must’ve been acting within the law, then, huh?

33. #33
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:01 pm, babbledabble said:

    Are these files considered “classified”? Do these employees have a security clearance? If they are classified & the employees have a clearace for that level, they probably CAN access these things. And if they are classified & they don’t have a clearance, they how did they get to them? As a former computer security analyst, I wonder what security they have on thier files. And even if they aren’t classisfied, there are ways of locking down files people shouldn’t have access to. So what happened?

34. #34
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:02 pm, JHSII said:

    The proper response is:

    “We’re going to do the same kind of in-depth investigation that was done when 1000 FBI files were found in the Clinton White House on Clinton’s political enemies. Stay tuned for updates.”

35. #35
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:07 pm, franksalterego said:

    I’m tying to figure this out…

    If someone doesn’t want anyone to have access to their private information, then why do they volunteer it, in the first place?

    And, if we expect no one’s going to be looking at it, then why would they need it?

36. #36
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:12 pm, iamsaved said:

    I doubt the files are classified as secret but when proprietary data is involved, safeguards must be taken.

    As to outrage, I think the outrage should have come when the New York Times published information that was classified as secret and when Sandy Burgler was caught red-handed stealing classified documents from the archives. By the way, how many days has it been since he was supposed to take the lie detector test. John Gibson on Fox News has quit counting I think.

37. #37
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:15 pm, Mark Jaquith said:

    I’m trying to figure out why the same people who support warrantless wiretaps would cry foul over this. I think I have it: you actually think that the government is only putting warrantless wiretaps on terrorists or terrorist associates. Adorable! Welcome to the real world, where power corrupts — all power that the government seizes from the people is eventually used for evil.

38. #38
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:30 pm, bvw said:

    Ken Bacon was never fired. What he and his fellow sleazoid did to Linda Tripp with her private information was far worse.

    See http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200005/ai_n8903352

    Chuck Colson did time, these lads at State got fired. But Kenneth Bacon still collects his full fedgov pension, as far as I know.

    Sleazoids, at least, band together.

39. #39
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:33 pm, emjem24 said:

    This goes way beyond “imprudent curiousity.” What exactly were these contractor employees accessing or training to access? I don’t see any political motivations here but I do see a case of “curiousity” taken way too far.

40. #40
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:34 pm, babbledabble said:

    The “real world” is that there is more information about everyone out there than you would ever imagine. If you think you have secrets – don’t count on it. Anyone ever see the TV film “We Know Where You Live”?
    And anyone who thinks the Gov actually listens to every phone call you make to Granny in Iowa, think again. I seriously doubt that there are enough Gov employees in the world to listen to every single phone call made in the US.

41. #41
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pm, Gabe said:

    Welcome to the real world, where power corrupts — all power that the government seizes from the people is eventually used for evil.

    Most people would disagree. Power does not corrupt. Power without any morality system does. So yes, a lot of the power government takes is used for evil, such as getting rid of any mention of God in public education.

    But protecting America’s security by listening in on terrorists’ conversations is not.

    Let’s say I am a terrorist who wants to commit a terrorist act. Of course, I would be crying foul that President Bush is listening into my phone calls and internet activities. And, of course, it would be suicidal for America if it weren’t.

    The government has every right to breach terrorists’ “privacy.”

    Again, if you have nothing to hide, why worry? I’ve traveled all over the world. Go ahead, check my passport file, who cares? Listen into my conversations on the phone. I’m not plotting explosions, so who cares?

    It is when people protest too much that I get suspicious. For example, why are socialists and Muslims always so keen on protecting Muslim’s “civil rights?”

    Why is Hussein Obama SO upset about a curious low level data entry clerk looking into his passport file.

    Finally, where is a “right to privacy” in our Constitution?

42. #42
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:37 pm, emjem24 said:

    Mark Jaquith said:
    I’m trying to figure out why the same people who support warrantless wiretaps would cry foul over this. I think I have it: you actually think that the government is only putting warrantless wiretaps on terrorists or terrorist associates. Adorable! Welcome to the real world, where power corrupts — all power that the government seizes from the people is eventually used for evil.

    Hey Mark, here’s a tip: paranoia will destroy ya. Hey, the government may be looking at your blog posts right now. Hurry… duck for cover.

    Newsflash: you’re not nearly as important as Clinton, McCain, or Obummer. I’m sure the government is just absolutely curious what company you’ve been keeping, eh, Mark?

    sarc off/

43. #43
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:38 pm, franksalterego said:

    March 21st, 2008 at 1:15 pm, Mark Jaquith

    Are you confusing “Wiretaps” with “Electronic Surveillance” ?

44. #44
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:44 pm, emjem24 said:

    franksalterego said:

    Are you confusing “Wiretaps” with “Electronic Surveillance” ?

    I think Mark has forgotten how “open” our society has become. Where’s all his bleating protests over things like open access to one’s credit scores. Or are the credit score agencies like Experien a new arm of a power hungry government?

    I’m sure good old Mark has forgotten that he can be looked up on the internet, people can look up his house on Google Earth. If they’re that curious. Oh, but I forgot it’s now the fault of the evil federal government.

    Where’s Mark’s concern for identity theives and those who put health care records on internet databases? Yeah… open society=no privacy.

45. #45
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:46 pm, maurelius said:

    IT Guy is bored and is just looking for little thrills to see what is there.

    Firing is strong for this. What if dude was accessing the data for test purposes?

    No, I don’t believe that is the case here, but I routinely access live production data for the purpose of testing my programs and modifications.

    At one site I used a Dealer X for a test dealer. Dealer X is a guy I know. I knew exactly what stuff he was ordering and all that. I have never mentioned it to Dealer X and never will.

    I used to be a customer of my current client and it is tempting to fish out the records of my business with them. I have viewed the account header but no more.

    That is what we see here, curioisity.

46. #46
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:50 pm, franksalterego said:

    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:44 pm, emjem24

    Yes,

    Mark thinks Steven Segal movies are documentaries.

47. #47
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pm, graysonret said:

    Well, all 3 candidates got their passport files breached. Sounds equal to me. No racism or discrimination there. Can’t have 1 candidate having an unfair advantage over the others.

48. #48
    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pm, franksalterego said:

    My parting shot…

    If you believe, someone snooping in your files is a problem,

    then,

    consider,

    someone who harbors a belief in Black Liberation Theology becoming president.

49. #49
    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:14 pm, johnnycab23513 said:

    Actually, this might be caused by President Bush. As was the case of the federal prosecutors, he left the Clinton appointees in place when first elected. Had he done as Clinton did, he would have cleaned house and replaced the disloyal personnel with employees that could be trusted.

50. #50
    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:26 pm, gollumclone said:

    So why is passport info not subject to Freedom of Information Act? here in Fla. if you have someone’s name you can access loads of info through the county clerk’s website- divorces, liens, mortgages, addresses, etc. are all opne to public scrutiny and I know everything on the drivers license was available to people willing to pay the state a fee if you did NOT opt out. Seems at least bass-ackwards to me.
    How about releasing Bill Clinton’s passport details as to when and where he traveled in his draft-evasion days to protest the Vietnam war overseas. Btw, I hear that moron admiral Fallon who was canned might well be a dem VP nominee. He’d fit right in with the State and CIA crowd who owe allegiance solely to DEMS regardless of who is their boss in WH.

51. #51
    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:27 pm, MNUSMCDavid said:

    After reading John Bolton’s book, I am not surprised one iota that the State Department could have such goings on. A department that will not police itself, purge itself of Clintonistas who are still there and low levels who only care about a salary can’t possibly handle contract workers. Oh, conspiracy nuts? Ain’t gonna happen. I know of a company here in MN that it’s employees routinely go into files looking for info in violation of HIPAA rules not to nail anyone but to just look. Mencken is still right.

52. #52
    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:46 pm, meatpieandtatters said:

    Hillary was breached! GOOD! Considering the cache of over 1,000 FBI files she used to bribe and influence her enemies I could care less if she’s exposed. In fact, we’re in jeopardy given this government’s penchant for intrusion.

53. #53
    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:47 pm, meatpieandtatters said:

    #46….Hey! No busting on Segal!

54. #54
    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:59 pm, d1carter said:

    I wonder how outraged the Obamamaniacs are now?

55. #55
    On March 21st, 2008 at 3:06 pm, right_on said:

    I guess I fail to get what all the hubbub is about. One would think that it would be nice to know where (what countries, that is) our presidential candidates have been secreting off to…if there’s nothing to hide, then make the info available. These citizens of the US are, after all, public employees, and I think we have a right to know where they’re going…you know, the places the press knows nothing about.

    If Obama has made trips to Islamic countries, and done it under the radar, I want to know about it before the election, not afterwards. Likewise Hillary, and McCain.

    Accessing files without authority is illegal, so prosecute the perps, but don’t make a big political deal out of this.

56. #56
    On March 21st, 2008 at 3:19 pm, gandolphxx said:

    All this fuss and now shudder ‘congressional investigations’ demanded by Obama – doesn’t wipe out the stink of the Wright mess and throwing your granny under the bus, nor lying about NAFTA, etc.

    The only thing in the stupid files that is not public knowledge for these three is their social security number – BFD.

57. #57
    On March 21st, 2008 at 3:58 pm, zorro said:

    3:22pm Eastern. Here comes Henry Waxman.

    This one will end up in you “Calls for Impeachment” file any minute now.

58. #58
    On March 21st, 2008 at 4:02 pm, governmentdrone said:

    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:46 pm, maurelius said:

    Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.

    Maurelius, I think you hit this nail squarely on the head.

    The only thing I would have to add is that when government agencies play with “contract workers”, they’re gonna get burned.

    Why is it that the first order of business for Democrats when elected is to clean house, while the Republicans never consider it beyond very high level employees? That’s why at the mid-to-lower levels, just about any government entity you can think of is populated mostly by Democrats.

59. #59
    On March 21st, 2008 at 4:14 pm, maurelius said:

    governmentdrone,

    Thanks but I cry foul on your call to dump contractors – being one myself!

60. #60
    On March 21st, 2008 at 4:25 pm, shooter said:

    12:05 pm, jeffshultz said:
    Hmmm, anyone know the political leanings of the contract employees?

    I think I would rather know what NATIONALITY they are.

61. #61
    On March 21st, 2008 at 4:55 pm, dakine said:

    Good post Mark Jaquith. Unfortunately, authoritarians such as emjem and Gabe are completely comfortable handing over all sorts of control to the federal government under the theory that “daddy government” can be trusted and will protect them from all sorts of imagined threats great and small. BTW Gabe, some of the most corrupt governments and institutions in history have either been organized religions or heavily influenced by the same, but you know that. Power does corrupt. Paraphrasing Jefferson, “love your country, but distrust your government”.

62. #62
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:05 pm, Hannibal said:

    Good grief, you have to be one sick puppy to look at Hillary’s passport info. It has her picture in there. Hopefully Obama’s info was not used to steal his identity. They might try to pass themselves off as a legitimate presidential contender. Then again, might be an improvement.

63. #63
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:13 pm, Hannibal said:

    #61 dakine. You certainly have this petty little habit of calling out other posters and then talking down to them. It is very unbecoming.

64. #64
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:15 pm, emjem24 said:

    dakine said:
    Good post Mark Jaquith. Unfortunately, authoritarians such as emjem and Gabe are completely comfortable handing over all sorts of control to the federal government under the theory that “daddy government” can be trusted and will protect them from all sorts of imagined threats great and small. BTW Gabe, some of the most corrupt governments and institutions in history have either been organized religions or heavily influenced by the same, but you know that. Power does corrupt. Paraphrasing Jefferson, “love your country, but distrust your government”.

    It’s nice to know that, as usual, Dakine, you have your facts ass-backwords. Yeah, those terrorists… just a figment of my imagination. Just like 9/11 and all the other terrorist attacks that could have been prevented had we been privy to their communications. No, don’t let that worry you, Dakine…after all, paranoia will destroy you.

    Actually I trust people like you, Dakine, a lot less, because you ultimately live in your own little passive, permissive universe of “live and let live.” It’s nice if you really don’t want any kind of accountability in your life but not so great when dealing with “shadow threats” like terrorists.

    Ignorance really does delude one into thinking they can speak of others like they know them, right, dakine? I trust government about as much as I do you, but I’d also rather get terrorists before they get us. Hey… you think your “civil rights” are being infringed upon…you can pretend that privacy is possible in an open society. You can look anything or anyone or anyone’s credit score up on the internet… it’s that easy.

    Which one do you want, Dakine… an open society like the US or a closed one like China? The great thing is…I’m not really sure the government is all that interested in you or me… just the terrorists. Hey, you want to spin conspriacy, paranoid fantasies… work for the DailyKos. I prefer to live in reality with all the other grownups.

    Oh, and that Jefferson…this is the same guy who thought nothing of using a newspaper cronie to spread smears about John Adams across Washington. Yeah, what a guy! I can see why you love him so much.

65. #65
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:20 pm, xler8bmw said:

    Jeez they act like national security was breached!

66. #66
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:21 pm, emjem24 said:

    Hannibal said:
    #61 dakine. You certainly have this petty little habit of calling out other posters and then talking down to them. It is very unbecoming.

    It’s interesting, Hannibal, you would think that a person so interested in “political discourse” could get beyond the personal insults bit. It’s too bad really. I didn’t know he cared so much he’d reference me in a post.

67. #67
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:28 pm, dakine said:

    emjem, I called you an authoritarian…is that an insult to you? BTW, an open society is one where the citizens know as much as possible about the “goings on” of the government, and the government knows as little as possible about the lives of its citizens. That doesn’t really describe China. Do you disagree with the sentiment behind the Jefferson quote?

68. #68
    On March 21st, 2008 at 5:53 pm, reine.de.tout said:

    On March 21st, 2008 at 2:26 pm, gollumclone said:

    So why is passport info not subject to Freedom of Information Act?

    There is a big misunderstanding about “public records”. Any information you give to the government, for govermental purposes, becomes a “public” record, because it is a governmental record. HOWEVER, within public records, there is information that is “confidential”, and cannot be released under any public records request. It does not have to be “classified” information to be considered “confidential”. Thus, your social security number, a number issued by the government for a government program, is confidential instead of publicly available everywhere. Confidential information within public records is either determined by law, or during court cases, such as those where a court finds that a person had a “reasonable” expectation to privacy as regards the information.

    Passport records contain your social security number, a confidential piece of a public record. This information is to be used for official governmental purposes and should not ever be accessible to people who are simply “curious” to see a person’s information.

    I pointed out earlier, and would like to point out again, that these were “contract” employees. Many governmental entities use “contractors” to do necessary work because they have “contract” money, but not “payroll” money and therefore do not have enough employees to do all jobs. This practice allows a “savings” in some situations, but not in others. But in all situations, it results in employees of private employers having access to official governmental records, without necessarily the same governmental oversight the employee might have if he were a true government employee.

    The scandal here, as I see it, is the practice of using “contract” employees. All governmental jurisdictions do it. In many cases, the use of “contracts” simply hides the true cost of doing governmental business, because these costs aren’t “payroll” costs. No one ever questions the amount of money being paid out on “contracts”; however, the public is always always always upset about public payroll costs. The result is that governmental entities hide the cost of doing government business by withholding money from payroll categories, and budgeting money in “contract” categories.

69. #69
    On March 21st, 2008 at 6:39 pm, xler8bmw said:

    #68 We also, know that the govenment has been known to use illegal aliens as contract workers. That may be why they won’t realease the names of who stole the info.

70. #70
    On March 21st, 2008 at 7:11 pm, Tennessee Dave said:

    On March 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pm, graysonret said:
    Well, all 3 candidates got their passport files breached. Sounds equal to me. No racism or discrimination there. Can’t have 1 candidate having an unfair advantage over the others.

    On March 21st, 2008 at 3:19 pm, gandolphxx said:
    The only thing in the stupid files that is not public knowledge for these three is their social security number – BFD.

    So all three have been breached it’s equal. I know there are some whackos out there, but how far would someone get trying to open credit cards in any of these names. Even if they did, I would hope they have protection on their accounts.
    Much ado about nothing.

71. #71
    On March 21st, 2008 at 7:16 pm, MNUSMCDavid said:

    Stanley, Inc was awarded a contract by the Dept of State on March 18 to provide Passport support services. While the employees who accessed the passport info should be fired and were, this leads me to believe that there is no “There” there. As I stated earlier, I suspect that it’s a case of nosey employees who could do what they did.

72. #72
    On March 21st, 2008 at 7:19 pm, brooklyn red said:

    what ever…

73. #73
    On March 21st, 2008 at 9:53 pm, almeehan said:

    Contractors, like the State Dept. are interested in cutting cost. So who do you hire? For clerical type work which this likely is, low tier help. Products no doubt of our liberal education system who care little about long term employment, responsibility nor accountability. What also precipitated this? Mr. Lettuce head and Homeland Security placing the need for passports for travel to Canada and other places not previously required. State couldn’t normally keep up with normal passport demands, so under pressure from a democratically controlled congress, contracted it out. Congressman Watt who wanted to see some affirmative action in the Homeland Security process to reflect more of a “rainbow” effect to make him feel good, perhaps got it, howbeit at a lower level than he desired, through some quick hire affirmative action employees whose few thrills in life are imprudence and curiosity!

74. #74
    On March 21st, 2008 at 10:10 pm, Bear said:

    Since when is your SSN top secret?

    Even though your SSN is not to be used for identifcation HA HA !!!, Try to open a bank account, get a driver license, get paid by your employer, etc without giving out your SSN. You must give your SSN or tax number to even pay your Federal and State income taxes.

    One need not go to your Passport for obtaining your SSN.

    If there was an intrusion to the Passports, I would think there was some reason other than getting a SSN to look at the Passport information.

75. #75
    On March 21st, 2008 at 10:34 pm, xler8bmw said:

    #74 there isn’t anything in your passport that is abig secret other than your SSn. Unless your ashamed of your birth town, age, address or middle name

76. #76
    On March 21st, 2008 at 11:07 pm, Bear said:

    75, xler—
    And most of those are available through Google and other internet sources!!

77. #77
    On March 22nd, 2008 at 2:38 am, reine.de.tout said:

    On March 21st, 2008 at 10:10 pm, Bear said:

    Since when is your SSN top secret?

    Your SSN isn’t top secret – it’s confidential. Any institution or business that gets your SSN is supposed to keep it confidential, not plaster it all over the place for everyone to see. It is no longer printed on Louisiana driver’s license, even though the DL office has it. Your employer has it in order to properly report your wages and taxes (official business), but they should have some system of maintaining confidentiality of employee records where the SSN appears.

    I think these folks looked at these records strictly out of curiosity. The bottom line is that when a governmental entity “contracts” work out to a private company, the employees of that company have access to confidential information and should be trained on how to properly and ethically deal with those records – but they don’t get that training. The gov’t should contract out as little work as possible – but instead, contracts are big big business when they shouldn’t be.

78. #78
    On March 22nd, 2008 at 2:43 am, reine.de.tout said:

    As I said, contracts are big big business. From one of the links in Michelle’s article:

    Stanley, Inc., is headquartered in Arlington, Va. The State Department awarded it a contract for $164 million in 2006, to print and mail millions of new U.S. passports. Stanley announced on Monday that it was awarded an additional $570 million contract to “continue support of the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs/Passport Services Directorate.”

79. #79
    On March 22nd, 2008 at 7:02 am, hayroller15 said:

    I find it amazing that all the candidates are for open border illeagal immigration. Whats the first thing they do when the get here, access someone elses Id. I don’t give a damn what happens to these clowns. Next we need a drunk illeagal crashing into one of their motorcades. Then they can truly feel the pain of the little people.

80. #80
    On March 22nd, 2008 at 8:57 am, Jim M. said:

    Clueless does not begin to describe the State Department. Just 3 days before State was alerted to the problem by the press, they awarded Stanley a half a billion dollar contract:

    ARLINGTON, Va., March 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Stanley, Inc. (NYSE: SXE), a leading provider of systems integration and professional services to the U.S. federal government, today announced that it was awarded a five-year, $570 million contract to continue support of the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs/Passport Services Directorate.

    A modicum of due diligence would at least dictate that any company receiving such a huge contract would undergo a performance review. And it would also seem, particularly in this day and age, that part of that performance review would include a look into compliance with security measures.

    Makes you wonder who Stanley has in their pockets on the Hill.