As the federal investigation of Sen. Ron Calderon unfolds, one thing appears clear: His personal and political activities are intertwined.
From the Bee's Dan Morain: "Ever since he arrived in Sacramento, Calderon's fundraising has intersected with his legislation, his lifestyle and his family. Democrats who control Sacramento have enabled it.
'Calderon dwells on legislation that might seem trivial. But his bills can mean millions for the small groups of insiders who seek his assistance. It's a way of Sacramento. Business lobbyists seek narrow legislation on behalf of clients. Certain lawmakers dutifully agree. The interests dole out donations. It's perfectly legal.'
'Not much has changed from the mid-1980s when FBI agents posing as businessmen from the South sponsored a phony bill to create a fictional shrimp processing plant, and used money as bait.'
U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who earlier said that last week's revelations of widespread data snooping at the NSA were part of the necessary role the government has in protecting its citizens, also says the person who leaked the information should be prosecuted.
From The Hill's Megan R. Wilson: "The disclosures of the NSA programs unleashed a firestorm of criticism at the Obama administration’s record on civil liberties, but Feinstein and Rogers defended the programs, saying they were essential to national security."
"Feinstein said efforts were made to protect the privacy of American citizens, including relying on a secret intelligence court for authorization."
“If there is strong suspicion that a terrorist outside of the country is trying to reach someone on the inside of the country, those numbers then can be obtained,” Feinstein said Sunday. “If you want to collect content on the American, then a court order is issued.”
Speaking of the NSA revelations, Silicon Valley's heavy hitters have been placed in a a harsh spotlight because the huge amount of data causing all the uproar came from some of them.
From the Mercury-News' Brand Bailey and Troy Wolverton: "Apple, Facebook, Google and Yahoo have all denied initial reports that they gave the government wholesale access to their servers. But U.S. officials confirmed the existence of a program focused on accessing the online activity of people outside the United States, as authorized by a secretive national security court, and critics said the program could easily pull in information about U.S. users as well."
"Experts warn that the government program known as Prism will make it more difficult for the companies to maintain consumer trust and expand their business both here and overseas, in an industry that depends on consumers' willingness to share intimate details of their lives online -- via emails, photos, Internet voice calls or even the websites they visit."
"These companies are trying to expand in markets around the world. Whatever assurances the government is giving to U.S. citizens, imagine if you were living in Brazil or India. I don't see how this isn't going to hurt," said Irina Raicu, who runs the Internet program at Santa Clara University's Markkula Center for Applied Ethics."
And still more on the NSA's mass data-based surveillance programs: American officials have been saying for years, in testimony before Congress, that it didn't exist.
From the AP's Stephen Braun: "For years, top officials of the Bush and Obama administrations dismissed fears about secret government data-mining by reassuring Congress that there were no secret nets trawling for Americans' phone and Internet records."
"We do not vacuum up the contents of communications under the president's program and then use some sort of magic after the intercept to determine which of those we want to listen to, deal with or report on," then-CIA Director Michael Hayden told a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in July 2006."
"But on Friday, President Barack Obama himself acknowledged the existence of such programs even as he gave the government's standard rationale to ease fears that Americans' privacy rights are being violated."
The budget fight between the state and the counties over healthcare funds is moving slowly toward a resolution, with each side likely to settle for less than they'd like.
From the LA Times' Chris Megerian and Anthony York: "The final details are still being worked out. But, Alsop said, counties will probably have to give up money faster than they wanted, and the state will probably achieve less savings than it sought."
"Alsop said counties successfully opposed Brown's initial proposal to make counties responsible for social services like child care. However, he said, a new formula would probably shift some money from county healthcare to other state programs to free up more money in Sacramento."
"Brown says counties won't need as much money because more poor people will be covered by the state and private insurance under the federal healthcare overhaul."
And from our lip-smacking "Tasty Tidbits" file comes the tale of the eats that we like the least.
"A new survey has found out which foods we're most likely to turn down and, perhaps unsurprisingly, oysters top the list. Apparently 47% of us would say no to an oyster if it was offered and the number rises to 57% with women."
"In second place was liver with 46% and in third was anchovies with 45%. Tofu came in fourth place with 42%, in fifth was black pudding with 39% and then 37% would refuse sushi. Other unpopular foods included blue cheese (34%), olives (33%) and marzipan (26%)."
"The results are from a study by Save the Children, ahead of the G8 summit in Northern Ireland, aiming to drive global action to reduce hunger and malnutrition."
We're with you on the liver but hey, oysters and sushi are great ...