Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Fed Up with the lies, and the disinformation? Support AlterNet and keep it honest.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

FISA, Compromised

Posted by , The Media Consortium at 11:17 AM on June 19, 2008.


House Democrats want to let Uncle Sam spy on YOU.

By Brian Buetler

After Democrats stood their ground and refused to pass a series of draconian FISA amendments in February, negotiations over the wiretapping law went behind closed doors. In the months since then, news reports have occasionally suggested that another Democratic party sell-out was imminent, only to be superseded by other reports indicating that negotiations were ongoing. Until today.

A few moments ago, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer released what he refers to as a "bipartisan" "compromise" bill: The FISA Amendment Act of 2008, which he authored along with Jay Rockefeller, Kit Bond, and Roy Blunt (respectively, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Intelligence committee, and the House Minority whip). The word "bipartisan" is technically indisputable. The word "compromise", by contrast, is a total farce.

The most controversial elements of the February legislation were provisions that would have allowed the White House to wiretap American citizens without a warrant, and that would have immunized telecommunications companies from participating in the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program back in the halcyon days when warrantless wiretapping was unquestionably illegal.

Here's how the new bill deals with the immunity question.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a civil action may not lie or be maintained in a Federal or State court against any person for providing assistance to an element of the intelligence community, and shall be promptly dismissed, if the Attorney General certifies to the district court of the United States in which such action is pending that...the assistance alleged to have been provided by the electronic communication service provider was in connection with an intelligence activity involving communications that was authorized by the President during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007.

That's the game. Non-profit groups like the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation can sue the telecoms if they want, but if Attorney General Michael Mukasey says "presto", the lawsuits must be dismissed.

As for the nitty gritty of surveillance powers the bill authorizes, here's what the ACLU says: "This bill allows for mass and untargeted surveillance of Americans’ communications.... The process by which this deal has come about has been as secretive as the warrantless wiretapping program it is seeking to legitimize." And the media blackout over the last few months is testament to that. None of Congress' civil liberties stalwarts partook in these negotiations. Neither John Conyers, nor Patrick Leahy--chairmen of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees respectively--got a say. Nor did Sens. Chris Dodd or Russel Feingold. Nor did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Leahy says "the legislation unveiled today... is not a bill I can support."

Nonetheless, it looks very much as if Pelosi--who has substantial power to control what does and does not appear on the floor of the House--will allow this to come to a vote.

I'll keep my eye on the comings and goings.


Conservatives Attack Google for Opposing Gay Marriage Ban
Randy Thomasson of the right-wing group Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) has called for a boycott of Google for its opposition to Prop 8.
Post by Amanda Terkel. October 3, 2008.
DNC Police T-Shirt:'We Get Up Early to Beat the Crowds'
Talk about bad taste.
Post by Lindsay Beyerstein. October 2, 2008.
Muslim Children Gassed at Mosque After 'Obsession' DVD Hits Ohio
What a pointless tragedy.
Post by Chris Rodda. September 30, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Oh, poop
Posted by: zipper696 on Jun 19, 2008 11:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just when, for a brief, golden moment we think the Dems have rediscovered their balls a huge sellout like this appears and makes us despair anew that they will EVER be a true party of opposition, rather than a pale rubber stamp.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

screw them
Posted by: madmatt on Jun 19, 2008 11:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not a dime nor a vote will I give to them until they act like real americans....if I wanted to fellate corporations, I'd be a rethug!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yet another reason why I don't give a dime to DEMs
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jun 19, 2008 12:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
DEMs are REPUGS evil twin...

enuf said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You've Got...
Posted by: Wacre on Jun 19, 2008 12:00 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to be fraggin' kidding me. I could understand such a 'compromise' if we had an US Attorney General who was actually motivated to uphold the law and make his way to the truth with Fox Mulder-like determination.

Unfortunately we have AG Mukasey, who seems to be somewhat, shall we say, particular about the laws he is willing to enforce.

This is not good. I think it is time to make some more calls, as I have been doing every since I heard the Democrats were going to buckle like grass underfoot.

Which reminds me, didn't many Democrats vote in favor of Mukasey's confirmation?

It could almost be considered poetic justice if it weren't for the fact that the American people are going to get the short, splintery end of the stick.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Constitutional Lawyers on FISA
Posted by: fanny666 on Jun 19, 2008 12:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FISA (PDF file)

This is worth reading if you'd like some background on the topic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I suppose Uncle Sam is feeling left out
Posted by: bluepilgrim on Jun 19, 2008 12:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
since everyone else is spying on people.

http://freepress.net/node/41744
"Free Press/Public Knowledge Investigation Finds NebuAd Wiretaps Consumers and Hijacks Web Sites"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So Shocked
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jun 19, 2008 1:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am SSOOO shocked that the Democrats caved....AGAIN!

Jesus Christ. What do you have to do to get your opinion considered by your legislator around here? I called. I emailed. I do not matter.

I bet some Democrats will be getting a fat BRIBE from Big Telecom in the mail.

I say, boycott the telecoms, if possible. Too bad they have a monopoly, isn't it?!

THIS IS NOT A FREE COUNTRY!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Why ??? Posted by: Persephone8
» RE: So Shocked Posted by: Vik
This is a job for...
Posted by: k_pr on Jun 19, 2008 1:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a moment when we need our new Presidential candidate to speak up and take a stand. Barack Obama must speak out on this issue now. A condemnation of this bill from the leader of the party would embolden the members of congress to shoot this legislation down. Right now the Democrats are still cowering under the fear of the administration, Republican slanders, and the pressure from the telecom giants.

Your time is now, Senator Obama.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Aren't WE the Majority
Posted by: JSquercia on Jun 19, 2008 3:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is NOT a compromise it is capitulation PURE and SIMPLE . Last I looked it WE were the Majority and yet we Constantly cave in to the Republican MINORITY . Dear God the Republican Minority stymes almost every Effort By the Democrats by Merely THREATENING to fillibuster and WE don't even MAKE them stand up and really Fillibuster .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DemocRATS - Sell Out ?? - Say It Ain't So....
Posted by: left_libertarian on Jun 19, 2008 5:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Vote 3rd Party - Green or Libertarian.

Or just write in Homer Simpson.

Anyone but the losers called the DemocRATS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what a bunch of pussies
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Jun 20, 2008 12:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
fired pussies as far as I am concerned. and not another penny to these bunch of beltway party-goers. you'd think they were afraid they won't get asked to the prom. lying,cowardly,weak-kneed,bootlicking pony-boys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

welcome
Posted by: walldodger1969 on Jun 20, 2008 3:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
TO 1984.. AND THIS NATION OF GAS GUZZLING SHEEP DON'T EVEN KNOW OR CARE OR EMBRACE WHAT JUST HAPPENED.. WE NOW ARE JUST LIKE THE PEOPLE UNDER HITLER,OR STALIN.OR ANY OTHER DICTATOR,CEPT THE LEADER CHANGES EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE..MAKES ME WANT TO VOMIT .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Re-Capitulation
Posted by: talkville on Jun 20, 2008 3:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Frederick Douglass once remarked words to the effect that the limits to tyranny are set by the conditions endured by those who are oppressed.

Evidence continues to mount that those conditions have not yet been reached; a sad and terrible reflection on our times. One can plausibly argue these days that Rule by the Corporate State and oppressive conditions are more accepted and 'normal' than we would like to suppose. Tyranny and tyrants are by now making themselves comfortable for a long period of plenty. And still the limits and range have not been reached. Apparently, we're able to put up with quite a bit. Admirable trait sometimes; other times not so much.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why are so many Democrats acting like Republicans?
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Jun 20, 2008 5:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doesn't the Justice Department have the DC Madam's phone records? They should be forced to release them to the public. Then we could be sure that congressional votes are not being influenced by blackmail from them. Never mind what all those wiretaps have brought in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

liam99
Posted by: liam99 on Jun 20, 2008 6:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can only believed this outrageous sellout comes from one of two positions. Either the dems are being blackmailed or coerced in some fashion or they are as facist as the bushies. This is treason in my mind and clearly unconstitutional. You cannot simply legislate away the fourth or any other amendment. There must be a 2/3ths vote in the congress and the states before this is law.
Last night, i was just about to make a contribution to the dnc and obama camp, when i became aware of this. Needless to say i stopped. Obama needs to stand against this insanity before i continue my consistent financial support to him and the dems need to not pass this. If they want my support to increase their majority in the congress and take the white house, this is NOT the way to get it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: liam99 Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: green president Posted by: Lauren
Shirl
Posted by: toots on Jun 20, 2008 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I truly believe that this election I will vote against my representative if he voted for the new funding for the war and this. I am truly so disappointed in the Democrats, we need to get rid of Harry Reid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't forget Nancy Pelosi Posted by: Persephone8
So speak up!
Posted by: westomoon on Jun 20, 2008 7:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Democrats.com sent out e-mails about this last weekend. They've got a petition going at this site. It gets sent to one's elected representatives, so they encourage signers to attch personal comments. Here's what I attached:

It is clear that you are not willing to pursue impeachment for the gross lawbreaking that has occurred on so many fronts during this administration, even though I have been pleading with you to do so since January 2007. I still believe that letting major crimes go unpunished is a mortal wound to the Constitution and very bad for the country.

This time, I am not pleading, I am DEMANDING that you at least not exempt the telecomm companies from the laws that governed their illegal wiretapping actions.

You have not been willing to force a review of the unconstitutionally broad claims of executive privilege that shield illegal Federal actions, so the courts will have to do for Americans the job you should have done. Private suits against the telecomm companies are clearly the only way that at least one segment of the Bush administration's high crimes and misdemeanors will ever be reviewed and officially branded unacceptable.

It irks me tremendously when, in addition to the taxes I cheerfully pay, I have to donate extra money to the ACLU so they can do the job I thought I was paying you to do. And it's ironic -- you're the one who took the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution! I don't think you know how angry we are out here in the hustings -- I would suggest that no incumbent is truly safe while the people's outrage is at its current level.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not a Dime's Worth of Difference
Posted by: Paul1939 on Jun 20, 2008 7:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
between the right wing and the center-right wing of the Corporate Party. How many times will it take being F*(ked by their party for Democrats to recognize what the Democratic Party is today? As a party, we keep falling for slogans and voting for people who don't give a damn about working US citizens. Democrats didn't do a damned thing to stop the disasters of the Republican Party beginning with Reagan and continuing through Bush, Clinton and this ass we have today. Republicans can stop anything put forward to benefit average Americans while Democrats go along with anything Republicans want no matter how bad it is for average Americans.

People do what they want unless forced to do what is right. Democrats WANT the policies that ass Bush wants! Anyone who thinks Obama will be any different is a fool. The stupidity of voting for HOPE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let Them Hear An Ear-Full!
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jun 20, 2008 8:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is the DNC switchboard's number: 1-202-479-5100


Here is the capitol switchboard to get Reid, Pelosi, and your own legislators: 1-202-224-3121


CALL! Tell them how much you appreciate their so-predictable selling-out!

Tell them they are TRAITORS, not only to the former ideals of the Democrats, but to the ideals of democracy, as well.

(And if the line is busy, call back!)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nader/Gonzales 08
Posted by: Ohjin on Jun 20, 2008 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ready for a 3rd part YET?

Nader/Gonzales 08

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SPYING
Posted by: billgee on Jun 20, 2008 8:49 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everybody Wants to Spy on You
Get Used to it

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: SPYING Posted by: Lauren
This will be defeated in the Senate...
Posted by: Quannah on Jun 20, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
where Russ Feingold and Patrick Leahy have vowed to kill it.

This is collusion by the HOUSE DEMOCRATS, but the Senate is another story. Pelosi, Hoyer and the rest of that slavish bunch HAVE TO GO! They have compromised our freedoms and themselves far too often to warrant their seats in Congress.

This is a very dangerous bill, as constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley stated last night on Countdown with Keith Olbermann. He said it destroys the 4th Amendment and it also sets a dangerous precedent for the provision giving immunity protecting not only PAST crimes by the big telecoms, but any FUTURE crimes they may commit.

He also said this is a major CYA program for some Democratic House and Senate leaders who KNEW about this (and torture) almost from its' inception, yet did nothing to stop it.

Thankfully, the Democrats in the Senate are wiser and won't allow this bill to pass. Feingold and Leahy are pissed, and they aren't going to let it slip by. It's come down to them to keep our Contstitution hanging by a thread.

Things have gotten way out of hand in the last 8 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THERE GOES THE BALLGAME
Posted by: gregii on Jun 20, 2008 9:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can they now justify asking us for a veto proof majority in the congress next Fall? They are just like the Republican majority. Corrupt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is It Possible To Have Webster Change The Definition Of Democrat
Posted by: desidid on Jun 20, 2008 9:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To chicken shit bastards?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To the voters of Maryland's 5th district.
Posted by: weslen1 on Jun 20, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With less than 6 months to go before Bush is replaced, there was absolutely NO REASON to move on this immunity deal and once again give Bush Co a free ride. Vote against Steny Hoyer in November. You don't have to replace him with a Republican. Vote independent for the House of Representatives.
Voters in Nancy Pelosi's district in California and Harry Reids district wherever he's from, get rid of them too. We need people in congress who fight for OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND NOT THEIR OWN POCKETBOOKS AND BANK ACCOUNTS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Betrayal in the Halls of Congress..a black day for America..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Jun 20, 2008 9:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm watching this abomination live on C-Span right now...

Many Congressmen and Women have made great intelligent strong statements well grounded in law and Constitutionally correct against this abdication of our rights as citizens many..

I also witnessed the traitors Pelosi and Hoyer and their lame rationalizations for this betrayal leave the Telecomm immunity out of it even, the provisions of this Bill allow the government to spy upon Americans without and Reasonable Cause for 67 days..at a time it's is nothing less than and evisceration and gutting of the 4th Amendment without a Constitutional convention..

Also the vast number in fact all about one of those who could call into C-span Democrat, Independent and even Republican have call in condemning this betrayal this Treason in the interest of a despised and discredited criminal administration..which should be facing Impeachment hearings..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Congress Toll Free Numbers -Don't Just Sit There. Do Something
Posted by: Magginkat on Jun 20, 2008 9:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Share these numbers with every anti-republican you can find. Some of them work 24/7 so you can leave a voice mail for your elected officials if you can't reach them during office hours.


800-828-0498, 800-459-1887 or 800-614-2803,

800 833-6354, 866 - 220-0044

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dems = Reps in Congress
Posted by: solitarysherlockian on Jun 20, 2008 12:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nancy's boys (and girls) seem to have rolled over and played nice for the wire tappers--and passed what the Republicans want. WHAT is wrong with these people? Don't rock the boat--they have no balls and no scruples except for power. Is their medical coverage THAT good that they can't lose it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dems = Reps in Congress Posted by: Lauren
Don't count on me
Posted by: rafey on Jun 20, 2008 12:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They can be certain not to count on my vote next time around. I am voting third party. I cannot wait to see the back of Pelosi, et. al !!!!!!!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Conyers, Barbara Lee, Shiela Jackson-Lee, Dennis Kucinich and more...
Posted by: Turiye on Jun 20, 2008 12:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....spoke loudly and with indignation at the thought of voting Yea, John Conyers yielded the majority of his minutes to the decent Dems left, I have the list downstairs. From Jackson-Lees' analogy of this bill as being anything less than reframing the Constitution, "This amounts to puttin' some lipstick on a PIG!", loudly, 'NO', Barbara Lee spoke of how she was surveilled relentlessly under Hoovers direction, and spoke of the eregious, demeaning way they used surveillance on Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his entire family, how disgusted she was and turned on her heel with a resounding NO!@@!@
Then after that expected debacle I was live streaming the Full House Judiciary questioning McClellan, in between on whatever station slid in there they were reporting an actual event in an apparent hostile, likely if it was not stopped immediately a Nuclear attack on Iran by Israel, but it was a 30 second thing and I've been on Cspan so I suppose I will have to put MSNBC on and see if perhaps it was a trinket pulled from the Panderers Box...
If I had to hear one more repuke say, "Islamic Jihadists that we have been threatened by each second that FISA expired", or this was from that slick looking MotherF$$ker from CA., I cannot even look at his smug ass face, "well, it's like we had to listen to FOREIGNERS in FOREIGN lands...", perhaps that is why they are being termed Foreign by you, ergo in a Foreign Land?, and this was priceless from the Leader of the Committee on Intelligence, as he spoke with words that were in direct opposition from his title, Intelligent Leader??? I think not. "AND YOU, YOU on the other side, with all of your, yourrr rhetoric, these are Terrorists, Islamic Jihadists, they killed 3000 Americans...", I s'pose he
ASS-umed everyone in the Towers that day were American and none were Muslim, numbskull. Or perhaps the 4,101 Troops the Sociopath in Chief murdered are without meaning?
Pelosi makes me so sick, what does she do when the Speaker pro Tempore is standing in for her, run to the Murderers Oval office and use her mouth as much as she normally does?
I know the ass that has that bushesque smirk on his face that I cannot even look at, he's Darrell Issa of CA., always reminding us, although he has wiped his derierre daily with our Constitution taht HE is an ARAB-AMERICAN, so I said , "Self, Arab- American, uh-huh, he's probably from Lebanon and Christian, frontin' like he is a follower of al-Islam.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Change starts at home
Posted by: westomoon on Jun 20, 2008 4:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We each live in a Congressional District, and for most of us, the primary races for those Democratic seats haven't taken place yet. It's time to get involved -- give some money and some time, bend our friends' ears, write some letters to the editor -- and support the Democratic challengers' campaigns. My DLC-oriented Congressman hasn't had a primary challenge for years, but this year there's a flat-out progressive running against him, with me as a supporter. The disgust level is high everywhere.

I want to try hauling the D party out of their drunken stupor before I give up on them. A serious challenge in the primary is also the most effective way to deploy the old electoral smelling salts in the time between now and November -- make those smug incumbents sweat in the Dem primary, to help them remember who hires 'em every 2 years.

There are going to be a lot of freshman Dems in Congress next year, and even the current crew of dullards may be willing to do their damn jobs with new kids in the mix, with us breathing down their necks for a change, and with Obama in the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who voted "Aye"?
Posted by: westomoon on Jun 20, 2008 5:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's the breakout of the House vote today. I am shocked by who voted "aye" -- my own Congressman among them. Suddenly I'm feeling wholehearted in my support for his primary opponent!

I don't care what kind of classified briefing the House got -- when it comes to the Bush administration, the Congress is way beyond "fool me twice". And, of course, nothing justifies abrogating the Constitution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who voted "Aye"? Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Who voted "Aye"? Posted by: Lauren
Selling Us Down The River!!!!!
Posted by: lively56 on Jun 20, 2008 6:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would say perhaps 95% or more of the people in the House and the Senate, are nothing but a bunch of Nazi whore dogs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OBAMA IN SUPPORT OF FISA
Posted by: bbfmail on Jun 21, 2008 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://blog.washingtonpost.com
/the-trail/2008/06/20/obama_supports_fisa_legislatio.html

Barack Obama

Obama Supports FISA Legislation, Angering Left

By Paul Kane

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) today announced his support for a sweeping intelligence surveillance law that has been heavily denounced by the liberal activists who have fueled the financial engines of his presidential campaign.

In his most substantive break with the Democratic Party's base since becoming the presumptive nominee, Obama declared he will support the bill when it comes to a Senate vote, likely next week, despite misgivings about legal provisions for telecommunications corporations that cooperated with the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program of suspected terrorists.

In so doing, Obama sought to walk the fine political line between GOP accusations that he is weak on foreign policy -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called passing the legislation a "vital national security matter" -- and alienating his base.

"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said in a statement hours after the House approved the legislation 293-129.

This marks something of a reversal of Obama's position from an earlier version of the bill, which was approved by the Senate Feb. 12, when Obama was locked in a fight for the Democratic nomination with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

Obama missed the February vote on that FISA bill as he campaigned in the "Potomac Primaries," but issued a statement that day declaring "I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty."

Sens. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) continue to oppose the new legislation, as does Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). All Obama backers in the primary, those senior lawmakers contend that the new version of the FISA law -- crafted after four months of intense negotiations between White House aides and congressional leaders -- provides insufficient court review of the pending 40 lawsuits against the telecommunications companies alleging privacy invasion for their participation in a warrantless wiretapping program after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"The immunity outcome is predetermined," Feingold wrote in a memo today.

#####

IS THIS THE CHANGE OBAMA AND HIS SUPPORTERS HAVE BEEN TELLING US ABOUT?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]