Skip to main content

View Diary: What's going on with FISA and the filibuster? (234 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Of course one could ask (17+ / 0-)

    Why in the hell Reid is pushing to get the FISA bill through before the recess instead of working on the other legislation?  This says it all:

    After all, the current FISA law doesn't sunset until February, so they do have some breathing room, even if they're convinced just letting the law expire won't do.

    I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. - John F. Kennedy

    by DWG on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 11:42:15 AM PST

    •  Because he's pwned eom (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HighSticking, Anne Hawley
    •  Because they tapped his phone? (12+ / 0-)

      For weeks people have asked  "Why would Reid do this?" "What could make him refuse to honor a Dem hold?"

      We now KNOW Bushco started domestic phone dragnet(s) before 9/11. Whose records would Cheney have asked to see first. Domestic Radicals or Dem politicians?

    •  Hmmm... (8+ / 0-)

      ...maybe he has a deal with Dodd.

      This could all be kabuki theater.

      The goal here is for Dodd to delay this until Christmas recess, they adjorn with no bill, Reid can then say he tried, and it dies there, never to be brought up again-in any form (or he "gives in" and passes the FISA bill without the telecom immunity at the last minute, when everybody is tired and wants to go home).

      If this theory is accurate, our anger towards Reid is missplaced.

      The way to tell this is to see whether or not Dodd succeeds.  If he does, I suspect Reid was in on it all along.  If not, well, not.

      •  Hmm... (5+ / 0-)

        ...interesting theory. "Oops, sorry, wish we could help you, but Dodd's being so difficult and we have other things we have to do. Kthxbye."

        •  Exactly (5+ / 0-)

          Reid is (was?) known for being the parlimentary master.  He knows how long things take, and how long there is before the Christmas recess.  This could all be a dance.

          There's a bonus here-if the Democratic Presidential canidates (all of those in the Senate) join the filibuster, it will be some good press for them (nobody likes the fucking phone company).

          •  Democratic Presidential Candidates? (7+ / 0-)

            A passionate speech on the Senate floor would get any of the Senators running for CEO of 'merica some free TV time should they choose to stand up for the Constitution and the American people.
            Anything less makes them accessories to the multiple felonies that violating FISA brings with it.
            So, Dems, who's it gonna be? Stand up in opposition to the bush regime and the criminally complicit telecoms or thumb your nose at the Constitution and the American people?
            I won't hold my breath...

            republicans have killed more Americans than the terrorists!

            by cybersaur on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 01:34:44 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hear, Hear (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              What a great opportunity to show some leadership!  Take to the floor, make a point, show some emotion and rally the troops!  What an opportunity, please don't waste it.

              You know the rent is in arrears, the cat has not been fed in years, its even worse that it appears but, its alright.....

              by PWT on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 01:42:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  nope...that's theory is totally wrong... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Luam, adrianrf

          if he was doing that then the better option would have been to let the Chimp veto the better version of this bill (which isn't perfect either, but doesn't have the telco immunity provisions).

          the Chimp in Chief has threatened to veto any version without telco immunity

          Reid coudla then said "oh..I tried but chimpo refused to deal."

          He woulda kept our love and couldn't be blamed by the Repugnant party and the Liebercrats too much.

          •  Well, he will have the chance (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            If the better version passes after all of that.

            Maybe that's another reason to do this now instead of in February-so they have chance to, after Bush vetoes it, do the same damned dance in two months, and get the same result and see if Bush vetoes it a second time as the clock ticks on it's expiration.

        •  So why did Akaka fail to back the cloture vote (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          StrayCat, CenterLeft, adrianrf

          this morning, in support of Dodd's filibuster, as he pledged he would?  And the other Strong Narrow Stance Presidential candidates all fail to show up for a vote that could have given us an even stronger demonstration of the strength of this filibuster?

          Not saying it's impossible, but we didn't start off well with a 76-10 to undermine the filibuster.

          Why does Shrub never talk about his first wife, Reality? He divorced her with prejudice and all of his alimony checks to her have bounced.

          by nepolon on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 01:21:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, but that's the vote to decide whether or... (0+ / 0-)

            ...not to vote on the vote to decide whether or not to discuss voting on an amendment to amend the amendment.  That is, this early stuff is just killing time until the big showdown.  No need to bring out the big guns just yet.

            If the Senate actually is in favor of the bill with telecom immunity by a vote of 76 to 10, then this whole thing was doomed from the start, because that means about half of Senate Democrats were in favor of the thing (plus all Senate Republicans).

          •  For Cloture (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            When there is a cloture vote it needs 3/5th of the Senate no matter how many people are actually in attendance, so by not attending all of our presidential Senators are essentially voting against Cloture.  It is less dramatic and it prevents them from making a speech in favor but in terms of votes a the bill progressing they are not hampering our efforts.

            My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
            Philly for Obama

            by Luam on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 02:38:17 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Absolutely, but (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Luam, marina, adrianrf

              there is the subtle bigotry of silence and/or absence that makes it that much harder to sway others.  

              It's difficult to argue that Obama, for instance, is really covering Sen. Dodd's back here because he isn't giving the issue valuable face time or expending any political capital working the caucus.  I can say the same for Clinton and Biden.  

              It's not like they are actively aiding the Republicans in covering up the misdeeds of this (mis)Administration, but boy-howdy if they could have called a cease-fire in Iowa and showed up en mass to twist arms in support of this that would have been worth a few moments on the evening news, wouldn't it?

              Why does Shrub never talk about his first wife, Reality? He divorced her with prejudice and all of his alimony checks to her have bounced.

              by nepolon on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 03:06:11 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Could be. "Guys, I went to the mat for you on (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        this, but just couldn't move it."

        Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid.
        --Basil King, Canadian novelist, 1859-1928

        by dallasdave on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 12:56:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site