Skip to main content

[crossposted at Also Also]
RawStory is publishing an exclusive* that claims Sen Min Leader Reid will vote against cloture on the current PATRIOT USA Act agreement, effectively vowing to filibuster the bill:

Reid has told aides he will vote against cloture -- a Senate procedure which requires that 60 senators support a bill being brought before the Senate before it is brought to a final vote. In essence, voting against cloture means supporting a filibuster.

"Senator Reid has several concerns including the National Security letters, the library provision, and some of the habeas corpus aspects which have nothing to do with terrorism," an aide told RAW STORY.

Interesting to note that last line on habeas corpus--the current version of the bill already reflects some compromise between Lindsey Graham and Carl Levin, but still runs to the right of the Bingaman amendment largely restoring HC rights to Guantanamo prisoners.

But in any case, whenever the party leader in one of the chambers signs on to blocking a bill, that's pretty big news. Reid continues to impress, picking battles that are both important and winnable.

[edited to remove extraneous 'l's from 'filibuster.' Why do I always do that? {headslap}]

UPDATE--I just got word from Wyden's office that our senior Senator from Oregon will join the NO votes on cloture! Here's info from the release:

U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) today announced his intention to vote against and support efforts to filibuster the conference report reauthorizing the USA Patriot Act, citing concerns about numerous provisions that could compromise Americans’ privacy rights that would be made permanent under the legislation. Specifically, Wyden announced his intention today to oppose the legislation because it does not include sunsets for controversial powers and diminishes congressional oversight over the government’s use of these powers. “The current version of the report strikes the wrong balance between security and civil liberties and leaves Congress with inadequate oversight,” said Wyden. “Just as troubling is the inclusion of new language that will make it much more difficult for law-abiding Americans to defend themselves from possible Patriot Act abuses. These unjustified changes do not make the Patriot Act a more effective tool for fighting terrorism and in fact, make it more susceptible to abuse. I will vote against the current version of the legislation and support efforts to block its passage.” Specifically, Wyden cited strong concerns over a number of provisions contained in the conference report that would significantly compromise the privacy rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens. These specific provisions include:

· A provision that makes permanent the ability of FBI agents to issue National Security Letters (NSL), or documents issued without the approval of a judge or grand jury, which allows the government to obtain sensitive personal information about law-abiding U.S. citizens;

· A requirement that requires anyone who receives a NSL to notify the FBI if s/he consults with an attorney and to identify the attorney to the FBI, potentially resulting in a significant blow to the right to counsel, something that exists nowhere else in law;

· A provision to impose criminal penalties on a NSL recipient who speaks out in violation of a NSL gag order, even if s/he believes his rights have been violated;

· A measure that fails to require a roving wiretap includes sufficient information to describe in detail the specific person to be wiretapped.

While Wyden is an original co-sponsor of the Combat Meth Act that was attached to conference report, he expressed his disappointment that this legislation was attached to the controversial PATRIOT Act. “As a cosponsor of the combat meth legislation, I am disappointed by the politicization of the meth tragedy in this fashion,” said Wyden. “I will continue to fight for the passage of the meth bill but not as a part of this badly flawed legislation.”
Notice the comments on the meth amendment. I saw that in an earlier article, but glossed over it in my brain. Obviously, it's an unsubtle attempt to force legislators to vote No on meth legislation if they want to fight the PATRIOT extension. Glad to see the Dems aren't falling for it.

*Kossack nwprogressive points out that while this is good news, it's also hardly an exclusive if Reid told AP about it last night. So take 'exclusive' with a grain of salt.

Originally posted to torridjoe on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 10:52 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Damn. (4.00)
    I'm so impressed with Reid. (And Feingold... ).

    "I desire what is good. Therefore, everyone who does not agree with me is a traitor." King George III

    by ogre on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 10:56:51 AM PST

  •  Give em hell, Harry! (4.00)

    Bush is NOT America!

    by annefrank on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 10:59:13 AM PST

  •  GOP scared out of their minds (4.00)
    They don't think they have the votes, so they're talking compromise.

    As the USA Patriot Act headed toward passage in the House, its prospects in the Senate grew so uncertain Wednesday that Republican leaders considered an alternative to extend the current law a year rather than let parts of it expire Dec. 31 for lack of consensus, a senior Republican aide said.

    Senate vote-counters trying to tally support and opposition for an agreement that would revise the 2001 anti-terror law were unable to precisely gauge it's prospects Wednesday.

    If the agreement to renew the act fails a crucial test of support, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., was preparing to bring up his own legislation to extend the current Patriot Act for a year, according to a senior Frist aide who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision had not yet been made.

    Remember, there's a bipartisan group of  senators opposed to this bill, including Larry Craig, John Sununu and Lisa Murkowski.

    •  actually (none)
      extending it for a year may not be a bad idea.  that will guarantee that it will become an election issue in 2006
      •  Oh, yeah, that's right... (4.00)
        So that they can pass it next year on their terms, once they've used Diebold in 2006 to get a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Right???

        And, if you do it that way, it looks like you are playing politics with 1) national security and 2) American's rights and liberties.  I'm sorry, but the Democrats don't come out ahead pulling shit like that.

        •  How is making the Patriot Act an election issue (3.70)
          "playing politics" with American's rights and liberties?
          •  Habeas Corpus (4.00)
            Is more than a political issue, it's a key provision of the Magna Carta.

            Disappearing people, torturing them, and killing them in the course of interrogation violates the Magna Carta, the Constitution of the United States, and the Declaration of Universal Human Rights.

            Anybody willing to play games with Habeas Corpus and the foundational rights guaranteed therein is unfit for public service. To be willing to do so for momentary political advantage is unspeakably cynical, more than a bit risky, and so fucking stupid as to be unworthy of serious consideration.

            •  No offense (none)
              But I believe both of you and all of us are in agreement.  I believe in protercting social security and wish the attack were extended to election time next year.  It won't, because the people attacking it know it will cost them.  

              The guy is just advocating a practical measure and ony asked a rhetorical question.  Troll-rating the guy for it is pretty low.  

              Jerry Kilgore, used-car salesman for Governor.

              by PaulVA on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:50:07 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  None Taken (1.66)
                A one is not a troll rating.

                The problem with rhetorical questions (tho I'm not sure I buy your premise) is that they often turn out to be real questions. Indeed, many of our elected officials, my views notwithstanding, have already demonstrated their willingness to choose expedience over principle.

                So the one is intended to mark the rhetorical question as an egregiously bad idea that needs to be terminated with extreme prejudice.

                And I gave him a four downthread where he made good solid sense out of a personal obligation to fairness.

                •  From the DailyKos FAQ: (4.00)
                  "Many users believe that the rating system is intented to be an opportunity to express agreement or disagreement with a post, or with the poster themself. This is not accurate; ratings are intended to help elevate those posters that consistently make clear, good arguments and points, regardless of content, and to prevent trolls from invading the message board. Downrating commenters on the basis of agreement or disagreement with their arguments leads to a monolithic forum, free of new ideas and input.

                  So, please don't downrate comments just because you disagree with them!"


                  Just because you think it's a bad idea, he doesn't deserve a one.  

                  •  Basic Rights... (4.00)
                    ....are basic rights.

                    A willingness to dicker and deal over habeas corpus is no less offensive, in and of itself, than the most violently offensive hate speech.

                    The expression of a willingness to negotiate fundamental rights which have been protected under foundational Anglo-American law for over 500 years is no less offensive than a suggestion that there might be political advantage in allowing the imposition of theocracy in South Carolina, the reinstatement of slavery below the Mason-Dixon Line, the repeal of equal suffrage without regard to gender, the reestablishment of miscegenation laws, or the imposition of deed codicils which preclude any person of Jewish heritage from buying a given house.

                    Willingness to sell out fundamental legal rights which inhere to all American citizens is not a mere opinion with which one may agree or disagree.

                    Such a willingness is an affront to the Magna Carta, rule of law, an affront to the Declaration of Independence, an affront to the Revolution of 1776, an affront to the principles of the US Constitution, an affront to every soldier who has died in every war to protect and extend the full protection of the law to all citizens beyond the narrow circles of white male property owners and it is, in short, not merely pernicious, but evil: root, trunk, branch, stem, leaf and fruit.

                    With all due respect, that is far more than a mere disagreement with opinion.

                    •  greenskeeper, at first, I felt (with PaulVA and (none)
                      andreuccio) that you had been a little over the top with your rating of FleetAdmiralJ. even though I fully agree that compromise on the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is stupid and dangerous. I feel so strongly about this vile Act, I stalked off to my bathroom, muttering "..and where is that band, who so vauntingly swore, that the havoc of war and the battle's confusion, a home and a country would leave us no more?" I finished by declaring to the commode, "They're in the White House, and the House of Representatives."
                      Then I came back to my screen and read your response to andreuccio! I jumped back out of my chair, yelled "Shazam!" and pumped my fist. You are completely and superbly correct.

                      To torridjoe: Thanks for a great diary. My first sight of your title really lifted my spirit.

                      •  You talk to your toilet too? (none)
                        Maybe it's something in the water here.  (It did catch fire once, after all.)

                        Jumping on the bandwagon: (-3.63, -3.03) - Does that make me part of the right wing here?

                        by someone else on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 06:19:49 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  no it's not (none)
                      but I'm not going to rate you down. Or up. Disagreement, even with ideas you see as evil, is still disagreement. Your eloquent words are sufficient counter to the chance that anyone will thoughtlessly argue for the position you abhor. But the airing of such a thought (and your argument against it) is exactly what this forum is about, and giving the OP a 1 is not the way to speak out.

                      OK, we need +6 in the Senate and +16 in the House. Put your game face on and get to work!

                      by uffdalib on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 02:59:53 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  As suggested, waiting hides more torture, death (none)

                      many blue, yellow and green dogs are a majority

                      by Prove Our Democracy with Paper Ballots on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 08:11:03 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

            •  I agree... (none)
              it is imperative that Habeas Corpus be preserved.

              "When the government fears the people, that is Liberty. When the people fear the government, that is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

              by RichardG on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 07:14:09 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  ye of little faith (4.00)
          If GOoPs get 60 Senate seats, I'll eat your poop.

          SoapBlox Colorado - The Daily Kos of Colorado

          by pacified on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:24:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  If the Rs are going to use Diebold to win in 2006 (none)
          anyway, then what is the point of defeating PATRIOT?

          A peace vigil has as much effect on foreign policy as a debug vigil would on broken software.

          by RequestedUsername on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:55:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Fuck em lets stand and fight now. (4.00)

        Economic -6.63 Social -5.95

        by Lawdog on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:22:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  At least it's a fall back (none)
        Byt I don't think we should give an inch on the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act, it's too anti-american.
        •  That is right... (none)
          this is an issue of principle and it is about upholding our constitutional rights.

          "When the government fears the people, that is Liberty. When the people fear the government, that is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

          by RichardG on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 07:16:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Ummm... (none)
        Kerry came out against the PATRIOT act in his 2004 campaign, for about one week. His internal polling found that his opposition to the PATRIOT act was hurting him among independents and conservative-leaning Democrats. So, he stopped talking about it.

        Why in the world would we want the PATRIOT act to become an election issue in 2006? That's suicide, unless you're a candidate from Berkeley.

        •  TOO BAD if it's a weak campaign issue (none)
          How about standing up for principle for once?  Do the right thing FIRST, then worry about how to win.

          I don't want to hear Hillary-esque lectures about how we have to enter the "real world."

          Feingold kicked butt in 2004 while talking about his lone vote against the Patriot Act all the time.  His opponent tried to make it an issue and failed pathetically.

          •  indeed, its merit as (none)
            a "strong" or "weak" campaign issue is more than made up for by the strength of actually standing up for a principle.

            The Democrats can't go too far wrong in principled opposition to obnoxious non-Constitutional legislation.  It's like in business -- it's never a mistake to protect your clients/customers.

            Loyalty comes from love of good government, not fear of a bad one. Hugo Black.

            by Pondite on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 06:54:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Kerry voted for it ... (none)
          So he looked like a fool campaign against it.

          Kerry voted for every bad free trade deal which was every proposed ... so he looked like a fool campaigning against closed factories.

          Kerry voted to give the president authority to invade Iraq ... so he looked like a fool when he said "I actually voted against the $87 billion before I voted for it ..."

          Etc., ad nauseum.

          A political fanzine containing random musings about politics, music, the media and modern times: Politizine

          by politizine2 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 05:54:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  possible election issue or not. i say get rid (none)
        of that damn thing immediately. it is that serious.
    •  Idiots... (4.00)
      "I know! Rather than sunset it, we'll extend the Act for just a year! That's a compromise! It's a year shorter than the "two-year sunsets" the Democrats wanted!"

      No mention of opposing the passage of BAD, UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW, regardless of any sunsets. If it's bad law now, it will still be bad law in a year's time, too.

      I say, filibuster everything. Better to let the CURRENT sunset provisions expire than to repass them and allow them to constrain our rights as Americans any longer.

    •  An extension (4.00)
      of the current act shouldn't be allowed for more than 3 months, IMO.

      Perhaps the senate version could be allowed for a year, as that is a bit more palatable than the current law or the "conference report". But remember that the election time will be a rather busy one, and the forces of poltics will intrude an honest debate on the matter if it is allowed to overlap with the election.

      All in all, I think that asking for a 3 month extension of the existing law and forcing open floor debates seems to be best option to me.

    •  Thats right (none)
      I love watching Frist whine like a bitch. "I've never been slaped in the face like that." Lets see how he takes a boot to the nuts next November.

      "Just when they think they know the answer, I change the question!" R.Piper

      by McGirk SF on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 02:11:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  With Reid going (4.00)
    that could also draw other democrats over too
    •  Hopefully (none)
      I just don't understand what took so fucking long.

      Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

      by als10 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:26:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Too much credit? (4.00)
        It seems this would be the perfect time.  Right as the bill is coming up for passage would be a good time to fall in line with Feingold and cause Frist a coronary as he runs around trying to figure where he stands.  

        I believe that Reid takes a perverse pleasure in giving Frist ulcers, and it's tactically brilliant.

        •  Too much credit? (none)
          No, the credit is due and Reid is deserving.  I just wish it had been sooner, with more senators falling in line with Feingold's rock-solid stance on the subject.

          Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

          by als10 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 02:14:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Reid wouldn't do it if he didn't have the votes (4.00)
      Reid KNOWS he can stop this crazy thing. By publicly signing on, he's effectively endorsing Feingold's filibuster - not exactly a party-line requirement for other senators, but pretty close.  And given the number of Republicans feeling squeamish about the rap-tap-tapping of jackboots on the floor, a filibuster should be quite doable.

      One good thing about Reid... he hasn't tilted at a single windmill since taking over as majority leader.  He hasn't lost a battle.  That's because he doesn't take on losing causes.  So if he's doing it, this is a winner.  With a little luck, he'll get a decent number of GOP senators to cross the lines as well.  Wouldn't it be sweet if Reid can hold his troops in line while Frist's break ranks?

      Why is security or morality an either/or question?

      by Leggy Starlitz on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:31:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hegel, Obama, and Kerry (none)
      are also on board and ready to vote against cloture.
  •  Go Reid, Go Feingold! (4.00)
    When nations surrender their freedoms and civil liberties to the extent reflected in the Patriot Act, then the enemy has won.  The provisions of this act as indicated in the conference committee report undermine our democracy and our Constitution.  Just the way in which the committee excluded debate and inclusion of Democrats in the formulation of the final report reflects the hubris and chicanery of the right wing extremists who dominate all branches of our government.  Just today we read that the Pentagon has been spying on average citizens who oppose their criminal war in Iraq.  Give the government even more power over our private lives?  While our national treasure, our sons and daughters are dying in a war to bring freedom and democracy to a foreign country, we are losing our freedom and democracy here at home.  

    Filibuster that Bitch!

    ...and they passed in thought out to regions where pain and delight flow together and tears are the very wine of blessedness.

    by rlharry on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:19 AM PST

  •  If this fillibuster works (4.00)
    what are the implications for Scalito?  This could be a good test for the Dems to fight over the next fillibuster battle.
    •  they can't go nuclear on this (4.00)
      This isn't a confirmation vote - this is legislation, and major legislation at that.  The nuclear option doesn't exist.  The Senate has never even vaguely hinted at legislation getting an upperdown vote.

      So Frist can still threaten the nuclear option for Alito.  But if Reid soundly kicks his ass on PATRIOT (i.e., all Democrats and several Republicans support the filibuster), Frist's position will be greatly weakened.

      Why is security or morality an either/or question?

      by Leggy Starlitz on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:33:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  the senate backed bill... (4.00)
    is just plain better, Russ said it on PBS yesterday that the majority in the Senate backed his version of the bill, and it is the House and Whitehouse that is fucking things up, he even got Senator Sessions to admit this in their debate.  

    Harry, Russ and the rest of the Senators know their version of the bill is better for the country and they are willing to fight for it.  

    absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limit's the freedom of another.

    by jbou on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:31:52 AM PST

    •  If the filibuster blocks the conference version, (none)
      is there anything stopping the House from passing the Senate version?  If they did, wouldn't it then automatically go to the president for his signature?
      •  Yes, there is. (none)
        The hubris of the wingnut members of the House of Representatives.

        On a procedural basis, there's absolutely nothing to stop them from doing so.  And you're right, that would send it straight to the Chimperor.

        The Chimperor Has No Clothes

        by DC Pol Sci on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 03:55:47 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  The more publicity on the the Patriot Act, (4.00)
    the better. If there is a filibuster, it will help get the word out why the Patriot Act is bad for our country.
  •  Petition to Filibuster Renewal of (4.00)
    parts of the so-called "Patriot Act".  MoveOn's collecting signatures to drum up support for a filibuster - go to the following link to add your name here...

    From an email from MoveOn...

    "Last night we learned that the Defense Department has been secretly collecting intelligence on small peace groups, like one gathering at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Florida.1 It's a jarring reminder of the ongoing erosion of our civil liberties. This Friday, the Senate is expected to vote on a new and even more dangerous version of the Patriot Act.2

    A bipartisan group of senators have agreed to fight the Patriot Act--by filibuster if necessary. The law currently goes too far in curtailing our freedoms and they're fighting back. This is the time to act.

    This is a huge moment. Senators from both parties are standing together to protect privacy and liberty in a time of war--and they're ready to go all the way. It's important to support them and to show those who are still on the fence how important this issue is to you. Will you help us reach 250,000 signatures on our petition so we can hand deliver them in time for the vote?

    If this filibuster holds, Congress could vote to temporarily extend the Patriot Act as it stands--allowing time to craft a new, better version that addresses the big problems in the law. This would be a huge victory for those of us who believe that liberty is non-negotiable....

    ...That's why a bipartisan group of senators, including Republicans Larry Craig, John Sununu, Lisa Murkowski and Democrats Russ Feingold, Dick Durbin and Ken Salazar, have been working to fix the Patriot Act. They have vowed to fight the most egregious provisions and filibuster reauthorization if necessary. We need to show them that we have their backs.""

    by Alegre on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:42:45 AM PST

  •  The best news I've had all day (4.00)
    If we can filibuster this thing to death, then freedom wins.

    The White House seems to think that freedom is much too precious to be trusted to the people.  That's why they have to be able to look into everyone's comings and goings.  

    You can't defend freedom by locking it away in a vault, where nobody can get to it.

    Filibuster the damned thing to death.  Every procedural trick in the goddamn book, and make a few up if you have to, just


    Sorceress Sarah

    It is no accident that Liberty and Liberal are the same word.

    by Sorceress Sarah on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:46:46 AM PST

  •  am i (none)
    supposed to get this happy when our leaders actually do what we hired them to do????

    I re-did my website! See how pretty is now.

    by OrangeClouds115 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 11:48:36 AM PST

  •  first time recommend! (4.00)
  •  Need to.. (none)
    Notify each of your senators that you urge them to vote against the Pariot Act Renewal and not to compromise.  This is a nasty Act that infringes on our constitutional Rights and is being misused.  It is unconstitutional.  Vote it down!!!!
  •  Pubs fighting tooth and nail.... (4.00)
    ...against 'radical militant librarians', per a bemused announcer on NPR yesterday morning.

    Pubs: Our way of life is threatening by free reading libraries and excessive literacy and empirically-verifiable knowledge!

    Clue: Which speaks volumes about your way of life, my friends. :)

    Heroes Serve - Republicans GET Served.

    by cskendrick on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:05:22 PM PST

  •  I LOVE Harry Reid (4.00)
    He keeps playing chess, while the republicans are trying to find their checkers.

    Republicans to Americans: "Are there no prisons?...And the Union workhouses?...Are they still in operation?"

    by adigal on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:07:09 PM PST

  •  Has there ever been an iota (none)
    of evidence that the provisions in this act stopped a single act of terrorism in the U.S.?  It has not helped us find Bin Laden.  It has not stopped bombs from going off in London, Madrid and Bali.  

    If not for the cat,
    And the scarcity of cheese
    I could be content.
    --Jack Prelutsky

    by Reepicheep on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:08:59 PM PST

    •  Interesting, but not the key issue (4.00)
      After all, Saddam was very good at preventing terrorism in Iraq.

      The main question is the kind of country we live in, not how "safe" we are.

      •  But it is an arguably important issue (none)
        Before I start, let me preface with the fact that I am personally behind Feingold on this 100%.

        It is absolutely important to consider if we are any "safer."  You can certainly argue against the "Patriot" Act on the grounds that it is overly broad, it infringes on our constitutional rights, is generally not fair, etc.  However, our law is based on a continuous struggle to find the line between where your rights end and the greater good begins.  Clearly, most of us here believe the line should be closer to personal liberty and away from the government's police power, and that this law goes way over that line and is just a blatant power grab or an attempt to look like the government is "doing something."  But others in the middle take a more trusting approach, and that is where we need to fight.  In addition to telling people what they're giving up, we need to show them what they are getting in the bargain (very little or nothing).  As much as people value their rights, they value (perceived) safety more.  When it is clear that people are not getting what they bargained for, they will fight back.  So, keep asking our Dear Leaders what we are getting in exchange for our civil rights.

        (-7.25, -5.85) "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." - Thomas Jefferson

        by Slartibartfast on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 03:33:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Your argument (none)
          was much clearer than mine, thank you.  My point in asking the question is to challenge the tactics of the right, who invariably accuse the liberals and the "militant librarians" of being so squishy and sentimental about civil rights they are willing to let terrorists blow up Disneyland.  Their premise is that the Patriot Act makes us safer.  I want to see them back up that assertion with proof.

          If not for the cat,
          And the scarcity of cheese
          I could be content.
          --Jack Prelutsky

          by Reepicheep on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 08:48:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Not a single conviction. (4.00)
      And a jury just rejected the Patriot Act evidence against Sami Al-Arian.

      Washington Post reports today that a large majority of the jury were for acquitting Al-Arian on all counts, including the ones that the jury ended up hung on.

  •  Dec 11th MJS Article (4.00)
    This was in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel last friday:

    MJS Article

    You may remember Sensenbrenner when he stormed out of that meeting, and had the lights and microphones turned off when people were still debating, just because he didn't like what they were saying.

    Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

    by als10 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:24:34 PM PST

    •  Battle of the cheeseheads (none)
      Russ should shove some down that fat pile of dung's throat until he blows up.  Stalinbrenner is a bigger threat to our civil liberties than any illegal alien or terrorist is.

      -7.38, -5.74 This is your world. These are your people. You can live for yourself today, or help build tomorrow for everyone.

      by DisNoir36 on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:30:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What happened to Sensenbrenner? (none)
        Back in 2001, he was largely responsible for the limitations contained in the original Patriot Act, notably the sunset provisions.
      •  Sensenbrenner: (4.00)
        Chairman: PATRIOT powers eternalized `over my dead body'

        Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Apr. 17, 2003

        WASHINGTON - (KRT) - House Judiciary Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner said Thursday he would fight any effort now to make permanent many of the expanded police powers enacted after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as part of the USA PATRIOT Act.

        "That will be done over my dead body," said Sensenbrenner in an interview.

        The Wisconsin Republican also said it was "way premature" for Congress to consider a new package of anti-terrorism proposals being drafted by the Justice Department - a so-called "Patriot Act Two."

        Before that happens, he said, the "burden of proof" is on the Justice Department to prove the merits of what he called "Patriot Act One."

        Sensenbrenner's comments are notable because he is a critical player in the running debate between the Bush administration and civil liberties advocates on both the right and left who see the new search and surveillance powers as a threat to privacy and individual rights.

        The War on Terror is terrorism

        by Halcyon on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 01:26:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Democrats standing up for freedom (none)
    It's about time the Dems show some backbone when it comes to liberty and civil rights.
       This is one area that could get them HUGE political points with average Americans. They need to fight this civil rights grab, and make a big stink about it.

    "In her mercy, history anesthetizes those whom she intends to destroy." -Leon Trotsky

    by gjohnsit on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:38:48 PM PST

  •  Could be a "good" thing (4.00)
      Reid and Feingold : this is great!  Filibuster this mutha!
        The bright side:
                   1. Dems standing up against very bad law
                    2. This law if passed is now going to be a campaign issue-
                         it'll be for us'ns what married gays does for the goobers-
                         it'll get even more of us to the polls.
                    3.  When the issues get focused, as in this diary and Bob
                         Johnson's still up now, some of those still 'independent'
                          will (finally) see these assbites for what they are. When
                          the public hears the stories of D.o.d spying on all the
                          domestic groups and grannies and librarians and vet
                     4. Detailing the money pissed away on surveillance of
                          protest groups instead of finding real terrorists and
                          criminals and making us 'safer' will actually be a middle
                          ground position and sway even 'swing' voters.
      Good diary, thanks and keep it up I hope!

    Neocon plan for Iraq : Chaos and Corruption.

    by KenBee on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 12:43:04 PM PST

  •  This issue is #1 for me (4.00)
    If we can't protect our most basic, general liberties to privacy and a transparent legal process, this country is no more.  Whatever it will be, it is not America.  Maybe change the name to Amerika or something, cuz it won't be the country I grew up in.

    Support the filibuster, support anything that damns the PAT ACT to the abyss it belongs in.  This BS cannot stand and not break our country forever.

  •  Feingold: I've got Hagel, too (4.00)
    Russ has been blogging at TPM Cafe all week leading up to the Senate fight.  He confirms Reid's (and Leahy's) opposition, and gives some new info in today's post:

    This morning, the SAFE Act cosponsors released a "Dear Colleague" letter, laying out our objections to the conference report and pledging to vote against cloture.  You'll see some new names on this letter - including Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.

    That's at LEAST 4 Republicans on our side, which means we could sustain crossover Dems and still force a filibuster.

  •  TJ (none)
    Where is your tip jar - this is great stuff?!!
    •  Haven't figured out what they do (4.00)
      what the heck is a tip jar for, anyway?

      As for needing one here, I sincerely appreciate the flattery--but my diary probably represents nothing more than scoop status for having put it up first. I didn't do much more than pick out the part that interested me (habeas), and then on my own blog tailor it a little bit to Oregon state politics.

      Nonetheless, I'm happy to see it up on the big board for a while, and glad that others found it (as I did) to be important news.

  •  reid, you are the man! harry would be proud! (4.00)
    I'm proud to be a Democrat again!

    I AM paying attention, and I am so fucking outraged I can't see straight. Besides, TORTURE is not a family value!

    by caseynm on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 02:49:20 PM PST

  •  My E Mail to Nelson (none)
    I sent this to Bill Nelson ( Fl.centrist Dem.)

    Dear Senator Nelson
    Re: Patriot Act
    My extended family have been supporters long before your ride to space.
     We feel this legislation is so flawed to be a threat to american freedoms and basic rights.
    We request you back Senators  Fiengold, Reid and others even if it is decided to filibuster it. It is definately time to stand against majority leader Frist and the right wing extremists.
     Fla Senator Martinez sent me a nice letter which in efect said " I can't vote against my benefactor GWB" I hope you don't do the same.

    "a smart man knows what he doesn't know" Sister Mary Loraine Hialeah 1951

    by flafran on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 03:30:42 PM PST

  •  Feingold is gonna be on Wash. Journal (none)
     sometime tomorrow morning on Cspan.

    "No one has a finer command of language than the person who keeps his mouth shut."- Sam Rayburn, Former Speaker of the House

    by LeftistIndependent on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 04:36:17 PM PST

  •  I think we might have the votes. (none)
    Feingold said he had a bipartisan group of senators joining him. And since Reid is a vote-counter, he must believe he has the votes to block the renewal of the Patriot Act. Normally, if he does not have the votes, he will not filibuster, like he did with the Gonzales and Roberts nominations.
  •  At least you got a response from Marty for GWB (none)

    I recieved zilch from both Senator Mike DeWine and Senator George Voinavich. There's little doubt that they are shaking in their boots (especially DeWine going up against no nonsense  Paul Hacket)!

    I need to say Feingold was beautiful in his speech this evening. He's doing everything he can to protect our rights and liberties. And he's gathering the support of the people. We ,as he states, understand that sometimes we need to look at how law enforcement is able to conduct investigations to protect us. But only when we can trust those people in law enforcement and government to FIRST..protect all of our civil rights and liberties. Things like "Sneak & Peak" is not an action I feel my government needs to be even contemplating...but they sure are. Getting customer information from book store sales, jewelry store sales. publications card and banking info is ridiculous!!!! That is very intrusive...
    And the library check out records just gets my goat...

    If law enforcement is so enept... so bad that they need to stoop to such low life scheme's to make their friggin work easier things have gotten really bad...remember Brownie!!...not being properly trained in law enforcement technic is all this is about. The really professionals can do it without this crap.

    One last thing I must add....

    Is it me...or is Jeff Session's just an idiot? he has nothing on his mind but making brownie points with buddy boy George. Between the two of them there is no brain matter at all....

    They could have been twin brothers except that Jeff's ears are only a little big bigger.
    The getting the

    Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. Author: Groucho Marx

    by JellyPuddin on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 04:45:36 PM PST

  •  Look at this AP Bias! (none)
    Senate GOP Fights to Sustain Patriot Act

    By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 10 minutes ago

    WASHINGTON - Senate Republican leaders fought Wednesday to save the USA Patriot Act renewal from sinking under the weight of opposition from a bipartisan group that says the measure would give the FBI a dangerous amount of power.

    This is so blatently biased in favor of curtailing liberty! Here's proof that it could be written differently.

    Senators Fight to Preserve Liberty

    WASHINGTON - A bipartisan group of Senators is holding fast to prevent further incursion into American civil liberties by resisting passage of the Patriot Act until it is amended to protect the privacy of law abiding American citizens

    That'll be the freakin' day!

    (-8.88/-7.64): I drink from the keg of glory, Donna. Bring me the finest muffins and bagels in all the land!

    by Joshua Lyman on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 05:25:42 PM PST

    •  Or Just Objectively Giving The Facts? (none)
      Something like...

      "The Patriot Act will expire by the end of the year unless Congress acts.  Although the White House and a majority in the House of Representatives have agreed to revisions, a bipartisan group in the Senate objects to those revisions.  The bipartisan group wants greater protections for civil liberties and privacy..."

  •  Best part of filibuster (none)
    Feingold as said that for his filibuster he'll read the Bill of Rights and other pertinent documents.

    God I'm glad he's my Senator.

    "Murrow had a child. The damn thing went wild." -- Fleetwood Mac
    (-8.63), (-7.03)

    by Perdition on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 06:57:38 PM PST

edverb, selise, pyrrho, pine, Lawdog, Phoenix Woman, tankej, JoelK in AZ, glitterscale, Oregon Bear, joejoejoe, human, ubikkibu, Unstable Isotope, wytcld, Winger, Bob Love, Maryscott OConnor, Kire, Yoshimi, scrutinizer, kerry, ssm, bramish, shumard, Victor, lysias, Blue Shark, cookiesandmilk, polecat, year90ninezero, MilwMom, Carolina On My Mind, Muboshgu, bumblebums, PeterSD, km4, mlafleur, PaintyKat, bronte17, RichardG, cskendrick, Einsteinia, pondside, annrose, gaspacho, ecostar, FtheNaysayers, Billy Shears, Welshman, HippyWitch, als10, Paul Douglas Fan, Transmission, chechecule, Prove Our Democracy with Paper Ballots, Ignacio Magaloni, peraspera, sgilman, L0kI, cognitive dissonance, Swordsmith, Gonzophile, diana04, Cedwyn, menodoc, annan, rcvanoz, NewDirection, missliberties, nj mom, StuartZ, brainwave, JDPITALIA, Sorceress Sarah, duncanidaho, newore, kathika, GN1927, rlharry, TheJohnny, barbwires, Leggy Starlitz, Patriot for Al Gore, freeyourmind, Man Eegee, kidh, Bozos Rnot4 Bush, DrReason, Lookingforwardtothefuture, Dr Seuss, bablhous, rebirtha, DrewDown, rickeagle, rolet, Gowrie Gal, Nindid, rapala, davidincleveland, joanneleon, Bluesee, whodat527, LeftistIndependent, Chris Kulczycki, liberal atheist, Elise, patrioticliberal, Alegre, aitoaster, LarisaW, Congressman John Conyers, LisaZ, Heiuan, Valtin, Shiva, viral, NeuvoLiberal, zombie, majcmb1, thered1, annefrank, QuickSilver, CarterDulka, JanL, melvin, PoppyRocks, cephyn, Compound F, buhdydharma, KenBee, Detroit in Appalachia, dagor

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site