Skip to main content

This is what his local news has to say on the FISA bill he engineered:

Steny Hoyer (D-MD-5th) was a key player in a bipartisan compromise announced today to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The FISA Amendments Act, H.R. 6304, in part provides legal immunity to the nation's telecommunications companies who helped the federal government with a warrantless surveillance program, which in part gathers information about the phone records of American citizens.

According to a May 11, 2006 report by USA Today, "The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime." ...

Proponents of the surveillance program say it is in response to the attacks on 9/11 and necessary to combat terrorism. However, the Washington Post reported on Oct. 13, 2007 that former Qwest executive Joseph Nacchio said in court papers, "the NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."

Qwest is the one telecommunications company who reportedly refused to cooperate with the NSA on the grounds they believed doing so would have been illegal.

It's good to see that at least some reporters can get the story right.

Debate on the latest version of the Protect AT&T has begun. It's going to move fairly fast, with just an hour of debate. Conyers is leading the opposition.

Update: Glenn finds this gem of a new Fox poll showing that Republicans approve of Congress (23-64) more than Democrats do (18-71). That was before yesterday's capitulation announced.

Congratulations to Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer for leading the Republican Congress.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:14 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
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

    •  I would... (14+ / 0-)

      ...except my Representative is Hoyer, and it would obviously be like talking to a concrete wall.

      •  Fuck that! (27+ / 0-)

        Call and tell em what's what!  Let him know he's pissing his constituents off!  You alone calling the ass means ten times one of the rest of us doing it.

        Hell, I called his office this morning and bitched already, and I'm from Mississippi!

        Kid on the phone was polite, kinda took some of the fun out of it, didn't get to yell. =(

        "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."--V

        by CC Lee on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:21:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I emailed his office earlier (9+ / 0-)

          Maybe I'll ring him, too.

          •  Legal Jeopardy (9+ / 0-)

            Instead of asking their position on capitulation, maybe we should start asking if they fear legal jeopardy if telecoms don't recv immunity...

            It is the only plausible explanation; much moreso than pictures of little boy fannies...

            Pelosi just asked for $ via the DCCC with an Obama attached message...

            I replied, not to the "donotreply" address but to this one: speakerpelosi@dccc.org

            These Thursday/Friday attempts at much sought after immunity lead me to believe it is legal jeopardy they fear, not eavesdropping data as blackmail, which would PROVE illegal domestic spying in spades...

            Their ilk are afraid of the slammer, me thinx...

            Evidence that contradicts the ruling belief system is held to extraordinary standards, while evidence that entrenches it is uncritically accepted. -Carl Sagan

            by RF on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:38:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  there has been much talk this morning about (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RF, chimpy

              ;legal jeaprody'?  what exactly is this legal jeaourdy they are afraid of?  surely if the president is immune from prosecution, as well as his staff and  Justice department, they would already have covered their rear ends under either the Patriot Act or some other Exevcutive Order indemnifying those who were told of the the program under the classification clauses they have been relying so heavily on.

              In order to investigate the matter one would need to go right back to the statement made by Nacchio that Qwest was approached six months before 9/11, meaning that already there would be fears in the administration that a terrorist attack was in the works. And that of course would blow the ship right out of the water.

              However the chances of anything like that happening are absolutely zilch.

              So instead of baseless accusations a brilliant piece of investigative journalism would be welcome. Where are Woodward and Bernstein when we need them. The fact is that basically only the major media outlets have the resources to so this kind of expose and none of them appear to have the slightest interest in rocking anybody's boat.

              It is shameful day for American government, Democratic and republican. it is going to take more than a paint job to clean uip this den of snakes and pit of corruption. I am not holding my breath.

            •  Legal Jeapordy How?... (0+ / 0-)

              I understand the legal jeopardy of the phone companies and the Bush Regime. But members of Congresss neither ordered the illegal wiretaps, as the White House did, nor made them operational, as the phone companies did. So where is the legal jeapordy for them? Being a pack of spineless enablers is contemptible, but is is legally actionable?

              •  Pictures worth a Thousand words- (0+ / 0-)

                Ask yourself why?

                Given the obvious consternation of strong activist groups backlash for dogged persistence in achieving immunity...  Why?

                I have heard many reasons, but the only one that makes sense is the "If we go down, you go down..." scenario...  

                Pictures worth a Thousand words-

                Posted in a previous RF Thread

                Evidence that contradicts the ruling belief system is held to extraordinary standards, while evidence that entrenches it is uncritically accepted. -Carl Sagan

                by RF on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:04:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks for this information (0+ / 0-)

              I've sent my second email to her so far this morning.  The DNC will not have one penny of my money because of this...and Obama may not get any more either unless he repudiates this.  I've had enough!

          •  The more people from his district that call (9+ / 0-)

            the better.  He should be made to feel the full heat from his actions.

      •  And I thought (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shaharazade, ankey, kyril, StrangeAnimals

        I was the only progressive in all of Southern Maryland!!!

      •  Oust Hoyer (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kyril, MarkMarvin

        Vote for the republican running against him.
        Hoyer must be sacrificed for the greater good.
        Give me liberty or give me death!

        Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

        by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:35:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No you don't really want to do that. n/t (4+ / 0-)
          •  Yes I do (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Uberbah

            We can afford to sacrifice one House seat to show the remainder of the Dems in Congress that we will not stand for this.

            Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

            by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:14:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actually - we would and should sacrifice (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              shaharazade, Uberbah

              about 50-70 seats if we were really going to do it right - but that won't deliver an outcome that would be any better than the one we are getting now.  The only thing that will scare these people is the possibility - which I believe is very real - that their hopes for a Democratic White House could easily be dashed by this stupidity.  Giving into the least popular president in the history of this country makes them look mighty weak - they ought to understand that they can lose independents and base votes with these foolish capitulations.

        •  Yeah ... (4+ / 0-)

          More like, "Take my wallet or take my wallet and shoot me."

          "Vote for the Republican" indeed!

          Outraged Conservatives: Stop Picking on McCain's Trollop

          by Bronxist on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:45:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Vote for the Republican...NO!! (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          chimpy, The Gryffin

          I live in Charles County.  The republican running against him would make the KO Worst list in minutes.  This is exactly what we can not let happen.  Collins Baily is currently on the Charles County Board of Ed.  We just missed getting him booted off in the last election but much like the rest of this district it it struggling to remain "Blue".  Collins Baily is the gentleman who in a board 'brainstorming' session through out the idea of allowing the Gideons to distribute Bibles in the PUBLIC schools.  This from a man who did not send his kids to PUBLIC school but choose to have them home schooled, below is his answer to the local paper on his opinion of eduction:

          .

          Q. What is the federal government’s role in setting educational standards for Southern Maryland schools?

          Constitutionally, none. The federal government has no proper role in setting educational standards for Southern Maryland schools. However, the No Child Left Behind Act as well as many, many other federal mandates are currently the tail wagging the dog.

          Parents are the proper authority over their child’s education. Our state constitution mandates a state role in education which it partly delegates to the local education authorities. The federal government’s involvement in setting educational standards has had a tremendous negative effect on quality and accountability. The GOP platform used to call for the elimination of the Department of Education, a very good idea. I am serving my fourth four-year term on the Charles County Board of Education and have seen firsthand the negative effects that federal involvement has had and is having on our schools in Southern Maryland. As a congressman, I would eliminate the $67 billion Department of Education budget. That money can better be managed at the state and local level. I would repeal NCLB and all other federal education mandates.

          Those candidates running for federal offices who want to be involved in education should run for their local counties’ board of education or get a job as a teacher. Although the folks in Washington may be very earnest in their opinions about what our schools need, they have shown that they don’t have a clue about what is needed to be done or how to provide educational opportunities for our youth.

           

        •  No (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Uberbah, justshootme

          vote for the Libritarian running against him.  She is against FISA immunity and for bringing the troops home now.  

          Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/05/22/gi_bill/index.html opposition

          by ScienceMom on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:52:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Primay Challenge (7+ / 0-)

        We primary challenge every single one of the "Democrats" who just sold us down the river.  If we can't beat them in the primary we let them lose in the general.  Better we have real Republicans in office than these sleazeballs.

        Pelosi, Hoyer, and Reid are the leaders, so of course we need to get rid of them, but we can't stop with the leaders.  The rollcall will show who the enemy is, and every one of them must be ejected from Congress ASAP.

        I'd rather lose the fake "majority" we have today and strengthen the party's core than keep these Lieberman clones around.  They've shown us what they think of us, they've just told us that we don't matter, that they support Bush over our freedom, that Democratic values are something they don't support, so the only response we have is to kick them out.

        If we let them get away with this they'll screw us even harder later.  This is not a negotiable issue, it is not an area where there can be reasonable disagreement, its a matter of the basic fabric of our nation, and what they are doing is unforgivable.

        "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 2, 2003

        by gaijin99 on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:43:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  may be too late for primary challenges (0+ / 0-)

          lots of states already had their primaries for congress/senate seats.

          By 2010 most voters will have forgotten what these creeps did.

          What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is. ~ Dan Quayle

          by CParis on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:52:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Then we let them lose (0+ / 0-)

            If its too late to primary challenge them then we let them lose to the Republicans.  There must be punishment for this.

            I'd rather have an honest minority than a stab us in the back, false, "majority"

            "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 2, 2003

            by gaijin99 on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 11:10:25 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  We'll take them down to rebuild our country and (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          chimpy, grrr, Uberbah

          our party.

          I just gave $50 yesterday to ActBlue's anti-FISA campaign at http://www.actblue.com/...  They'll be running ads against lawmakers that support this travesty.  

          I'll keep my eye out for ways to roust the sellouts.  We've got to keep the long term in view and punish office-holders who corrupt our institutions.

      •  Call him anyway! Be on Record! (0+ / 0-)

        Welcome Back, Hillary & friends!

        by Krum on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:00:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Time to find a Democrat to primary Hoyer (0+ / 0-)

        With Democrats like Hoyer, who needs Republicans.

        Don't be so afraid of dying that you forget to live.

        by LionelEHutz on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:09:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  what's there to say? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cybersaur, illusionmajik, seabos84, kyril

      i can't wait to vote you out of office?

      other than that, what's there to say?

      •  Is he running unchallange this year? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cybersaur, kyril, MarkMarvin

        For some reason, even a republican freshman will be better than this guy. (at least we get rid of bad Dems leadership and can start over.)

        What is the state of Hoyer race? This guy is practically working out of ATT office.

      •  "Please don't do this." (9+ / 0-)

        Whether it falls on deaf ears or not can't really be helped, but at least it's an actual constituent expressing deep disappointment with Hoyer's stance on this issue.

        In all liklihood, it won't make a whit of difference now, but he's going to be very high up on the Netroots's 2010 primary hit-list, if not our "public enemy #1."  We brought down Lieberman, we'll bring down Hoyer, but that doesn't make it any less worthwhile to call him and politely ask him to make the right choice so we don't have to.

        •  Primary would be to late (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyril

          Hoyer needs to be removed from office NOW. He has spearheaded crimes against the Constitution. I don't know if he's got a republican opponent in the general election this November, but if he does I would urge all Democrats to vote against Hoyer. We must sacrifice Hoyer to send a shot across the bow of the Democratic party to show them that we will no longer tolerate their complicity in destroying our Constitution.
          Give me liberty or give me death!

          Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

          by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:41:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm all for fortitude.... (0+ / 0-)

            But I think you're taking things a bit far. As bad as this bill is, it's got nothing on, say, the Alien and Sedition Act (advocated by John Adams) and the nation continued to exist.

            I'm glad we're all fighting mad about this -- we really should be, but please don't think that this one single bill means the world ends and we're all going to be shot in the street. It's very bad, but it's I don't see how it's "the end of all we hold sacred and dear" bad, though enough bills like this one and we could be headed in that direction, but I don't see it happening that way now. (A few years ago was a different story.)

            Getting worked is great if it stirs action, but some of our passion is getting misdirected.

            Forward to Yesterday -- Reactionary aesthetics and liberal politics (in that order)

            by LABobsterofAnaheim on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:52:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The end comes in a series of steps (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LABobsterofAnaheim

              You're right, LABobster, that we're not all going to be rounded up next week, but this shit has already gone too far and it is time--way past time for us to make Democrats who're comfortable with Republican authoritarianism to be made very uncomfortable.

            •  It IS that bad (0+ / 0-)

              They can siphon up ALL of your electronic communications, find something illegal, make broad, unsubstantiated public statements about the plot you were "involved in" and lock you up indefinitely without ever allowing you access to an attorney.
              You may not see the elimination of our Constitutional rights as unacceptable, but many of us do. How bad are you willing to allow things to get before you agree with me? Don't wait until it's too late. This has to be stopped NOW!

              Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

              by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:19:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  This is what I'm talking about! (0+ / 0-)

                Where did I say it was "acceptable" -- though I'm not quite sure the series of events you describe could happen with this bill (remember, we just got habeas back, yay, and I still think my American citizenship would help me even under the Bushies, but I take your basic underlying point about the real-world importance of this stuff). With some of you people if I'm not ready to man the barricades, I'm a traitor to the cause. How about a little less Madame Defarge and a little more Thomas Jefferson, okay?

                In any case, I'm stridently opposed to the bill but I'm also saying it's just one part of a larger battle and going ballistic isn't going to help anyone or anything. Sheesh.

                Forward to Yesterday -- Reactionary aesthetics and liberal politics (in that order)

                by LABobsterofAnaheim on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 11:46:02 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  mojo for Qwest letting the cat out of the bag! (17+ / 0-)

      That's the headline for this story - BEFORE 9/11????? So all this "September 10th mindset" smear stuff is (no one here is surprised) NOT TRUE????

      Watching Dem's cover their butts on this is pathetic. It's about more and BETTER Democrats!!! Emphasis on the BETTER.

      Fear is the mind killer - Frank Herbert, Dune

      by p gorden lippy on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:25:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course 6 months before (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Norbreacht, CParis, p gorden lippy

        The illegal taps were only ever for opposition research. Legit targets were always easily approved the the FISC. Existing intel was ignored in favor of crackpot rumors. There wasn't enough manpower to process all the sigint we already had.

        Nobody needed any more actual terrorist intelligence unless it happened to support some existing conclusion, and most of the WH team probably knew it wouldn't.

        The only taps that needed to stay off the books were those against political opponents and insufficiently conservative non-profit groups.

        Why is there a Confederate Flag flying in Afghanistan?

        by chimpy on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:47:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Done! (5+ / 0-)

      Folks in the First Congressional District in NJ, hit Andrews up.

      I get the feeling, after speaking with the DC office, that his phone hasn't been ringing quite enough. Usually when it is busy there, the rep will be trying to get my reason for the call and information quickly, assumedly to get to the next call. This time, I was able to speak with the rep at length, leading me to believe he hasn't been all that busy answering phones.

      That should not be.

      Especially considering what I heard from the rep, which was not promising. Near as I can tell, congressman Andrews will be standing with the telecoms and Bushco in opposition to our Constitution (imagine my surprise-NOT!).

      That should not be either.

      Let's let him know.

      202-225-6501

      •  Andrews is a lame duck (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SJerseyIndy

        he gave up seat to challenge Lautenberg in primary (and lost).  His wife won the Dem primary for his seat, there is some gossip that the state party might look to pull a switcheroo and swap wife for hubby.

        What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is. ~ Dan Quayle

        by CParis on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:55:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "swap wife for hubby" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CParis

          In my eyes, that was never in doubt.

          Andrews is a political animal hellbent on remaining in a position of power (and hellbent on climbing to a more powerful position). However, he could not have seriously believed he was going to beat Lautenberg. To that end, slapping wifey into his spot was clearly, to me, nothing more than a place-holder for his eventual Senate primary loss.

          Those actions in an of themselves ought to lead to Andrews getting booted.

          Unfortunately, I just don't see that happening.

          If only someone would've mounted a serious primary challenge against wifey, and the Andrews couple would've been gone for good.

          To no avail.

          I guess it's back to Bobby bending us over in the First...

          •  Andrews is a doofus (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SJerseyIndy

            wonder if the wife running was to get her some visibility for future run? Don't know much about them - but wish you luck!
            I've got Bill Pascrell, fortunately, he's been much better on this FISA nonsense.

            What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is. ~ Dan Quayle

            by CParis on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:36:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Just called Rep Todd Platts and Senator Casey (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grrr, p gorden lippy

      Platts' staff person was non-committal - listened to my concerns.  I said I'd just taught an hour and half long course about the consitution (summer camp for kids interested in conservation and environmental stewardship), and that the kids are aware of their constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure.  Incredible two days later to be calling my representative to please not violate this constitutional protection.  

      Casey's office is watching closely:  1) wants to deal with now before the crush of legislative activity at the end of the summer; 2) wants to provide the tools needed to fight terrorism and catch the terrorists; 3) thinks that the bill actually leaves to the COURTS the question of whether or not to grant telecom's retroactive immunity.  I said I did not read the bill that way and that in fact the courts will have no meaningful opportunity to evaluate whether or not the telecom has broken the law if the telecom gets the bullet proof defense letter.  I said I was also concerned about the breadth of the surveillance authority.  

      We'll see.  

      It's a great day for hockey! -"Badger" Bob Johnson, 1931-1991

      by gpclay on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:03:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Am I sensing the frontrunner (8+ / 0-)

    for the 2010 blue to orange primary?

    Republicans are not a national party anymore.

    by jalapeno on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:16:42 AM PDT

  •  I'm watching this Bill (7+ / 0-)

    like something akin to a train-wreck.  I don't want to see it, I know it's gonna be ugly and disasterous and yet I can't look away.

    I can only pray Obama will be able to clean-up some of this mess after the fact when he takes office.

    ...honor is a harder master than the law. It cannot compromise for less than 100 cents on the dollar and its debts never outlaw. - Mark Twain, a Biography

    by billd on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:17:21 AM PDT

  •  It'll move quickly here in the House--Senate is (6+ / 0-)

    our only hope.  Obama & Dodd---are you listening?

  •  Lofgren just nailed it... (5+ / 0-)

    ...the immunity is already there.  The real change to the law is the "reverse' engineering" that Turley clearly laid out.

  •  Whoyer is the bushco "bag man"! n/t (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    illusionmajik, kyril

    It is the province of knowledge to speak. And it is the privilege of wisdom to listen. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. US Jurist

    by Oliver W Holmes the 3rd on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:18:01 AM PDT

  •  I Dropped At&T When This Started And Went With (8+ / 0-)

    Qwest.  Too bad most Americans still use AT&T.  

  •  GO CONYERS! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    groggy, cybersaur, AllanTBG, kyril

    One of my faves, though I wish he'd move faster on enforcing his subpoenas.  

  •  Less than 30 seconds of listening to the "debate" (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    groggy, chimpy, sherlyle, dewley notid, kyril, SPD

    and my head is already exploding.

    Oh, goody! Here comes Jane Harman. Her constituents are stooopid, according to her.

    "You'd be surprised at what kind of party you can throw for the same amount of money that it takes to get someone to fuck Paul Wolfowitz. " --TBOGG

    by vicki on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:18:34 AM PDT

    •  Halliburton has the no-bid contract for clean-up (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy

      $50,000 per head.  
      Don't enrich Bu$hco, don't explode.

      What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is. ~ Dan Quayle

      by CParis on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:57:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  They all should face challenges (6+ / 0-)

    We should make sure every single one of them has to fight for their seat, this year if possible.

    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." Sen Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    by atlliberal on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:18:40 AM PDT

    •  I'm totally in favor of primary challenges.... (0+ / 0-)

      But I wonder if there's any organization out there that could make sure this many all at once we're effective. Especially when there's probably a ton of Republican (like my idiot congresscritter who just loves this kind as far as I can tell) who also could be ousted by the right candidate in a year like this.

      Forward to Yesterday -- Reactionary aesthetics and liberal politics (in that order)

      by LABobsterofAnaheim on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:57:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Have we heard from the presumptive nominee yet? (15+ / 0-)

    We really need him to stand up and tell the House what he expects from them.  My Rep - Emmanual Cleaver, is, I believe , going to vote against the bill.

    How can there possibly be enough Representatives dumb or venal enough to pass this excrescence of a bill??

    "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

    by bobdevo on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:19:01 AM PDT

  •  Jane Harman speaking in support of the (8+ / 0-)

    "compromise." Wasn't she one of the guilty ones in 2002?

    The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

    by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:19:04 AM PDT

  •  DONT GIVE UP (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AllanTBG, illusionmajik, kyril

    Call pelosi or FAX FAX FAX
    FAX JANE Harmen
    FAX FIENGOLD!

    "I didn't really say everything I said" Yogi Berra

    by surfdog on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:19:22 AM PDT

  •  Jane Harman Has Any Credibility? She Sold Out On (9+ / 0-)

    the Iraq War to the Bush Administration.  Don't listen to her bullshit.

  •  Re: "Conyers is Leading the Opposition" (15+ / 0-)

    I guess this means that after a stern warning, Conyers will counsel his colleagues in the so-called "opposition" to stand down and be steamrolled.

    That seems to be the only play in his book.

    I guess W. has Nancy Pelosi's tit in a wringer and Nancy has John Conyers' balls in a vice.

    Hasn't anybody in DC ever heard of a safe-word?

    Or is the safe-word simply: "Yes, Mr. President, whatever you want."?

  •  A bi-partisan violation of our unalienable rights (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, istari5th, illusionmajik, kyril, ryan81, SPD

    Nice work. Criminal.

    When a government violates the unalienable rights of the people, it loses its legitimacy.

    by Rayk on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:19:46 AM PDT

  •  Bush just thanked congress (10+ / 0-)

    for both the FISA and the Iraq funding votes. I weep again.

    Life's a gift--unwrap it.

    by MantisOahu on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:19:56 AM PDT

  •  Jane Harman says: (8+ / 0-)

    Exclusivity provisions in the bill mean no president can ever ignore the wiretapping laws again.

    My question: what if one does?

    This bill says precisely jack shit about that.

    And it's not like "no one could foresee" it happening, now is it?

    •  If they ignore the exclusivity provision (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy, illusionmajik, kyril

      Then they'll be forced to demand immunity again.

      BTW, am I reading the bill right? It looks like people can still sue for all activities that occurred before 9/11/2001

      •  Prove it happened... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chimpy, illusionmajik, kyril

        ...if they throw the cases out.

      •  Statute of limitations should prevent suits (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chimpy, kyril

        for what occurred before 9/11.  Unless somebody can think of a good reason for why the statute of limitations would have been tolled.

        The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

        by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:30:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  State secrets privilege will kill that. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kyril

        Frankly, it would likely have killed the post-9/11 suits, too. But now they don't even have to pay for the lawyers to go to court and plead it.

        •  A smidgen off-topic question (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          chimpy

          You and I know that Senate procedure makes getting this bill through there a tougher row to hoe.  Odds are, there will have to be a successful cloture motion to proceed to debate on this bill (as well as one to close debate) which will require a 60-40 vote.  There's also the weekend operating in our favor.  It seems both of these give us some maneuvering room.  Why not:

          1.  Start combing the past debates for amendment ideas for filing once this thing moves to the Senate.
          1.  Give the "national security" worriers (Landrieu) some breathing room by giving them an alternative excuse to vote against cloture --- i.e., lack of opportunity to have this thing hashed out in a committee, lack of sufficient debate time, or limits on the amendments that could be offered.
          1.  Focus a phone-call campaign on the wobblies who could give us 40 on a cloture vote?  If you remember the immigration reform debate from last year, one of the things that spooked the Senate was when the switchboard went down from the high volume of phone calls.  

          I'm sure you'll have other ideas.

    •  More bullshit (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy

      FISA had exclusivity provisions when it was passed in the 70's. It was ignored then and it will be ignored again. Laws are meaningless.

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

      by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:52:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Question (4+ / 0-)

    What are the constitutional issues here? Would this law withstand SCOTUS scrutiny?

    ___
    To achieve the impossible, it is precisely the unthinkable that must be thought.
    ~Tom Robbins

    Conlige suspectos semper habitos

    by Marcus Junius Brutus on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:20:43 AM PDT

  •  If this passes (10+ / 0-)

    I feel I will have been betrayed by a hundred Joe Liebermans...starting with Hoyer and Pelosi.

    "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor liberty to purchase power." B. Franklin

    by istari5th on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:20:52 AM PDT

  •  Hilarious. This was before 9/11!!!!!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    illusionmajik, kyril
  •  Protractor, 0 = Far Right. "Bipartisan" = 15 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gaijin99, illusionmajik, kyril

    degrees off of Far Right.

    F$%K The Blue Dogs / Bush Dogs / DLC Sell Outs

    And / Or

    Incompetents

    Who spend all their time in the fascist defined 15 degree off of far right 'middle',  'center',  'swing',  'independent',  

    'bipartisan'.

    rmm.

    Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

    by seabos84 on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:23:48 AM PDT

  •  The Only Thing I Can Rationalize Is That Nancy (6+ / 0-)

    Pelosi believes that if Democrats oppose this bad bill then the Republicans can say that Democrats are supporting the terrorists.  So Nancy is willing to support bad legislation in order to allow Democrats to win back the Whitehouse and get a large majority in the House and Senate.  But what if Democrat don't win the Whitehouse and the congress?  Then we have a bunch of really bad laws.  I think Nancy is taking a big risk for America.  Her personally?  She hasn't been held accountable.

    •  'leadership' = fear of lying fascists? how about (5+ / 0-)

      BEATING the fucking lies of the fucking fascists?

      why isn't that on the agenda?

      maybe cuz Pelosi is a dilletante incompetent against these ruthless bastards?

      maybe cuz Pelosi is a sell out?

      maybe cuz Pelosi is a mix of both?

      rmm.

      Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

      by seabos84 on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:27:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rationalization (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy

      Pelosi believes that if Democrats oppose this bad bill then the Republicans can say that Democrats are supporting the terrorists.

      republicans are going to keep saying that anyway. Pelosi supports eliminating the Fourth Amendment because she is complicit in the illegal domestic spying program. Congress had knowledge of the program years ago and did nothing to stop the law breaking. Pelosi is a criminal too.

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

      by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:55:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I have nothing kind to say (14+ / 0-)

    and if I did.. I would be lambasted.. but the word traitors comes to mind.

    I am ashamed of these democrats that are going to vote for it.. bastards...

    •  I hear ya (0+ / 0-)

      I keep typing vitriolic posts only to cancel them before posting for fear of being visited by the secret Service and FBI for inciting what I'd really like to see done to these traitors.

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

      by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:57:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I wrote a diary (0+ / 0-)

        Called Nancy Pelosi our new Benidict Arnold.. but got lots of hate over it.. so I deleted it.. but I am soosoooooo angry..

        She is a taint and stain on democracy today.. So is Hoyars etc...

        I am listening to here speaking.. right now.. she makes me sick...

        I love my 4th Amendment and she is killing it.

  •  Somebody needs to Primary Hoyer (5+ / 0-)

    I personally can't stand him, but Maryland State Senate President Mike Miller could give him a run for his money.

    I am not sure if Maryland House Speaker Mike Busch (D-Annapolis) is in Hoyer's district. If he is, Busch should be the candidate of choice in 2012.

    Obama/Casey, my personal dream ticket.

    by The Bagof Health and Politics on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:25:04 AM PDT

  •  Heather Wilson From New Mexico Is A Sick Fuck (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc9464, bobdevo, cybersaur, kyril, The Jester
  •  Oh and people who vote for this (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, chimpy, cybersaur, Terminus, kyril

    ARE NOT PATRIOTS.. Patriots do not destroy the constitution and the rule of law..

  •  And again, do I have this right? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, chimpy, poco, cybersaur, Absit invidia

    The lefty blogosphere spends thousands and thousands of man/women hours debunking the establishment media, faux news, and the rest of the vast right wing conspiracy, all in defense of the Democratic Party, with the idea being that the Democratic Party is the "party of the people" and better able to implement policies progressives in the lefty blogosphere support.

    And in return the Democratic Party takes the impeachment of a gang of war criminals "off the table", refuses, even in the face of the outright refusal of the US Justice Dept to enforce the laws of the US, to even consider using their powers of inherent contempt to hold the executive accountable,  refuses to use their power of the purse to stop ANY of the juntas worst policies, let alone the illegal occupation of a sovereign state which is resulting in the death, maiming and displacement of hundreds of thousand of innocent Iraqis and in short just never misses a chance to kick the lefty blogosphere in their collective crotches.

    And yet the lefty blogosphere continues to support these useless scumbags.

    I gotta admit, but I'm a little bit confused...

    Boycott these motherfuckers. A threat to their power is the only thing that will ever understand...

    •  Okay, but..... (4+ / 0-)

      ......you have one party where the support for such things is unanimous and another party where support for such things is merely a majority. I know it sucks, but if we don't support the latter we get the former.

      Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

      by Doug in SF on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:28:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (0+ / 0-)

        If we support the latter we get fucked, and if we support the former we get fucked.

        Vote Green or Libertarian.

        •  No (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TampaCPA, LABobsterofAnaheim

          If we support the latter we get semi-fucked, and if we support the latter we get really fucked. Voting Green or Libertarian = supporting the former.

          As an example, I have a fine, upstanding Democratic Representative in Jackie Speier. She's new, but presumably she will obtain more power over time to do the right things. But if we vote Green or Libertarian, causing Democrats in other districts to lose to Republicans, Speier will no longer have any voice at all.

          How fucked over are you willing to let the country get before the public opens its eyes? Do you really want that conservative court majority?

          Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

          by Doug in SF on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:57:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Vote Green, Vote Libertarian... (0+ / 0-)

          and you are fucked!

          We have a better chance of taking back the Democratic Party.  We've made progress, now is hardly the time to give up.

          Maybe you're a Rethug posing as a progressive- I don't know.  But we are closer to our goals fighting within the Democratic Party than to leave and fight outside the party.

          Jeez.  What a counter-productive run you're on.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just say you're having a bad day.

          But please stop this crap.

          In an insane society, the sane man would appear insane

          by TampaCPA on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:07:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  This Is What America Has Become. The Tipping (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy, CParis, lisastar, kyril

      point occurred several years ago.  It's all gravy for the right wing now.

    •  Only WaPo was a travesty... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grrr, Mary2002, kyril

      ...I mean beyond the usual suspects.  The Times' editorials were perfectably reasonable.  Certainly better than I expected.  Siobhan Gorman in the WSJ has been even-handed.  Chris Storhm (from the National Journal properties) just called into the C-SPAN line before the debate started and he was great.  They just are not making their decisions based on facts but on bunk ideology.  They've drunk the homeland security kool-aid, plain as that.

  •  Thanks Rep. Speier!!! (5+ / 0-)

    My rep. Jackie Speier voted against it. Will work on Feinswein and Boxer now.

    Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

    by Doug in SF on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:26:58 AM PDT

  •  Our Government (6+ / 0-)

    83% of Americans think US heading in wrong direction.

    77% disapprove of Congress

    71% disapprove of the Administration

  •  Barack Obama better show some Leadership. (16+ / 0-)

    If he fails this test, his cred is shot.

  •  Call Obama-ask him to LEAD (6+ / 0-)

    1-866-675-2008 option 6

    I called once yesterday and once today. Basically his staff said they don't know where he is. I asked if he was in Washington D.C for the vote. She said she didn't know. Yesterday they said 'obama made a strong statement against retroactive immunity and will protect the constitution and hold people accountable when he is president.'

    Screw that. I want him to be a leader now!! I want him to make sure that the american people get sunshine and discussion about how the president gave the telecomms the okay to violate our 4th amendment rights.

    Remember innocent people were tortured as a result of these fisa violations. That means that they collected information and thought they had a guilty party, tortured them, only to find out they had made a mistake.

    This could happen in our country?? If Obama does NOT take a strong stand against this, he is basically refusing to protect our civil rights.

    Call him. Call him and call him some more.

    The lady I spoke to said that she had recieved many calls and that this is clearly important to the american people. They said they would try to get the word to him.

    "try".

    The greatest gift you can contribute to the goal of world peace is to heal.

    by wavpeac on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:30:08 AM PDT

  •  What are we doing here? (8+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, chimpy, cybersaur, lisastar, kyril, senex, ryan81, SPD

    I wish Kos would write a front page article on the purpose of dkos again.  Just what are we doing here? Why is the solution electing more Democrats?

    The Democratic Congress we elected in 2006 - that many dkos people expended sweat and money to elect - is more popular with Republicans than Democrats, as pointed out by Glenn Greenwald and as revealed by the latest FOX poll.  And this is **before** the FISA capitulation, which gives the Republicans more of what they want.

    http://www.salon.com/...

    Do you approve or disapprove of the job Congress is doing?
                     Approve   Disapprove    (DK)
    17-18 Jun 08      19        69            13
    Democrats         18        71            11
    Republicans       23        64            13
    Independents      15        74            11

         

    •  This does NOT mean Republicans like the Democrats (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      senex

      in congress.  What it means is that Republicans approve of the way their Republican representatives are obstructing the Democrats.  And we democrats are unhappy with the success of the Republicans in obstructing the democrats in congress and blame them for not being more effective.  But we like to foget that we don't have a useful majority in the Senate and that in the house the democrats are not a united group, like the Republicasn tend to be, so we barley have an effective majority there either, though if people looked at all the good stuff the congress has passed that died in the senate, people might have a different opinion of the house.  Not that this forgives Hoyer or  or the blue dogs for what they are trying to do, which is ultimately to cover their own complicit asses in the who warrantless wiretapping scandal.

      •  That is typically a different question (0+ / 0-)

        The question was not asked in this poll, but typically there are two questions -

        Do you approve or disapprove of the job your Representative is doing?

        and

        Do you approve or disapprove of the job Congress is doing?

        A paradox of American politics has been that people generally rate their Representatives highly, compared to Congress as a whole. I assume the same holds here.

    •  what we're doing here (0+ / 0-)

      What are we doing here?

      Deluding ourselves

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

      by cybersaur on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:03:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Osama Bin Laden wins another one (6+ / 0-)

    "The Conservatives definition of torture: Anything that provides death or false information from its captive." Me 2007

    by army193 on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:33:11 AM PDT

  •  Per Bond: WH got better deal than it could have (7+ / 0-)

    ever hoped for.  Isn't that nice?

    WaPo editorial waxes rapturous over illegal surveillance and amnesty.

    Meanwhile, what did Pelosi and Reid and Rockefeller know and when did they know it?  That wont' be coming out in any trial.  

    And most of the televised press has managed to stay quiet on the whole thing.  I talked to two fairly active political people who don't do much on the internet yesterday and neither knew anything about this.  It certainly didn't monopolize the news last night, did it?

  •  So-called "liberal media" (6+ / 0-)

    I'm incredulous sometimes about how anyone can call America's media liberal. Just look at two of the WaPo board's three editorials today:

    A Better Surveillance Law

    The Politics of Spare Change

    The former is a breathless endorsement of the current FISA capitulation. The latter is a breathless denunciation of Obama's public financing decision.

    "Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine

    by arainsb123 on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:36:17 AM PDT

  •  I'm extremely disappointed in Obama right now (8+ / 0-)

    Why the silence? Is he the new party leader or not?

  •  When this so-called compromise ever gets a vote (8+ / 0-)

    it is a call to arms.

    Each and every single democrat that votes in favor of compromise is voting to compromise the constitution and the rule of law. Period.

    All efforts must be made to remove them from office and replaced with individuals that actually place principle before politics. The constitution is NOT a political football, and we should be outraged at anyone that steps on it.

    The cowards that vote in favor of a compromise are no better than the the thugs that would have us all groveling in fear.

    My fellow Kossacks, we must let it be known, that we, and all Americans deserve better. We deserve the constitution we were given.

    Removing them must be a principle goal.

    I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." (Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire, 1694-1778)

    by Kairos on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:38:01 AM PDT

    •  Unfortunately, the MAJORITY of the citizens (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kyril

      don't seem to know or care much about this Constitution we talk about.

      Years ago a research poll, not a political one, presented citizens with quotes from the Bill of Rights. A frightening number were clueless and, in an even more frightening finding, when asked if they would support such a "law" many said they'd be opposed. It was long ago, RR days I believe, and I don't have cites.

      The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

      by pelagicray on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:54:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree, but then (0+ / 0-)

        If we can organize grassroots elections, we can organize grassroots EDUCATION.

        If they don't know then it is up to us to teach them the importance. A long road, but it is one that I am willing to travel. I'm not very patriotic, but I do believe our framers were on to something special. It has yet to see its full potential. The key is the citizens over which resides.

        Talk to others of the constitution with the same energy that we talk of Obama. Change will come.

        PS - why aren't we as excited about protecting the constitution as electing some Joe off the street? Seems to me we should be more...

        I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." (Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire, 1694-1778)

        by Kairos on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:16:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  One major change I watched was education. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kairos

          I my fifth grade included an excellent civics book and that was right up there with math for the year. We had a civics workbook (still have mine somewhere) in which we had to do things such as draw the route a bill took to being law. Of course we were less than a decade beyond VE and VJ days so there was a lot of civics in the air.

          I had two more significant units before high school graduation and that required one year, one full year, of civics and government for graduation. I lived in a state in which voting was at eighteen and we essentially went as a class to the courthouse to register during that course.

          College required units in American History and Government for graduation. In getting those every student had a basic exposure to more civics and learned how things worked.

          All that apparently vanished between the sixties and now in most school systems. As a result we have even many of the political activists here on this site demonstrating a very vague view on how things are supposed to work.

          You cannot maintain or repair the thing if you have only a poor understanding of how it is supposed to work!

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:57:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Can we challenge this in the Supreme Court? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bluewombat

    This needs to happen...Our Constitution is at stake here..

  •  There's a loophole (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpy, saralee, AllanTBG, SPD

    As I understand the bill, it gives immunity for illegal wiretapping between 9/11/2001 forward and makes ongoing wiretapping legal.  Since Qwest was approached in Feb. 2001 it is almost certain the other telcos were approached before 9/11 also.  This means all lawsuits can move forward by attempting to establish plaintiffs were illegally spied upon before the immunity period begins.

    •  Trouble is proving timeframe (0+ / 0-)

      on when a given plaintiff was wiretapped.  You can bet the phone companies aren't going to enthusiastically hand out that info.

      ...honor is a harder master than the law. It cannot compromise for less than 100 cents on the dollar and its debts never outlaw. - Mark Twain, a Biography

      by billd on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:40:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  True but (0+ / 0-)

        the fact that the question can be explored keeps the lawsuits alive.  If the telcos have to prove when they granted access to the government, then they still have to provide all the information the public has a right to hear about in open court.

        •  And a Court has to be willing to hear... (0+ / 0-)

          ...that evidence.  Which requires standing.  Which requires you being able to prove that you were harmed (ie wiretapped).  Get it yet?  Kafka wrote a story about it...

          •  Then that would require (0+ / 0-)

            a plaintiff proving the government had information which could only have been acquired before 9/11.  If even one plaintiff can do that then everything is still on.  I don't know how likely this is, but at this point I don't see a lot of hope anywhere else.  It's certainly worth exploring.

    •  Statute of limitations will block civil actions (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dewley notid

      (and criminal prosecutions) for acts that occurred before 9/11.

      The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

      by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:47:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  FISA as QA (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpy

    QA = Quality Assurance

    Given that the FISA court can issue a warrant retroactively, having wiretaps reviewed can be thought of as QA (as in this call may be recorded for quality assurance purposes.) The court just verifies that wiretaps are following the rules.

    It seems to me that honest objections to getting a FISA warrant fall into 2 categories:

    1. We don't want anyone knowing what we've done.
    1. We don't want to do the paperwork.

    Can anyone think of a third?

    Deranged neoconservative militarism isn't the solution to nuclear proliferation; it's a cause. -- Glenn Greenwald

    by factbased on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:39:35 AM PDT

  •  Another way to tell Hoyer how you feel (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AllanTBG, dallasdave, SPD

    let Matt Stoller tell his Chief of Staff:

    I was writing an email to Steny Hoyer's Chief of Staff to try to let him know how much rage there is out there about his boss's actions around capitulating on the FISA issue, but I realized that my words are probably less powerful than yours.  I'm just one person, so he has no reason to believe me except as someone engaged in hyperbole around a contentious issue.

    So instead, please put your comments about FISA and Hoyer in this thread, and I will send it onward.  Please keep in mind that this will be sent to Hoyer's office, so I will delete off-topic or especially rude comments.  If you support Hoyer, let him know that.  If not, let him know that.  And if you are a donor or volunteer for Democrats who won in 2006, mention it, as that will help him understand why he should consider listening.

  •  You go Barbara Lee! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SPD

    She was the most passionate speaker, made great points.  Good for her.

    Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace ~~ Dalai Lama

    by happy in MA on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:41:06 AM PDT

  •  repubs: this bill affirms OUR STANCE (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, chimpy, DavidW

    thats what I just heard on the house floor... a republican telling us exactly what they plan to throw at democrats in the coming campaign....

    PASSAGE OF THE PROTECT ATT ACT AFFIRMS WHAT WE HAVE SAID.... that FISA is the only way to protect us from terra -ists, and the constitution be damned.

    and who is to blame when this piece of DRECK gets passed...  DEMOCRATS, thats who.

    Democrats like Nancy Pelosi who KILLED the rule of law when she uncerimoniously took IMPEACHMENT Off the table

    John COnyers, when he backed Nancy and began ridiculing those of us who continue to call for IMPEACHMENT

    Hoyer, who thinks ANY compromise that has HIS NAME on it is GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY

    NADLER, who opposes the passage of this bill but STILL REFUSES TO MOVE ON IMPEACHMENT

    REYES who helped craft this FAUXC compromise

    the Democrats who were read into this act in the first place!!!  and did NOTHING at that time to restore our RULE OF LAW

    and every single democrat who votes YES to passage in hopes it helps them get re-elected.  IT WON'T

    this is not a republican raping of the rule of law... THIS IS THE WORK OF DEMOCRATS.

    "Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" is NOT a coherent Mid-East Strategy Mr McCain

    by KnotIookin on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:42:41 AM PDT

  •  Oh great, Conyers is leading the opposition. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rustbelt Dem

    What's he doing?  Writing a strongly-worded letter?

  •  Bill Durston CA-03 (0+ / 0-)

    Fuck Lungren in his fat sanctimonious gut.

  •  Life goes on. (0+ / 0-)

    Pardon me if I don't think this is a big enough deal to go apeshit over. The way I see it, this administration will trample the Contitution FISA bill or not.

    I don't know why people here seem to think that not passing a bill means the Administration will stop spying on Americans. Or that making the telecom companies immune from trial lawyers will, in some way, keep them from cooperating with their friends in the Administration. They know theyll win in the Supreme Court anyway, they'd just rather avoid the expense.

    Pardon me if I move on to more important matters.

    With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

    by brooklynbadboy on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:44:49 AM PDT

    •  Yeah, and now they've legalized it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grrr, dewley notid

      so the next president, and the one after that, and the one after that can do it, too.

      This was about the long view on government.

      Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Ben Franklin

      by Joan McCarter on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:52:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I see your point. (0+ / 0-)

        Which is, why not wait until next year when we can get a good bill with a better president?

        Totally agree.

        I think the Leadership wants this issue off the table in November because its easy to demagogue, and the price for that from the GOP is telecom immunity.

        Besides, the way this law is written, it will expire, so we can revisit this another day.

        With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

        by brooklynbadboy on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 10:05:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  BklynBB without a STRONG constitution we are (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      brooklynbadboy

      NOT AMERICA...  not even in the most liberal definiton... so when you say SO WHAT its not like Bush will stop spying on us....   that is exactly the miondset the right wants to foster... the SO WHAT, BIG DEAL, LETS MOVE ON mentality....

      it IS a big deal when decades after we had to craft FISA in the first place we now watch as congress KILLS IT with BS about protecting it.

      The SO WHAT question can be so easily answered by doing the most basic reading on COINTELPRO and why we needed FISA to begin with.

      When we SO WHAT to the most blatant FU to the constitution in possibly our nations history we join with those who have tried (and are succeeding) is destroying our nation of laws in favor of a nation RULED by fewer and fewer "MEN"

      without the full and complete constitution WE ARE NOTHING but another country ruled by the whims of whoever can GRAB POWER by any means possible.

      "Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" is NOT a coherent Mid-East Strategy Mr McCain

      by KnotIookin on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:11:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Look... (0+ / 0-)

        I don't need any convincing that this administration runs roughshod over the constitution and any number of statutory law on any given day. Thats obvious.

        The question for us is, what we do about it. I agree the best thing would be to do nothing until next year. But the Leadership wants this issue off the table for the election, and the price for that is immunity.

        The key thing to remember here is that these powers will expire and this problem can be corrected at that point, with a new president and a stronger majority. THAT is the real issue here, not exacting revenge on AT&T.

        With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

        by brooklynbadboy on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 10:08:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  these powers dont expire.... where did you get (0+ / 0-)

          that idea?  if I am not mistaken, this was the reasoning behind many people voting for the patriot act...  that it would, if we wanted, go away at some point.

          and as for 'the leadership' wanting this off the table before the election....  we have NO leadership...  that is our basic problem here.  all that we have is the democratic and the republican versions of 'the permanant campaign" and the constitution (and we the people) be damned if we get in the way.

          and people who are adamently opposed to retroactive immunity are NOT trying to 'exact revenge" on ATT...  what we ARE trying to do is get some damn JUSTICE, under our laws.  as has been said repeatedly, COngress has absolutely NO BUSINESS inserting their noses into our right to seek redress in our courts.

          "Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" is NOT a coherent Mid-East Strategy Mr McCain

          by KnotIookin on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 12:23:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  lundgren is scaring me even more (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, grrr, CParis

    he just said (and  am praphrasing) 'there are good samaritan provisions here that will protect any civilian from civil action when they co-operate with the lawful requirements from their governments'.

    In other words, you can be hauled off to jail on the say so of your neighbor and there is not a damn thing you can do about it.  We should call this the 'snitch act'.

    •  can I get your stuff when I snitch on you? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LABobsterofAnaheim

      just like the bounties paid in Afghanistan for "Al Queada fighters".  Folks turned in rival clan members, business rivals, etc for the $$$.
      Welcome to Gitmo!

      What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is. ~ Dan Quayle

      by CParis on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:01:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  doubt this vote is even going to be close (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr

    Democrats seem to be wasting no time lavishing place about all the "improvements" in the bill

  •  another liveblog (0+ / 0-)

    Here. We've been going since the beginning, there's almost 150 comments...

  •  Called Klein (FL 22) (0+ / 0-)

    Told them I was against today's FISA Protect AT&T Act and to vote Hoyer out of leadership because this is ridiculous.

    Too many people are thinking of security instead of opportunity. They seem more afraid of life than death. James F. Byrnes

    by DavidW on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:49:13 AM PDT

  •  Kucinich is pissed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar, SPD

    as well he should be

  •  Dennis Kucinich! you go sir! n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  WHERE THE HECK IS OBAMA!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MantisOahu, First Light

    he is supposed to be our leader...

  •  I'm listening to them debate right now. (0+ / 0-)

    Nancy Pelosi is speaking.

    John McCain "Beware the terrible simplifiers" Jacob Burckhardt, Historian

    by notquitedelilah on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:53:33 AM PDT

  •  Voice recognition technology (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias

    I'm going to speculate some on this, but not without some knowledge of the technology and the players. Voice recognition has come a long way. One of the motivators for this is large scale information collection, i.e. surveillance. Most people believe that their telephone conversations are private, or that worst case the record of the telephone numbers, data and time are stored. How would they feel if they knew that the content of the conversation could be stored and scanned for any interesting content? This could be happening today, and the technology either exists or will exist to record and analyze the contents of all telephone calls made in the US or that are routed through the US. Is this what we want? If not, we had better stop the march to a total surveillance state now!

    •  Solzhenitsyn wrote about that state in his (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Wizard

      "First Circle".  And it involved precisely voice recognition technology and the interception of telephone calls.

      Precisely what Stalinism was about.

      The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

      by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:55:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The voice contents of individual calls... (0+ / 0-)

      ...are not nearly as important as the community of interest link analysis that can be done by looking at the traffic patterns of ALL calls.  This can be automated and equals megabucks for intelligence community outsourcing to private corporations.

  •  Pelosi thanks Hoyer for his contributions (0+ / 0-)

    to the bill!  Thanks a bunch of Republicans!

    The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

    by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:53:37 AM PDT

  •  This is a massive embarrassment for Pelosi (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dewley notid, happy in MA, SPD, The Jester

    and the sad thing is she will never see that.

    Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Ben Franklin

    by Joan McCarter on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:54:13 AM PDT

  •  WHERE IN THE HELL IS OBAMA? (5+ / 0-)

    All he need to do is drop on 15 second soundbyte calling this a bad bill and the whole FISA thing crumbles.

    Show some leadership, Mr. President, cause Pelosi and Hoyer won't

    By the way, can we PLEASE primary these people?

    •  He's not coming (0+ / 1-)
      Recommended by:
      Hidden by:
      BigBensBeermaster

      He's not going to come riding in on his white horse. He's not that kind of leader. He's not a different kind of politician. Barack Obama is just the compromise we settled on in order to be able to elect a Democratic president.

      Don't be fooled into thinking otherwise.

      Yeah, we could do a hell of a lot worse than Obama, but he still is what he is.

  •  I called my rep... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpy

    the intern could not tell me how he was voting on FISA but I left a comment.

    I was pleased to hear that he voted against the war funding bill yesterday.

    Thanks to this site for helping me to keep up with these things and get my opinions in when they count.  I have rarely done this in the past because it is so hard to know what is going on in DC until after the fact!

  •  I think the editors of this site... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpy, grrr

    Need to post a list of how each Democratic Member of Congress voted on this issue.

    Providing a roll call vote here might have some limited impact.  

    1. It lets them know we're watching and know exactly how they voted as individuals.  
    1. They will have the opportunity to read what their activist constituents have to say about their votes.
    1. It can become a working list for which so called lovers of freedom, democracy and the constitution need to face a challenge from a real progressive candidate.
    1. It will let them know exactly where and when their hold on their Congressional seat just got a little less stable.

    Any others I'm missing?

    Suppose you were an idiot .. And suppose you were the President... But I repeat myself.

    by War Horse on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:54:56 AM PDT

  •  Waiting for Obama is not a good strategy... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar, The Jester, First Light

    you can be sure they passed this by him and he didn't object. OR at least said he wouldn't make an issue of this. And they have decided to ignore the netroots.

    It is a challenge that we cannot ignore from either Obama or the "leaders". What is our response other than bitching and moaning?

    I call for an organized strike of labor and funds from working on any campaigns for a period of time. We need to show we're more than paper tigers, if we are more than that.

  •  Pelosi sucking on Bush balls (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, SPD

    right now in Congress, saying everyone is doing a great job in keeping Americans safe.

    Obama needs to kick her ass.

  •  DCCC & Pelosi's important email they sent me (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpy, grrr, dewley notid

    Uh, no, not on FISA.  

    On public funding for Obama and how I can contribute to insure more Dems just like her can be elected.

    Bet most of you got one too.

    So I tried to send her a response to thank her for  the lovely message, what with the FISA vote pending and all.  Only apparently the DCCC and Pelosi prefer, like others I can think of, a one-way set of communications.  If you aren't clicking the "donate" button, your reply ends up going to an email addy that reads, "no-reply@..."

    So in case she didn't get the message, here was my response:

    *********
    *********
    Thank you for your email.  As Speaker you have managed to convince me that the last thing I want to be going forward is a Democrat and the last thing I want to do is vote for more Democrats like yourself.

    After your briefings on illegal surveillance programs and torture and your failure to require compliance with the National Security Act by the Bush administration, you have proceeded to use your position and influence to repeatedly block any investigation of the crimes; and to grant amnesty and encourage violations of the law and the Constitution even to the extent that those violations result in deaths and ongoing physical and mental disabilities for the torture victims involved.

    Despite the clear and convincing evidence, you have repeatedly failed to address the fact that most of these torture victims were innocent of any crime against America and were not members of al-Qaeda.

    Depsite the clear and convincing evidence, including statements by Intelligence Czar McConnell of telecom liabilities running into staggering amounts (which could only result from staggering violations of law and staggering unchecked domestic surveillance) you have also chosen to promote telecom amnesty in efforts that only make sense if you and Jay Rockefeller are more interested in  covering for yourselves than protecting the nation.

    One of your first acts as the first woman Speaker was to make me very ashamed, as you unconditionally took impeachment "off the table."

    In the midst of your preparations to once again betray the rule of law and this nation, I can think of no more specious and contemptuous message to receive from you than that "we" somehow "need" more Democrats.

    As you and your actions have defined them, that is the last thing we need.

    Sincerely,

    Mary

  •  Pull Pelosi Off The Stage. She Stinks. (0+ / 0-)
  •  It's always the lesser of two evils. (0+ / 0-)

    Keep your perspective, guys.  Just because the chickens screw up the henhouse guard duty, doesn't mean we hire the foxes.  Anyone who thought politicians are saints were fooling themselves.

    Obama/Clinton 2008. The likeliest ticket to win that won't happen, but it was nice to think about while it lasted.

    by alkatt on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:56:48 AM PDT

    •  As long as we keep the majority, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grrr

      Hoyer needs to go.  At the very least he needs to face a well funded progressive primary opponent.  There has to be a price paid by Hoyer.

      Leadership cannot act against the interests of the American people toward the benefit of the Telecommunications Industry and continue to expect a free ride.

      His feeling the heat at the polls just may make the rest of those cowards stand up and take notice that we're watching them and plan on doing whatever is necessary to clean up this mess!

      Suppose you were an idiot .. And suppose you were the President... But I repeat myself.

      by War Horse on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:01:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree about Hoyer. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        grrr

        He needs to sweat on his next election, whether or not we have any success.

        Obama/Clinton 2008. The likeliest ticket to win that won't happen, but it was nice to think about while it lasted.

        by alkatt on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:05:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You don't get it..Hoyer is making his move (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        grrr

        to be the next Speaker. Pelosi has lost control. And we are working to provide the Bluedogs (because we have failed to coalesce behind progressive candidates and a false loyalty to a "democratic" majority) to elect him next year. Sheesh.

        •  Don't make... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dewley notid

          me pull this Congress over and come back there!

          If Pelosi doesn't have the strength to be Speaker and keep Hoyer in check then she's next on my list.

          Robert Wexler and Barney Frank for Speaker and Majority Leader in either order.

          BS, Barney Frank might be the smartest Member of Congress any of us have seen in our collective lives.

          Suppose you were an idiot .. And suppose you were the President... But I repeat myself.

          by War Horse on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:16:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  God Nancy is a terrible liar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    I've defended her in the past but she's lying out her ass.

    When they were working on the old house bill she claims to support so much the Dems were all over the media saying that there's no big hurry to get it past and that Bush has all the rights he needs to get intelligence now, without a new bill.

    So don't give me that crap about how the soldiers need intelligence Nancy. They have it.

  •  Since IANAL, can someone explain... (0+ / 0-)

    why this anonymous commenter is wrong?

    The immunity is retroactive, meaning it dooesn't allow illegal spying of Americans it only refers to actions in a window between 2001 and 2007. Furthermore, telecoms are a scapegoat. Dems can still impeach or go after any Administration officials that were involved in anything that is illegal. There's only immunity for the telecoms.

    First, immunity for the telecoms is a good thing?  But even then, doesn't it also then imply immunity for any Bush administration folk that were responsible for this in the first place?  How are we supposed to find out if what they did was illegal if all lawsuits are thrown out due to immunity?

    Now, the bill does refer to that period from 2001-2007, so what's exactly to come in terms of wiretapping since that time?

  •  Total Information Awareness is real (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpy, Gorette

    And it's bi-partisan. Like the old saying about guns:

    If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

    Likewise,

    If you outlaw privacy, only outlaws will have privacy.

    Long live the hacker.

    Electronic Data Mining is Bi-Partisan.

    by plok on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:58:42 AM PDT

  •  "if this bill does not pass..." (4+ / 0-)

    "...we are left with the Senate bill"

    Why?! Aren't you the majority party? Don't you determine what bills come to the floor?!

    They want this bill to pass, there's no doubt anymore. This stalling has all been for show.

  •  Nancy Was Deeply Involved In The Illegal Activity (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, Gorette, dewley notid, The Jester

    of the Bush Administration.  She was in the meetings and approved most of this illegal activity.  She is now trying to save her ass.

  •  OBAMA IS NOT COMING, FOLKS, (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr, dewley notid, temptxan, SPD, First Light

    to our rescue. Don't you all understand he surely was briefed on this and decided not to make a stink? They would not have done this without consulting him.

    Stop hoping for a savior. We need to STRIKE now. No labor/funds for a period of time. This must be organized by the netroots, mcjoan and kos leading the way. Otherwise, they will ignore us.

  •  Bob Barr opposes this "compromise" and (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr, The Jester

    surveillance: Press Releases › Bob Barr Urges Congress: No Surveillance of Americans Without Fourth Amendment Protections:

    June 19, 2008 6:33 pm EST

    Atlanta, GA -- "In asserting his power to conduct warrantless searches of Americans, President George W. Bush has expressed his clear contempt for the Fourth Amendment.  So has Sen. John McCain, despite his reputation as a supposed maverick," says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president.  Now the Democratic-led Congress is preparing to approve a so-called compromise that gives the Bush administration almost everything it wants in order to expand dramatically the power of the federal government to surveil American citizens without court orders.  "America desperately needs leaders who will stand up for the Bill of Rights," observes Barr, "not those who flaunt its vital and time-honored protections."

    I've got to say: this morning, I'm thinking much more seriously about voting for Bob Barr.

    The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

    by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:01:36 AM PDT

  •  Nancy says telecoms are "tainted" and have (4+ / 0-)

    no cause for celebration! What a lie!

    Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

    by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:01:36 AM PDT

  •  FISA is why many say we need an alternative (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, The Jester

    to the Democratic and Republican parties. Both are controlled by America's huge corporations. The big majority of working class Americans need their own party.

  •  I am sick to my stomach. (4+ / 0-)

    Nancy is currently justifying this capitulation on CSpan.  Can I get my money back?

    •  Really awful speech, wasn't it? I mean I never (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lysias, temptxan, Last Years Man

      heard anyone speak such idiocy with a straight face. She ended so weakly, saying she wasn't trying to convince anyone, just explain herself. Well, she failed. But we can read through the lines, Nancy. I'm just ashamed of you, Nancy.

      Shame on all of you voting for this bill.

      Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

      by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:05:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nancy Is In Way Over Her Head. Who Thought She (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dewley notid, Last Years Man, SPD

    could handle leadership?  She was appointed by the Republicans apparently.

  •  Pelosi makes me ill....what a turncoat liar n/t (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette, dewley notid
  •  applause (0+ / 0-)

    wonder which wing of congress that applause came from as Nanci finished speaking

  •  Pelosi just announced she's voting for the bill, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr, Gorette, temptxan, Last Years Man

    even though it was all based on a false alternative.  They wouldn't have to pass the Senate bill if they rejected this "compromise".

    The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

    by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:04:30 AM PDT

  •  And the DNC, DSCC and DCCC... (0+ / 0-)

    continue to wonder why we're not eagerly throwing contributions their way.

    This is the clearest example I can think of as to why I give to individual candidates and not to the party.

    Suppose you were an idiot .. And suppose you were the President... But I repeat myself.

    by War Horse on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:04:51 AM PDT

  •  Impeach Pelosi (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Jester

    she just violated her oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution.

  •  Doesn't this have to go to the Senate? (0+ / 0-)

    OR am I totally off?

    If so, won't Obama have a chance to vote on it then, along with all the other democratic senators?

  •  So let's take apart what Nancy just said (0+ / 0-)
    1. The information will be collected but they'll need a warrant to look at it.

    Wonderful. that makes me feel a lot better.

    2.Making sure that there are no abuses will depend on administration oversight.

    call me confident.

  •  Jay Inslee (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tarindel, dewley notid

    I'd never heard of you before this but you're awesome

  •  Amen Inslee (0+ / 0-)

    Make your fellow WA caucus member Hastings look like a NSA tool.

  •  Wexler: I love you! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr, Mary2002

    The law is our ultimate guardian of liberty.

    July 4, 1776 was pre-9/11.

    Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

    by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:09:18 AM PDT

  •  Conyers: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mary2002

    Executive branch is very near (being) an imperial presidency.

    Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

    by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:10:15 AM PDT

  •  Stupid Me (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mchestnutjr

    GWB: Fool me once...fool me... you can't get fooled again.

    Bush's take on this old quote seem more appropriate.  It just speaks to how pathetic i feel.  I foolishly allowed myself to get excited by this Congress and Obama.  I foolishly had contributed my hard, hard, hard earned money to Dems this year.  And what I get is what i've always gotten, come November I will have the American privledge of voting for the lesser of two evils.  

    Last night a Democratic organizer called to ask me to volunteer.  "You must be kidding me", I said.  Then i explained what was going down on FISA.

    Open Note to the Democratic Party: You will have my vote this November only because you are the lesser of two evils, but you won't get my money.  My tiny $100 or $200 dollar contribution has already by given to you and then some by the likes of Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, and others.  I can see you work for them and not for me.  Working for me would be upholding the Constitution and the rule of law.  I'm one of those Little People in the phrase We the People.    

  •  Just rang Hoyer and Obama (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc9464, Gorette

    Hoyer's rep sounded like he couldn't wait to get off the phone with me...must have heard an earful today (hope so anyway). Obama's said she's been getting similar calls all day and read his statement to which I said the Senate vote needed to fail and what was he doing to ensure that? All in all it felt futile, but making ones voice heard can never hurt.

    It's all about processes of production.

    by senex on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:10:36 AM PDT

    •  the heat has to stay on maximum (0+ / 0-)

      We tend to let off the pressure after being disappointed.

      I think its imperative to join all the netroots for a laser-like strike on the wimpy dem leadership. If we join together to show them how signficant the netroots are in rebuilding a party gutted by weakness.

      I would love to hear how others think some pain should be exerted so that our voices can be heard.

      I see no other way for our efforts to make any real difference

      •  Yes, keep the heat on in any way. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        doc9464

        It really is up to us. And doing something, even with this frustrating result, is better than doing nothing.
        I so want to stick it to those Dems - like Hoyer, Pelosi, etc. Their actions are abominable.
        We'll find ways, and take action.
        No retreat, no surrender.
        Btw,
        I don't believe Obama is coming to the rescue here.

  •  Does anything work? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc9464, Gorette

    Plan A
    Apparently, calling, writing or otherwise engaging our representatives does not work.

    Plan B
    Threatening primary challenges apparently does not work.

    Plan C
    Airing ads attacking Bush dogs doesn't work; it might even be making things worse because it gives them something to triangulate off of.

    Plan D
    Threatening to stay home in the fall REALLY does not work, because it just elects more Republicans.

    Plan E
    Voting third party doesn't work, because it just elects more Republicans.

    Plan F
    Withholding campaign donations doesn't work, because it doesn't make much impact, and if it did, it would just elect more Republicans.

    What's plan G?

    •  It's like the Beatles sang, "Talkin' about a (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mary2002

      revolution....."

      Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

      by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:14:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  frustrated and LIVID! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dewley notid, senex

      I made 40 phone calls yesterday to all my new england reps, the speaker, hoyer, several senators, and of course senator Obama.

      Nothing matters...all we do is speak to staffers...they are probably laughing at us constantly after they hang up knowing that we are just spinning our wheels.

      I get frustrared because we are taken for granted because the othe choice, the GOP is so odious and unacceptable to turn to.

      I don't know what to do when our leadership is so brutally spineless.

      Im sick to my stomach and im sick and tired of being sick and tired....

      Im listening to Hoyer now and i want to wring his sorry useless neck for the most unnecessary move we have ever seen.

  •  here comes the main asshole (0+ / 0-)
  •  "Mr. Hoyer has the wisdom of Solomon" says (0+ / 0-)

    Mr. Reyes. Barf.

    Mr. Hoyers has allegiance to corporate interests, imho.

    Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

    by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:11:54 AM PDT

  •  what is pelosis FAX #?? (0+ / 0-)

    i want to fax  over and over cause phone been bsy

    "I didn't really say everything I said" Yogi Berra

    by surfdog on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:12:06 AM PDT

  •  I just emailed Pelosi... and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    I called her office, Obama's campaign, and my senator and congressman.  Here's the email I sent to Pelosi, feel free to copy it.

    TO: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov, speakerpelosi@dccc.org
    RE: FISA Bill - HR 6304 - Opposed

    Dear Speaker Pelosi,

    I'm contacting you to voice my opposition to the "compromise" FISA bill being pushed through congress this week (HR 6304).  I firmly disagree with retroactively condoning illegal spying on American citizens - as advocated for by the Bush administration.  I also firmly disagree with increasing domestic spying powers.

    The end does not justify the means.  I would rather have a 9/11 every year than live in a police state. I think most Americans would agree.

    Thank you for your consideration of my opinion,
    {MY NAME} (A progressive Democrat from {MY STATE})

    Who Would Jesus Torture?

    by JJC on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:12:08 AM PDT

  •  remember the GOP ad (0+ / 0-)

    Where they showed Hoyer repeating "There is no urgency" over and over again making him look like Satan or something? It was one of the most over-the-top, preposterous political ads I'd ever seen, but maybe it worked.

  •  Today C-SPAN is televising (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Jester

    the Congress's historical march to fascism.

    The elections of 2006 was an epic failure.

  •  I called on my Senators and Congressman (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    to defeat this bill.  The congressman is a Bush loyalist who I will work very hard to replace in November.  

    The Senators, well Reid is one of them, well, he's lied to me on this. (I'll happily eat those words if he allows it to be blocked/defeated)

    The other is another Bush Bobble Head.

    Frustrating.

    Call your representatives please, try to help the opposition get some traction.  

    ... the watchword of true patriotism: "Our country - when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right." - Carl Schurz; Oct. 17, 1899

    by NevDem on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:19:16 AM PDT

  •  just spoke to hoyer worker (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    asked why hoyer is congratdulating himself for selling us out
    keep calling!!!

    "I didn't really say everything I said" Yogi Berra

    by surfdog on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:21:24 AM PDT

  •  Pelosi and Hoyer make absurd argument! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, doc9464

    They say that now the executive branch will have to abide by FISA.

    HA!

    Until the next time they wish not to. Then they will once again get immunity.

    Thank God the Democrats won control of the Senate... otherwise, think of how different everything would be. -G.Greenwald

    by Gorette on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:22:33 AM PDT

    •  after listening to Hoyer's bs speech (0+ / 0-)

      Imagine what kind of bill we had if we simply allowed our Democratic president to sign a bill that a more powerful democratic majority could create with the right focus and concern.

      The lie was this was the "best bill".

      There was no urgency at all......and Hoyer and Pelosi and anyone complicit in this tragedy knows that.

  •  We need a better Democrat in MD-05 (0+ / 0-)

    Hoyer's been the worst of corporatist Dems for years.  When are we going to push for a better Democrat in his district?

    "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs, who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    by bayman on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:26:41 AM PDT

  •  Go Conyers. (0+ / 0-)

    and did the Chairman seem a little pissed there or what?

  •  Call C-Span LiVE (0+ / 0-)

    "I didn't really say everything I said" Yogi Berra

    by surfdog on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:27:30 AM PDT

  •  Why did they have to do this?? (0+ / 0-)

    I will never understand the logic behind it. WE WON the last fight with Bush. It was only like 3 months ago. There was no need to capitulate now.

    Fucking stupid.

  •  This Bill Rewards The Wrong Telecoms (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias

    What does this Bill say about QWest who bravely said "no way" to the administration's domestic spying request?  What does it say, NOTHING!  What does it imply, EVERYTHING!  It implies to QWest, that they were wrong, that there was no reason for them to refuse the administration's request and that they were wrong to believe it infringed on our civil liberties.

    I am not a stockholder or employee of QWest, but we should be rewarding this company and its executive management for their brave stance in protection of our constitutional rights in the face of what I am sure was tremendous pressure from the Bush/Cheney administration.  Instead, this Bill is a slap in the face to this company and its brave management.

    Since Congress apparently will not recognize their contribution to our civil liberties, I invite you to join me in sending them an E-mail to show them some love.

    "Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?"

    by Doctor Who on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:35:02 AM PDT

    •  I wonder if Qwest stockholders would have grounds (0+ / 0-)

      to bring a lawsuit against Qwest's management at the time.  If Qwest management then raised the illegality of the warrantless eavesdropping as a defense, that might be a way to get a court to rule on the issue of its legality.

      The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

      by lysias on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 11:02:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  All Cspan callers are against this regardless... (0+ / 0-)

    of affiliation.

  •  sf.nancy@mail.house.gov (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SPD

    sf.nancy@mail.house.gov

    Dear Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
    We know what this FISA immunity bill represents - telephone and cable  company executives are buying a pardon, from the likes of Jay Rockefeller and many of your House Dems.

    This, of course, is what all leads to having these corporations literally write our nation's laws and be able to get so close to having such an extraordinary and transparently corrupt gift -- retroactive immunity for lawbreaking -- granted to them.

    See Glenn Greenwalds series, and todays Update.

    Just in the first three months of 2008, recent lobbyist disclosure statements reveal that AT&T spent $5.2 million in lobbyist fees. In the first quarter of 2008, Verizon spent $4.8 million on lobbyist fees, while Comcast spent $2.6 million.

    .

    .. contributions from telecom executives to Jay Rockefeller skyrocketed right before he became the key Senator leading the charge for telecom amnesty.

    "I love the Constitution" - President Barack Obama

    by mrobinson on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:40:39 AM PDT

  •  There seems to be (0+ / 0-)

    a disconnect between politics and governing. Don't match at all. How can the Democrats run against the administration and Bush yet legalize every nasty illegal act that comes before them? Oh yeah Blue Dogs, thin majority, off the table,  blab, blab, blab! Johnathan Turely is right, from the start they have been complicit both legally and morally. They are CTA, plus they gain the same power that the Bushies grabbed.

    There's nothing in the street
    Looks any different to me
    And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
    And the parting on the left
    Is now the parting on the right
    And the beards have all grown longer overnight

    I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
    Take a bow for the new revolution
    Smile and grin at the change all around me
    Pick up my guitar and play
    Just like yesterday
    Then I'll get on my knees and pray
    We don't get fooled again
    Don't get fooled again
    No, no!

    YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

    Meet the new boss
    Same as the old boss  

    "And if my thought-dreams could be seen They'd probably put my head in a guillotine" Bob Dylan

    by shaharazade on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:41:09 AM PDT

  •  GEEZ I CANT WAIT TILL JAN 20th 09 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Jester

    "I didn't really say everything I said" Yogi Berra

    by surfdog on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:41:49 AM PDT

  •  What happened to the populism in 2006? (0+ / 0-)

    Oh yeah, they got elected and then said F the people.

    It never changes does it.

    Pitchforks and torches is the only way this country will turn around.

  •  Over 100 "Democrats" are voting for telcom (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SPD, The Jester

    immunity. WTF did we work so hard for?

    We need to STRIKE NOW!

  •  Go CREDO (0+ / 0-)

    Their ads say they will not spy on customers nor turn their records over to the government. They used to be Working Assets.  If everyone on this blog changed their phone service provider to Credo, it would be a start.  

    Then we can throw the Bush Blue Dogs out in Nov.

  •  hoyer would love to be speaker some day (0+ / 0-)

    why do you think there's always a cadre of democrats who will vote with the republicans in a misguided effort to "protect" themselves from being called "liberal?"

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site