« Lanny Davis...the Weasel joins Faux News | Katega's Blog | FISA-The non Issue »

FISA- The non issue


This FISA bill bullshit is just that BULLSHIT. It is all smoke and mirrors for the dummy Liberal Democrats and they are all falling for it. This is a non issue from day one and the sooner that Liberals, Progressives and those concerned with civil liberties and Privacy face the facts, we are going to continue chasing our tails. The Republicans have set us up and knowing how stupid some of us can get we have fallen for it hook, line and sinker. Do you really think that Conservatives are not concerned with privacy and wire tapping on their phones? Do you really think that a Republican living in


6 Comments

| Leave a comment

This FISA bill bullshit is just that BULLSHIT. It is all smoke and mirrors for the dummy Liberal Democrats and they are all falling for it. This is a non issue from day one and the sooner that Liberals, Progressives and those concerned with civil liberties and Privacy face the facts, we are going to continue chasing our tails. The Republicans have set us up and knowing how stupid some of us can get we have fallen for it hook, line and sinker. Do you really think that Conservatives are not concerned with privacy and wire tapping on their phones? Do you really think that a Republican living in Mississippi hording enough ammunition to take down a small country is not concerned with the government listening in on his phone calls? Then why is he not upset? Why is he not up in arms about this?

The truth of the matter my little Liberal losers (we have lost 2 general elections in a row because we like to eat each other, instead of the other side). FISA is a non issue because the government has been listening in on our phone calls, keeping records of our activities for years. Why do you think the FBI was even established? We already had the CIA why the FBI? Do you really think we need the DOJ and the FBI to investigate Federal cases? It's for internal snooping you dummies. Files are kept on every one and any one they see fit or who is deemed or even looks like a threat. The FBI does not need the phone companies to give them permission to tap a phone line, all they are doing now is listening in on a larger pool and they needed the phone companies infrastructure of their main computers because of the lack of time and funds to build their own to listen to all calls. Because of the nature of the 9/11 attacks and the scope of the enemy and Bush going to war so fast, it left the FBI short handed, under funded and unprepared for the amount of work that had to be done. The FBI systems were most likely built to tap into particular lines of maybe a few hundred thousand people at a time. When it came time to listen in to millions of people they needed to approach the phone companies because it was faster to use a system that was already in place. The phone companies knowing that this would be discovered some day (employees not bound to secrecy and tend to blow the whistle and all that) asked for immunity and here we are arguing about a non issue. If the FBI had the time this would be done as quietly and efficiently as it has always been done since Hoover in the 1930's.
Obama voting for the bill is a non issue; it would pass with or with out his vote. The most import thing to us should be a President that knows the limits of wire tapping information and where and how this information is used. Electing a President that understands and respects the constitution should be the main concern of any self respecting Liberal, Progressive or Independent. There are thousands of laws on the Federal books that would make most of you roll over and die, because of their intrusiveness and ability to subvert the will of the people. It all depends on the President you have in that Oval office, if you have one that is willing to use these laws then we have water boarding, subverting the UN convention on prisoners of war and a lot of other issues.

I know a president Obama will not misuse this FISA law and it will have better, more constitutional oversight and the rights of individuals will be protected. So you Liberal fools need to concentrate on electing a Democrat into office other wise you will have a Bush/McCain Presidency and I don't know what will happen to you. Your' 7 year old can end up on the Terrorist watch list, you will not be able to travel outside of the US and the only traveling you will be doing is to Guantanamo bay for a little bit of water boarding and electric shock treatment. Your 17 year old daughter or son will be fighting a war in Iran for oil that is costing you 15 dollars a gallon. You've lost your job and you have moved in with your retired parents who are living in an adult lifestyle community complex in Boca Raton and you can't stay for longer than a month. So you live in your car now and as the traffic passes by on the bridge overpass above you, your mind goes back to the FISA argument. Well since you have no phone any longer, it finally dawns on you that the FISA issue was a non issue.

user-pic

Obama has my vote.
As a Chicagoan I was an early adaptor to the Obama presidential campaign and I cannot think of a nationally known politician who I would rather see as the next president. Still, I am not the first to note that Obama’s promise of Change and Hope for a more perfect Union has been largely generic.
His support of George Bush's FISA bill is profoundly disappointing. The “cave” on telecom immunity gives Bush and the criminals in his administration a get out of jail free card.
The issue here transcends electoral politics and goes to the heart of the Constitution’s providence for sovereign individuality. I am baffled as to why, as the tide of hope and change is rising, Obama decided to ignore one of the core components of the protection of rights in a free democracy and give de facto permission to conduct illegal spying. If our future president intends a more perfect union he must draw the line against government by and for the corporations and promote government by and for the people.

If he will not draw the line here, then where?

Your conviction that a President Obama would not abuse eavsdropping privleges is hardly consolation. This is not about Obama. The bill strips the Constitution of its authority

You argue that it is critical that the Democrats win and that need justifies whatever maneuvers the campaign employs. Push comes to shove, I agree. But I also believe, perhaps naively, that [we] were and are winning. Part of the shock I feel is due to my conviction that Obama will win the election walking away. Obama need not cave in to Republican autocrats and the corporate puppet masters.

The core of Obama’s campaign, the real fuel, the reason he will win is his uncanny gift to move people to believe that there is good among us and change is possible. He has asked us to become the change that we wish to see.

Barack, back at ya. CHANGE. Change the way politics is done.

We, the dummy Liberal Democrats, need to provide the campaign with the actual forms of change that we want to see. The campaign seems content to float an amorphous, warm ball of hope out above the crowd without distributing a single brass tack with which we might build the better America we want.

So here’s a start. Corporations cannot buy legislation. Check how your representative voted on FISA and if he or she is among the 94 Democrats who received money from the telecoms and then reversed their position on immunity, get busy in your district and throw their asses out. Throw them out along with the Republicans they are sleeping with. That would be CHANGE and it will let the prsident to be know what we demand from him.

Thank You, Kevin.

Great post. You have encapsulated my/others feelings on FISA brilliantly. I've always felt, deep down, that I was on the right side of this argument. You've confirmed that for me... I feel vindicated, somehow.

Bravo!

I know a president Obama will not misuse this FISA law

No you don't. And even if he doesn't, that's not the point.

He will not misuse it because he is "Saint Obama." How dare anyone question him. I seem to remember a similar argument being used at the begining of the Iraq war for one very evil dictator named Bush. I can see how the others would have forgotten not to trust self serving leadership as it was so long ago.

user-pic

Kevin, I too will vote for Obama and support him enthusiastically. I also am disappointed in his vote for FISA, but agree with Karen that FISA should not be the make or break issue that people have made it out to be. Kevin, you (and others) say that "The bill strips the Constitution of its authority". No legislation does that. Legislation that is unconstitutional can be challenged and struck down by the courts, that is, will be struck down if we have judges who are worthy of their position, something that will not happen (or will happen less often) if we have McCain for President. I was just over at Hullabaloo reading Digby's post and the comments following that post. Most of the commenters are shockingly willing to let this issue blind them to the horror of having another Republican presidency. I am so disheartened by people who can't see the forest for the trees. I wrote lots of letters opposing telecomm immunity, but it's certainly not the only thing on my list. Another thing we don't know is why this compromise was made: according to Paul Kane's Washington Post chat today: "I'm not sure what you mean by heartfelt in terms of Democratic opposition. But I'll say this, back in February Nancy Pelosi took a deep breath and rolled the dice on FISA. Almost 70 senators had voted for a FISA bill that gave automatic immunity to the telecoms and also had not very strong new regulations on domestic spying.

She didn't like that bill, but the tides for the previous 7 years had been that Congress always gave in to Bush on issues of national security.

Pelosi didn't blink. Rather than passing the Senate version of FISA, she instead pushed a bill that very day to hold the White House in contempt of Congress for its refusal to turn over documents and allow former aides to testify in the US attorneys investigation. And then she closed down the House for a planned weeklong recess.

It was a high-wire political act. When Democrats went home they realized that they weren't getting killed on FISA. So they dug in for months.

Ultimately, they gave in on a bill that many Democrats didn't like, but they leveraged that opposition to FISA for many concessions on domestic policy that simply were unthinkable 6 months ago." and

"Bush wanted a $108 billion war supplemental bill. "108 is 108" was his mantra.

Democrats then got an additonal $25 billion or so in basica domestic spending (shoring up Louisiana levees, veterans hospitals, etc). They got an additional 13 weeks of unemployment insurance, which Bush said he would veto until 75% of both the House and Senate voted for more unemployment insurance. And the Democrats, over Bush's veto threat, started a new GI bill for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

These were major accomplishments.

Just 7 months ago, during the end-game negotiations for the fiscal year '08, Democrats got stuck with basically no additional funds and gave Bush his war funds and were on the verge of caving in completely on FISA.

I know many Democratic activists aren't happy, but the past 7 months have been a remarkable turnaround of events."

Of course these things might not mean anything to you unless you're a vet, or unemployed, or live in New Orleans, or .....

Leave a comment

Katega

user-pic

Following:
Followers:

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address