ACLU Issues A Scathing Statement About The Senate Dems...

[Hissyspit]

http://www.atlargely.com/2007/08/aclu-issues-a-s.html

ACLU issues a scathing statement about the Senate Dems...

My thoughts exactly. I give you the ACLU (via email, so no link):

"While we do not agree with the reasons why the House Republicans defeated this measure, the fact that it failed is a victory for civil liberties nonetheless. Historically, legislation that has been rushed through Congress in the name of national security goes further than lawmakers intended. From the Sedition Act to the Patriot Act, passing laws on the fly can have unintended consequences for Americans' rights.

"The Democrats should be ashamed for allowing themselves to be bullied into surrendering our civil liberties. Where is their spine? The White House has intentionally misled the Congress and the American people about the illegal warrantless wiretapping program, and now the Democrats are going to give them even more power to spy on innocent Americans who have no connection to terrorism. We need a Congress that is going to protect our rights and our Constitution, not roll over every time the administration breaks the law. FISA doesn't need to be modified, it needs to be followed."

- Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office

Exactly. How many times does this need to be said and why always by me? "There is nothing wrong with FISA that the removal of Dick Cheney cannot fix." Say it, repeat it, spread it (and attribute it). Put it in your sig lines for forums and blogs, in your emails sig lines, on the top of your stationary, record it for your voice mail... spread it far and wide... the problem is not FISA. The problem is this administration. The problem is not the Constitution, which worked rather nicely during the first two world wars, during the Cold War, during the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, and so forth. But we are to believe that the Bush administration, which has empowered terrorism all over the world would do a better job in protecting us if we hand over the Constitution? Why?

Like I said, say it, repeat it, spread it!

[acmavm]

1. Pretty much what the whole situation boils down to, isn't it? Not only are they

not protecting our 'interests' they are providing cover for this administration's criminal activities.

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. That's it in a nut shell. We now know where THEY stand and it's NOT with us. n/t

[Greeby]

2. But Rush told me the ACLU controls the Democrat party

:sarcasm:

[Grandrose]

3. K&R

Scathing as it should be!:thumbsup: :kick:

[babylonsister]

4. I'm not getting why this is a victory. The dim one got what he wanted, and

also got a pass for the past transgressions when it was illegal but we didn't know it.

[Canuckistanian]

5. Done.

Changed my sig line.

[AtomicKitten]

7. "There is nothing wrong with FISA that the removal of Dick Cheney cannot fix."

:toast:

[Pushed To The Left]

8. I've been a monthly donor since November 2004!

Would any DUers like to join me?

http://action.aclu.org/site/PageServer?pagename=FJ_donationhome

[Hissyspit]

17. .

[creeksneakers2]

9. The ACLU contributed to this fiasco

They opposed the sensible Democratic alternative. According to reports, those Democrats who voted for the Bush bill did so because they felt something had to be passed and they were left with no alternative. There was nothing wrong with the Democratic bill.

[ConsAreLiars]

10. So you ae blaming the ACLU????

Wow!

[creeksneakers2]

13. I'm blaming the ACLU for trashing the Dem alternative

I'm blaming the Bush bill's success on the Democratic bill failing. It failed narrowly. I don't blame the ACLU for the Blue Dogs. I think the ACLU had a counterproductive strategy on the matter as a whole.

[Bluebear]

11. You're blaming the ACLU because the Democrats "felt something needed to be passed"??

Holy cannoli.

[creeksneakers2]

14. That's twisting what I said.

[Bluebear]

16. OK, well it appeared to be exactly what you said, though

[K8-EEE]

12. Dems in the blue dog districts, fund ACLU not these people!

Something needed to be passed, so let's pass a POS enabling bill for BushCo and hand over a piece of what remains of our civil liberties! How ridiculous....

For God's sake....speaking of God THANK GOD FOR THE ACLU FOR KEEPING FREEDOM ALIVE IN THE UNITED STATES WHEN POLITICIANS FROM BOTH PARTIES ARE SO INTENT ON KILLING IT!!!

I'M UPPING MY MONTHLY DONATION!

[creeksneakers2]

15. I'm not defending the Blue Dogs

I'm faulting the ACLU for attacking a good alternative that would have kept the Blue Dog problem out of the picture.

[noise]

18. It wouldn't have

Bush said he would veto any bill not endorsed by DNI McConnell (even though McConnell apparently changed the conditions after a call from the WH). And even though McConnell has conflicts of interests considering he was Senior Vice President with the consulting firm Booz Allen that was involved in Admiral Poindexter's TIA program and a pre-9/11 domestic spying program called Pioneer Groundbreaker.

The ACLU was standing up for the US Constitution. They could care less about some Democrats bizarre political concessions.

[nosmokes]

19. So let the mofo veto it. BFD. We'd still be better off than we are now.

FFS.Why is everyone so afraid of a lousy veto? They don't hurt. It's not getting poked poked in the eye w/ a sharp stick or getting your pisspoor armored vehicle blown to shit by anIED. Or having the bridge you commute on every day fall out from underneath you. But stand -up, for flying spaghetti monster's sake, show some fucking backbone and stand-up and do the right fucking thing for once, possible political consequences be damned.