Frist and Hastert could not get this "spying" bill through in 06. Now the Dems are doing it.

[madfloridian]

I read these paragraphs at Glenn Greenwald's blog tonight. It simply sickened me. There is no reason for this, no reason at all.

I'd like to underscore the fact that in 2006, when the Congress was controlled by Bill Frist and Denny Hastert, the administration tried to get a bill passed legalizing warrantless eavesdropping and telecom amnesty, but was unable. They had to wait until the Congress was controlled by Steny Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to accomplish that.

And isn't it so odd how this "compromise" -- just like the Military Commissions Act, the Protect America Act and all the other great "compromises" from the Bush era which precede this one -- is producing extreme indignation only from those who believe in civil liberties and the rule of law, while GOP Bush followers seem perfectly content and happy with it? I wonder if that suggests that what the Democratic leadership is supporting isn't really a "compromise" at all.

More from Glenn:

George Bush's latest powers, courtesy of the Democratic Congress

What the bill allows.

This bill allows for mass and untargeted surveillance of Americans' communications. The court review is mere window-dressing –- all the court would look at is the procedures for the year-long dragnet and not at the who, what and why of the spying. Even this superficial court review has a gaping loophole –- "exigent" circumstances can short cut even this perfunctory oversight since any delay in the onset of spying meets the test and by definition going to the court would cause at least a minimal pause. Worse yet, if the court denies an order for any reason, the government is allowed to continue surveillance throughout the appeals process, thereby rendering the role of the judiciary meaningless. In the end, there is no one to answer to; a court review without power is no court review at all.

They have raised $200,000 to fight this bill which is being rammed through tomorrow. So they are going to convert it to a PAC to target people like Hoyer, Carney, and Barrow.

Our fund-raising campaign has just exceeded $200,000. So the only solace is that this hefty (and still growing) fund provides some real ability to target those responsible and do everything possible to remove them from power and end their political careers for good (the list thus far includes Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Rep. Chris Carney and Rep. John Barrow).

It is also worthwhile to continue to call Barack Obama's campaign to demand that he intervene with meaningful action to stop this (though you'd be advised not to hold your breath while waiting for that to happen). As noted earlier today, Obama is conspicuously missing as his party is on the verge of enacting a radical bill to give the President vast new warrantless eavesdropping powers and retroactive amnesty to an entire lawbreaking industry.

We're in the process of creating a new PAC in order to oversee campaigns of the type we're conducting against those responsible for this FISA/telecom travesty, and Jane Hamsher has a poll up asking people to identify the best name. If the Democrats enact this bill, and it looks increasingly like they will, it's vital to direct the resulting rage towards constructive purposes.

Here is a link to Jane Hamsher's post.

FISA: Screwed, Blued and Tattooed

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Believe it or not, this is nothing to fret about, according to some

to me this is a frontal assault on the fourth amendment, but hey...

[Two Americas]

11. thinking about this...

We need to collaborate here and work on some new ways to communicate what you have been trying to say. For whatever reason, the word "fascism" isn't working. For one thing, people have the benefit of hindsight when looking at the fascist movements in Europe in the 30's - we know how things turned out. But we should not compare the final chapter in those regimes to what we are seeing here now, because by the time we know how this one turns out it will be too late. I have read over a hundred diaries and memoirs from people who lived through the 30's in Germany - resistance leaders, Jewish leaders, everyday people, foreign journalists and even Goebbels' personal diary - and they all have one striking thing in common. In all cases, they described how most people went on with their lives normally, and how little cause for alarm there was, and how few obvious signs of tyranny were out in plain view, or at least that people were willing to see. People adjusted and adjusted and adjusted to gradually worsening conditions and went about their lives. One resistance leader in Berlin described how she was in denial, for all that she knew about the regime, and that until 40 bombs fell on her street one night in 1944 (!) it had not dawned on her just how serious the situation was. All of the other horrors and signs were out of sight and out of mind for the most part. There is a chilling observation in Klemperer's diary that brings this denial into horrifying view. He said that as late as early 1944, in the ever dwindling population in the Jewish neighborhood in Dresden, with 90% of the people there already having been arrested and hauled away and murdered, STILL whenever someone was arrested he would hear people saying "what did he do? He must have done something. They wouldn't just arrest him for nothing."

On other threads, we have people arguing with you as though the danger we must all be alert to and suppress at all times in the human tendency to be overly alarmist. It is so obvious that the exact opposite is true - we have an amazing capacity for complacency and denial, and that is so clearly the greatest danger we face right now.

I am noticing in my first travels in the Pacific Northwest that the gap is wider here than anywhere I have seen between the gentrified suburbanites and the blue collar working people, between rural areas and suburban areas in terms of attitudes, cross-communication and mutual understanding. We have many people, and they are disproportionately represented here and in the party and liberal organizations in general, who are living a life of relative privilege and insulation and so are not alert to what is happening. They take their lives, and those around them, as the standard or the norm and fail to see that their experience and viewpoint only represents about 10% of the population in this country, let alone in the world. That increases the risk of complacency, as well as risking the alienation of the general public from the political left - such as it is in this country.

[DJ13]

2. I think it shows the Dem leadership was complicit with Bush all along

Not the party itself, just hand selected (by Bush/Cheney) Dem Congressional leaders who could have been coerced under the threat of national security.

Its probably no coincidence that the two weakest Dems in Congress ascended to the top of their respective chambers.

[Jakes Progress]

3. On KO, Johnathan Turley

explained how this bill has no valid reason for being. The only reason it is coming up is that a number of our leading Democrats are covering for themselves. They went along with Bush's crimes and now want to hide that from discovery. How can these people vote with Joe Lieberman?

They are willing to wreck one of the absolute foundations that make America what it is just to cover for bush and themselves. They know that covering their asses means that the fourth amendment is dead, that they are giving complete privacy power to a president, but they are cowardly and unpatriotically doing so. Everyone who votes with the republicans on this (and that includes any who duck the vote) should be fair targets for whatever scorn we can muster here on DU. They will have proven themselves unfit to be called Democrat. We need some leadership somewhere, damn it.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. Then we should vote in people who will change the rules this way:

We should make it a law in this country, that no elected official's vote shall be valid, and can be rescinded retroactively, if it is found that they were protecting themselves when they cast their vote, and, therefore, breaching fiduciary responsibility to the public.

[rumpel]

4. k & r

ugh

[crimsonblue]

5. It looks like it's time for large scale impeachments...

Bush, Cheney, Mukasey, Reid, Pelosi, Scalia, Hoyer, Rice, Gates, etc. Folks, the enemy of freedom is well past the gates, they are in our midst. I tried to give Reid and Pelosi the benefit of the doubt, but I cannot fathom how the majority is being manipulated into believing they are the minority. We the people deserve good leaders, regardless of party. I can accept political differences. I cannot accept leaders that ignore, trample, spit on, and destroy our Constitution. None of these idiots in charge is smarter than the brave men (and women) that founded this great country and demanded for, nay--sacrificed their lives for, liberty and justice for ALL. As a younger generation American, I'd like to thank the boomer generation, in particular, for fucking up freedom. Thanks, assholes.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. It's time to vote out all the enablers in the party.

They need to show their real face, because it's obvious that they think the job entitles changes once they get elected. Precisely who is feeding them information that makes them vote the way they do? If they're pretenders and think they have to put on a veneer for us, and then become something entirely else, then we should at least investigate to find out who controls them. Who is feeding them the information, and who is protecting them politically?

[madfloridian]

8. It is sad. I am beginning to agree.

.

[mdmc]

9. Go DemocRATS!

:woohoo:

[madfloridian]

10. They just sent the grassroots a signal....that we mean nothing to them.

A loud and clear signal.

[Two Americas]

12. money and votes

They know we are good for money and votes, and all we ask in return is that they be "better than Republicans" - whatever that means. Of course Democrats should be better than Republicans. Fire fighters should be "better than the arsonists" too. That isn't saying much.

We give them our undying and unquestioning loyalty first - surrendering all leverage we might have - and then hope they do the "right thing" - whatever that is - and then wonder why they keep ignoring us once they are safely in power. We are no threat to them. We refuse to be any threat to them. We smash down or purge any of our own who even suggest that we should be a threat to them.

We are soooooo nice to them - defending them, protecting them, promoting them and representing them - and then wonder why they don't return the favor. That is a weak, naive and child-like stance.