Yesterday's vote in the Senate was a perfect example of why the popularity of Congress is now in single digits (9%). Senators had a chance to stand up for the right of Americans not to be spyed upon without a legally issued search warrant, and to hold Bush and the telecoms responsible for breaking the law and ignoring the Constitution. But all they did was knuckle under again to the most unpopular (and worst) president in history.
The Senate passed the obnoxious FISA bill by a lop-sided vote of 69 to 28, giving the telecoms immunity for their past illegal actions. The one-sided vote meant that lots of Democrats caved in and voted with the Republicans to give Bush what he wanted.
One of the most disappointing aspects of the vote was the fact that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama voted with the majority in favor of the terrible bill. I had hoped that Obama would have the courage to stand against the bill, but that was not to be.
I am an Obama supporter, and I will campaign for him and vote for him in spite of the vote. But that vote does not make me happy. He is still the best choice in November, but he is not perfect. But then, there were no "perfect" candidates running this year (or any other year).
This has shown me that immediately after we get Obama elected, progressives are going to have to start the process of holding his feet to the fire. Over at Newshoggers the other day, they were discussing what would the progressive bloggers do once a Democrat entered the White House. Would they become administration apologists as the conservative blogs did for Bush?
I think yesterday's vote answers that question. Even with Obama in the White House and Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, there will be a lot of "opposition" blogging for progressives to do. We're going to have to hold the Democrats responsible for the position of power we helped them to achieve.
But that is for the future. Right now we still must work hard for Obama and other Democrats. As disappointing as they were yesterday, it would still be a disaster for Sidney McCain to be elected president.
Why don't you just admit it is not illegal, and that maybe the elected Reps know more about the issue than u do?
ReplyDeleteI can't believe you actually like the idea of illegal searches without search warrants.
ReplyDeleteYou would have made a great Tory had you lived during the American Revolution.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
ReplyDeleteLaw... the Fourth Amendment. Read up on it, CT.
The Executive branch of our government was never intended to have the sort of tyrannical powers that the Bush bunch have grabbed for themselves. The precedents set in the last eight years will take probably decades to untangle because much of our law is based on precedent and this sort of power grabbing allowed by a gutless Congress often takes herculean efforts to return to a constitutionally sound policy.
Think it thru, Sugar. Elected Reps often know less about the issues than informed citizens. How many of them actually READ the Patriot Act before they raced to sign it? How many took the time to think of the consequences of this FISA bill for the average citizen?
Democracy is a pretty good idea. We are foolish to surrender it to our fears. We are morons to trust it to elected Reps.
Mick
Very well said, MM!
ReplyDelete"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures
ReplyDeleteThis law is aim'ed primarily at those who are islamic here legaly or illegaly, and only when going toa country that is or sponsors terror. You act like every one on the phone talking to moma back in the next town will be monitored.
A phone call ordering attacks, the killing of more innocent Americans can happen in seconds. There is no time to run it through a judge first.
The Executive branch of our government was never intended to have the sort of tyrannical powers that the Bush bunch have grabbed for themselves.
And Bush never has. It has been passed by congress evry time. It was even supported by Obama. And was used by many presidents before. Clinton and even someone as gutless as Carter.
Elected Reps often know less about the issues than informed citizens.
That is rediculous. Certainly they don't always act in the best interest of the people, (illegal immigration)but to say they no less simply is not true. They in fact know much more.
Democracy is a pretty good idea. We are foolish to surrender it to our fears. We are morons to trust it to elected Reps.
We do not live in a democracy. This is a republic. Putting our trust in elected officials in exactly what the constitution requires. The failures of government reflect the failures of the American people to take even a minor interest in what the government is doing.
But don't worry if Obama has his way this country will go socialist. The government will have all the power then.
I can't believe you actually like the idea of illegal searches without search warrants.
ReplyDeleteI've not read it all yet but I don't believe searches are part of it. The bill is primarily about wire taps, which are very limited in scope and still monitored by a judge as soon as possible. Any ifo gained that would lead to a search or arrest will go through a judge first.
How many took the time to think of the consequences of this FISA bill for the average citizen?
ReplyDeleteThere is no consequence for the average citizen. Unless you believe the average citizen is a terroist.
I think you guys need to read up on fisa and how long it's been around
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act
1. A wiretap is a search.
ReplyDelete2. Bush did wiretaps without warrants before Congress allowed it - that was illegal.
3. FISA has been around a while, but required a search warrant for a wiretap.
4. This new FISA would allow any American to be spied upon, even if you're just calling your mother.
5. Nothing in the new bill says it's aimed at muslims. It could be used to snoop on anyone the government doesn't like.
6. It's a fact that most congressmen voted on the Patriot Act without even reading it.
7. Clinton and Carter did use FISA - after getting a search warrant.
What is your definition of socialism, CT? I don't think you have a clue what it is.
ReplyDelete" phone call ordering attacks, the killing of more innocent Americans can happen in seconds. There is no time to run it through a judge first."
ReplyDeleteOkay, you are advocating giving up certain freedoms in order to keep us safe?
hmm...but will it keep us safe? And how many freedoms will you donate to safety?
I won't quote tired old wisdom about surrending freedom for the illusion of safety. I'll just talk common sense for a bit.
In a country as large as America is there ANYthing a government could do that would keep us totally safe from terroristic violence? Stop all international trade and thus all foreign shipments from entering the country? Shut the borders down air-tight? The entire coastline? Stop international air travel? How do you protect against the home-grown version ala Timothy McMonster in Oklahoma?
It's nonsense to believe in the illusion of safety. In a country as large as ours, there is only one way to reduce terrorism...deal with the causes for violent expressions of fear and anger.
If you accept the fact that terroristic violence is impossible to totally prevent, then one might ask what freedoms may be stripped to maintain the illusion of safety.
Your privacy? Your right to convene and peacefully demonstrate? Your right to worship at your own choice of pew? Your right to speak out about unjust wars? Your right to vote?
All of these rights and freedoms are under attack. The FISA bill is just the latest in a long list of attacks against the constitution.
You obviously are a person of intelligence, CT. I think you do yourself a disservice to quote party lines without digging deeper into the subject.
Democracy is fragile. It requires vigilence from its citizens. Even if you don't believe we have a democratic form of government, then what sort of republic would you want to live in? A free society or a dictatorial one?
You claim there is no direct effect on the average citizen from the FISA bill. I hope you are correct. I believe you are not. There is NOTHING to stop abuse of wire-tapping now. A government is only as responsible to its citizens as the laws governing it require it to be. The amount of time it would take to get judicial oversight for wire-tapping is a small price to pay for the continuation of freedom.
Mick