My computer is still not back, but I am braving the waters of suicidally-slow response to post a link to HuffPost that you will (hopefully) be hearing more about.
A bit of background:
In case you have not made your living negotiating the sausage-making process of government, you may not realize how important "rules-making" is. Many of the most horrific government policies have come not through the legislative process, but through "rules making" that would never survive legislative review
I live with this each day in my non-profit environment. If you get to write the definition of "homeless" for example, you can instantly erase huge portions of the homeless population! Did you know that most homeless kids are not homeless? As long as they have ten friends willing to let them spend the night three nights over the course of a month they're all good!
But I digress....
FISA was a battle lost. And the almost inevitable consequence of failing to check the erosion of rights is........
more erosion of rights.
And this time, all we get is a hearing, not a vote.
Worse than FISA
This Is Rich
It seems that some of our fearless leaders are outraged – outraged I tell you! – about the fact that China plans to do during the Olympics what they have enabled the Bush administration to do EVERY DAY, namely monitor the electronic and telecommunications of people attending the Beijing Olympics.
Earlier this year, the U.S. State Department issued a fact sheet warning travelers attending the Olympic games that "they have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public or private locations" in China.I must assume that the equivalent departments in other countries have already warned their citizens that they should make the same assumption when they are in the United States.
Another Media Failure
I spent literally hours of time looking for this information during the FISA battle, but it was nowhere to be found in the MSM. Nor did I feel qualified to conduct my own Opensource analysis. Thankfully, there are still journalists left, they're just on the web:
One for the History Books
I'm sure you've been waiting with your breath held for my reaction to the FISA sellout, but my daughters came for an unexpected visit and my priorities were elsewhere. I guess that's why I'll never get paid for this!
I actually started the post but didn't have time to finish it. And you'll have to wait for links to move forward as well, because it looks like someone has hacked the FDL site today.
My reaction: Every Senator who voted for this measure is a gutless, spineless coward, a traitor to our history and the rule of law in the United States.
As I listened to the debate streaming over C-span in my office that day, in the week after the 4th of July, I could not help but compare these pathetic excuses for leaders to our founding fathers, who risked all to declare that no one person had the right or power to decide what was legal and what was not.
Until now.
With the passage of FISA we have witnessed an assault on our constitution and the rule of law which, unless we continue to descend further into authoritarianism, will one day be a topic discussed in the history of this time: How a government could be so afraid that it gives away the very system it is charged to protect, and how a people could be so complacent that they stood by, watched, allowed and/or supported what was happening.
FISA was not about listening in on phone calls and other telecommunications. It was not about sueing the telecoms for damages and punishing them financially for having cooperated in violations of the law (which is called being an accomplice if you're not the CEO of a major corporation and can buy you some serious time.)
FISA was about whether we are a country of laws.
If we are failing our promise as a nation, it is because large swaths of the American people no longer believe in the system. That is why people don't vote, don't organize, don't demand more of their representation. Why bother? It's all for sale and people are broke. They see the no-bid contracts, the gross and blatant corruption of this government, and have simply become cynical.
Our criminal justice system has become an embarassment. While our jails fill up with the homeless and hopeless, who can domino into long stretches of time with a string of stupid mistakes, the Scooter Libby's of the world get a Get Out Of Jail Free card. We watch the government arrange a bail-out for Bear Stearns while neighbors and friends go bankrupt and lose their homes.
So now major corporations can get away with illegal behavior because they were "taking orders", and I would like to extend my personal apologies, to those Vietnam Vets and battered women who served time for doing the same thing.
So we need to quit giving our money to politicians who violate their oath of office and betray their responsibility to represent the American people and start giving it to those who are actually fighting on our behalf. Some good choices are:
The ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have both filed lawsuits challenging the new FISA.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is another powerful voice in holding them accountable.
Christi at FDL has more, but as I said I can't link because the site is down.
FISA Today
Because patriotism isn't just the words you spew in front of the camera for a celebration of the Declaration of Independence. It's what you do, each and every vote, each and every day, to actually uphold the principles contained therein.
New Energy on FISA
If the MSM hadn't completely abandoned their role as the 4th Estate, the on-going and upcoming FISA vote would be getting more play. As it is the coverage is there but it's thin, reduced to soundbites that are both simplistic and dishonest: "a battle over authorizing the government to spy on terrorists." No, FISA is not about allowing the President to spy on terrorists you gutless drones. Check your facts: that power always existed. FISA is about allowing the President to decide unilaterally to spy on YOU, or someone who looks like you, or doesn't look like you, or who could be related to someone you know. He doesn't have time to be picky, goddammit, he wants it all.
Everyday people actually "get" the FISA issue when the central tenents of the argument are explained. They get instantly how this is contrary to our system of government. If this issue were getting anywhere near a level of attention proportionate to its importance there would be no issue. People would not have it.
But since you can only understand the issue by seeking out information not provided by most of the MSM, we have to become a more effective mouthpiece on this issue. We need to take responsibility to actively promulgate more reaction.
The entire argument in favor of telecom immunity rests on one premise: That, because the President ordered them to do so, telecoms should not be held accountable for their unlawful invasion of the privacy of our communications. Period. End of argument. Not their fault.
I don't remember that argument playing very well for some Vietnam veterans, who were "ordered" to commit atrocities in the name of winning a war and spreading freedom. Those poor men, grunts in the field who were told they would live or die based on the judgment of their commanders were not let off the hook for obeying orders. They were held responsible to decide in the field whether an order given to them was legal. This was also a time of war. Right or wrong, our government held them accountable. This argument alone would assure the defeat of this bill in any system that didn't continue to play the little guys as suckers.
Glenn remembers also:
Even soldiers, for whom the President is actually the Commander-in-Chief, are prohibited from obeying unlawful orders.
That's the whole point of this Administration. The rules are for the suckers. No-bid contracts. Sweet deals for Administration-connected industries in the war machine. Leaks of classified information that would get a powerless person a prison sentence all pardoned away. The rules are for suckers. The Department of Justice of the United States has been completely politicized in direct violation of federal law -- and this Administration thumbs their nose at inquiry. They violate the Geneva Conventions and U.S military law because those were rules made for other people, not for them, and they simply dare someone to challenge them.
And where are the Democrats?
Where are we?
Fax and call time. Christy commands:
Tomorrow is the vote on the FISA bill. What say we welcome back Senators and
their staffs from the 4th of July holiday with a rousing bit of patriotic
support for the rule of law? Last week, Blue America launched a call tool to help you get in touch with Senators regarding
the FISA bill. We'd like you to put it to some serious use today. We are asking
Senators to vote IN FAVOR of the Dodd-Feingold-Leahy Amendment (S.A. 5064 to
H.R. 6304). We're asking for a NO vote on cloture, and a NO vote on the final
bill as well.
More 4th Inspiration
I'm just freaking out tonight on all this freedom and patriotism stuff! McJoan at Daily Kos reminds us today of someone who “got” what freedom really means, and the courage true patriotism entails:
In response to the revelations that a president had violated the 4th amendments stricture against "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," the first branch of government stood up to that president, led by Senator Frank Church:
Personal privacy is protected because it is essential to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Our Constitution checks the power of Government for purposes of protecting the rights of individuals, in order that all our
citizens may live in a free and decent society. Unlike totalitarian states, we do not believe that any government has a monopoly on truth.
When government infringes those right instead of nurturing and protecting them, the injury spreads far beyond the particular citizens targeted to untold numbers of other Americans who may be intimidated...
The natural tendency of government is toward abuse of power. Men entrusted with power, even those aware of its dangers, tend, particularly when pressured, to slight liberty.
Our constitutional system guards against this tendency. It establishes many different checks upon power. It is those wise restraints which keep men free. In the field of intelligence those restraints have too often been ignored....
The United States must not adopt the tactics of the enemy. Means are important, as ends. Crisis makes it tempting to ignore the wise restraints that make men free. But each time we do so, each time the means we use are wrong, our inner strength, the strength which makes us free, is lessened.
Dissent is Patriotic
Stunning rebuke on FISA from James Galloway, in an editorial at McClatchy:
Early next week the U.S. Senate will vote on an extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, with a few small amendments intended to immunize telecommunications corporations that assisted our government in the warrantless and illegal wiretapping it has grown to love.
That such a gutting of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution even made it out of committee is yet another stain on the gutless and seemingly powerless Democratic majority in both houses of Congress.
That a majority on both sides of the aisle — not least of them the presumptive nominees for president of both political parties — intend to vote for such a violation of Americans' right to privacy and of the sanctity of their personal communications is a stunning surrender to those who want us to live in fear forever.
We are living in a time when the right of habeas corpus — which simply put is your right to be brought before a proper court of law where the government is made to prove that there is good and legal reason to detain you — recently survived by a margin of only one vote at the U.S. Supreme Court.
[snip]
How dare they?
Those denizens of the White House and Capitol Hill and all those gray granite buildings that line avenues with names like Constitution and Independence in the nation's capitol would have us believe that we must trade our rights, all of our rights, for some measure of security from the terrorists.
They would have us believe that a nation of 300 million people must surrender what a million other Americans gave their lives in war to protect in order to protect us from a couple of hundred fanatics hiding in caves in Waziristan..
Obama and FISA
After more than 17,000 people signed up in a just a few days, Senator Obama issued a response to the social network group against FISA today. (I’m a member, are you?) I don’t like the outcome, but the tone is perfect and – like his already-famous speech on race – an intelligent conversation between adults, not the parent to child hectoring most politicians adopt with their critics. On FISA, there are still approaches that can work, but more pressure on this candidate after this statement is almost wasted energy (although it will be interesting to see how much it moves on its own, virally.) Ironically, it is precisely because of the damage already done to his brand through this kind of reversal that he can’t afford to be seen as having given it to us! That is the kabuki of the screwed up politics of our time, but it is also the reality. Although I completely disagree with Obama on many substantive elements of his argument here, it is clearly a thoughtful statement from a man that has made up his mind.
So it’s time to turn to Reid – who can get this thing killed and out of the way for his candidate if he chooses to do so. We have to make him want to do so.
But I digress…
Giving our candidate his due, here is Obama on FISA. His complete statement.
I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.
This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.
But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility
The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.
The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe -- particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I've chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention -- once I’m sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.
Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.
I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I'm not exempt from that. I'm certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable
too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States -- a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples' business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country’s destiny.
Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.
So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.
The Dark Night Ahead
I feel compelled from time to time to reassure the many Obama enthusiasts among my small audience that I, too, am moved by the promise. One would have to be both dead and embalmed not to be affected by the promise this man holds out... for a return to grace on the international stage, to the dominance of reason and intellect over bullying in foreign policy. I remember when he said that he rose out of Chicago politics and could handle the fight. I remember when he used to challenge the Republican framing of security-vs-civil rights.
I remember just six months ago when he said this (via FDL):
Ever since 9/11, this Administration has put forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand.
The FISA court works. The separation of power works. We can trace, track down and take out terrorists while ensuring that our actions are subject to vigorous oversight, and do not undermine the very laws and freedom that we are fighting to defend.
No one should get a free pass to violate the basic civil liberties of the American people -- not the President of the United States, and not the telecommunications companies that fell in line with his warrantless surveillance program. We have to make clear the lines that cannot be crossed. . . .
But I was just one of those bitter, old Hillary pragmatists who wanted to see some beef before we bought the sandwich.
Yet I digress...
This is a post about why -- even as I encourage you to take action to move him on FISA, I urge everyone to support his candidacy with all your might.
Evil simply cannot triumph in this case:
Because if Obama thought Hillary was rough, he ain’t seen nothin’ yet. This post from Ian Welsh at FDL is a must read.
Rove's students are now in charge of Obama's campaign.
Mr. Schmidt's elevation is the latest sign of increasing influence of veterans of Mr. Rove's campaign efforts in the McCain operation. Nicolle Wallace, who was communications director for Mr. Bush in the 2004 campaign and in his White House, has joined the campaign as a senior adviser, and will travel with Mr. McCain every other week. Greg Jenkins, another veteran of Mr. Rove's operation, has joined the McCain communications operation.
And finally, remembering a recent conversation with one of my best friends, who didn’t believe (at first) the story in which McCain publicly called his own wife a c*&t, I feel compelled to promote the latest-emerging evidence that John McCain is unstable.
FISA Drumbeat
We won a reprieve, but now is not the time to let up on FISA. Now is the time to concentrate our efforts on our presumptive nominee. The MSM is all about how Obama is "tacking to the center" for the general election, but this candidate started out pretty much in the center -- so we can read that as "tacking right".
Don't let him do it. Can't we at least wait until he is in office before we let him break our hearts? Although we are unlikely to win a straightforward victory, Dem leadership can just delay this thing into oblivion to take the heat off their candidate -- but that is only likely if we create enough heat.
Likeminded supporters have set up a group at Obama's campaign site to help him see the light. Join.
One breathtaking comment from a recent comment (emphasis in original):
1. Why do we claim that our "privacy" is being violated when in fact we are communicating with another person? There is no right to privacy that extends to communication between two individuals, unless that communication is protected by law. There is no invasion of privacy if two or more people are communicating. In other words, if you want privacy, then don't use your phone or email!!! DUH!Wow. Who thought it was just that simple?! So the only right to privacy we have is confined to our own homes? This commenter apparently believes that what J. Edgar Hoover did to Bobby Kennedy and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. -- not to mention thousands of anti-war protesters during the 60s and 70s was perfectly okay -- because the idiots had the temerity to leave their homes!
2. This idea that we should somehow sue cell phone carriers for responding to an executive order is ludicrous, in my opinion. When you signed on as a cell phone user, did you get a written guarantee from the cell phone carrier that your communications would not be monitored by third parties? Probably not. Did you get a written guarantee that your cell phone records would not be shared with the
government? I doubt it. Again, if you want privacy, don't use a phone or email!
This is ridiculous. Just imagine how much fun the government could have with us if this kind of idiotic reasoning is allowed to prevail. Be afraid. Be very afriad.
Heroes and Leaders
For those who want a quick update, here is Ian at FDL on the “real” FISA vote. He’s a little too fatalistic for my taste. I say it’s not over --- even when it’s over.
And certainly before we move on, we need to hail the heros, however humble they might be. Chris Dodd, on the floor of the US Senate:
Under the legislation before us, the district court would simply decide whether or not the telecommunication companies received documentation stating that the President authorized the program and that there had been some sort of determination that it was legal.
But, as the Intelligence Committee has already made clear, we already KNOW that this happened.
We already KNOW that the companies received some form of documentation, with some sort of legal determination.
But that’s not the question. The question is not whether these companies received a “document” from the White House. The question is, “were their actions legal?” It’s rather straightforward—surprisingly uncomplicated.
Either the companies were presented with a warrant, or they weren’t. Either the companies and the President acted outside of the rule of law, or they followed it. Either the underlying program was legal or it wasn’t.
Because of this legislation, none of the questions will be answered, Mr. President. Because of this so-called “compromise,” the judge’s hands will be tied, and the outcome of these cases will be predetermined. Because of this compromise, retroactive immunity will be granted and that, as they say, will be that. Case closed.
No court will rule on the legality of the telecommunications companies activities
in participating in the president’s warrantless wiretapping program.
None of our fellow Americans will have their day in court.
What they will have is a government that has sanctioned lawlessness.
And Russ Finegold in front of reporters at the New America Foundation:
The Wisconsin Democrat voiced considerable frustration with members of his own party, who, he says, have enabled the sweeping new legislation. “Sen. Dodd and I and Sen. Leahy are going to do everything we can to stop this mistake,” Feingold noted, referring to fellow opponents of the bill. “But I’m extremely concerned that not only virtually every Republican… but far too many Democrats will vote the wrong way.”
“We met with Sen. Reid on Friday morning,” said Feingold, speaking of himself and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., “and we indicated our desire that this thing not just be jammed through, we’ll be requiring key procedural votes and we’ll also be taking some time on the floor this week to indicate the problems with this legislation.”
This won’t be the first time the duo has tried to stall the enactment of broad surveillance powers by using procedural tactics. Last December, amid the uproar over the possibility that the government would retroactively immunize telecommunications companies who participated in the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, Dodd spearheaded a filibuster of a similar set of FISA amendments — a move that ultimately prompted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to pull the bill from the floor.
Progressive activists and civil libertarians hailed the filibuster, and the Democratic party’s greater decision not to cave in to White House demands on a national security issue. Nonetheless, several senior Democrats spent the intervening months trying to accommodate the Republicans. And despite containing less than a handful of narrow improvements over the previous amendments, the new legislation has much wider support among Democratic leaders. Many of them claim the bill represents a worthy compromise.
“That’s a farce and it’s political cover,” Feingold said. “Anybody who claims this is an okay bill, I really question if they’ve even read it. ” “Democrats enabled [this],” Feingold went on. “Some of the rank-and-file Democrats in the Senate who were elected on this reform platform unfortunately voted with Kit Bond, who’s just giggling, he’s so happy with what he got. We caved in.”
Now Obama on FISA
And the Apologists weigh in
You’ve got to be kidding me. The Candidate who is too afraid to hold his position on an issue on which most citizens are agreed is going to pursue a criminal prosecution of telecom companies as a vehicle through which to hold the Bush Administration accountable after he takes office?
Yea, right.
We are not expecting too much of Obama; we are expecting too little.
Never Say Die
True to form, the MSM did not see fit to spend any time covering the backhanded repeal of the 4th Amendment that Pelosi and Hoyer engineered this week through FISA. Although I’m no longer a big fan of Olbermann, at least he saw fit to bring some credentialed analysis to the subject.
Do you think I am being too dramatic? Watch Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley on Countdown here:
The response from the left blogosphere? Among those who’ve been slugging Obama koolaid like it’s last call at their favorite bar some have been silent, others merely posted Obama’s statement without comment, and some have actually joined in trying to help the campaign peddle this shit.
Others, both true progressives and the intellectually honest, are having a fit:
Hunter at Daily Kos
Glenzilla
And the Great O finally earns a Wanker of the Day from Atrios.
What a politician. Obama now says that although he “supports the compromise” he will try to strip the immunity provisions from FISA when it hits the Senate, knowing full well how next to impossible that will be. The Senate already approved that once and there is little hope that they will allow that to happen this time. But the Magic One says we need not worry about this assault on the 4th Amendment, because when he becomes President, he will monitor it very carefully.
Please…
Far be it from me to lecture a constitutional lawyer on our system of government, but the Constitution was put in place expressly so that “we the people” do not have to depend on a benevolent dictator to safeguard our rights.
We are not done with this.
Christy at FireDogLake points out that Obama’s chief foreign policy and national security advisor saw clearly, once upon a time, what was at stake. Oh, but I guess that was before he attached himself to an ambitious and calculating politician.
Is there anything left to do? You bet your britches. I’m asking people to do several things:
First we need you to take to the phones or the fax machine. Email is too easy for us, and thus for them to ignore. But when the phones and faxes start jamming, they know it’s trouble.
Contact Feingold and Dodd and urge them to keep their filibuster promise:
Feingold – phone: 202-224-5323; fax: 202-224-2725
Dodd – phone: 202-224-2823; fax: 202-224-1083
Contact Obama and Reid and DEMAND that they remove the immunity provisions and tighten future surveillance requirements:
Obama – phone: 202-224-2854; fax: 202-228-4260
Reid: -- phone: 202-224-3542; fax: 202-224-7327
And finally, if you are from Illinois, contact Durbin and tell him to hold tight to his opposition. His support of Obama may bring him to fold on this, and that can’t happen.
Durbin – phone: 202-224-2152; fax: 202-228-0400
Finally, if progressives and Democrats are EVER to have better representation, we must make them pay when they turn their backs on issues as important as this. FireDogLake and Glenzilla have created a punishment PAC through Act Blue that has raised over $300,000 since this issue re-emerged last week.
If you are already contributing to Obama’s campaign, please divert your contribution this week and let the campaign know where and why. If you were planning to contribute but haven’t yet, don’t. Spend your money defending the Constitution yourself instead of waiting for politicians – even smooth, bright and shiny ones – to do it for you.
Take them down. Now.
Spitting MAD
I am so filled with rage that I am nearly immobilized. The Democrats have become traitors to this country by collaborating with Republicans to betray the U.S. Constitution. Didn’t hear that on your evening news, did you?
In a “bi-partisan compromise” on FISA legislation, they have decided to grant the telecommunication industry amnesty from breaking the law, and to allow the most corrupt administration ever to slink out of office without having to fear any judicial scrutiny of their lawlessness.
Tomorrow will go down in history. For the first time in 232 year history of our country’s history, Congress will pull together across party lines to declare that the President – and anyone serving as his agent – is above the law.
Glenn Greenwald and FireDogLake (can’t make the link work) are all over it, of course, but the accelerated pace of what is happening, which reveals a lot of backstage maneuvering around timing and a certainty that the votes are in line, leaves little hope that we will be able to prevent this.
Instead, FDL is organizing a “Punishment PAC”, that will target the Democratic Majority Whip in the House, and a few other key Democratic betrayers, with a media campaign to reveal their treachery. If you would like to contribute to this fund, as I have, you can do so here.
In 2000, Ralph Nadar gained a foothold among voters by arguing, fairly persuasively, that there simply was NO DIFFERENCE between Democrats and Republicans. He has since become a pariah among Democrats because they blame him for having cost Gore the Presidency. (One could argue that Gore cost himself the Presidency by being such a revulsive piece of white bread, but then we would have to ignore the Supreme Court.)
Today’s (and tomorrow’s) appalling display on the part of Democrats makes the case pretty well, I think, that Nadar is right.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering where the Big O is in all of this, he’s busy cutting commercials in support of one of the worst Bush-supporting Democrats there is, a commercial to help this guy defeat a progressive, African-American woman primary challenger.
Really out there to change the system, isn’t he?
Please Care about FISA
With his brilliant sarcasm, Hunter at DKos explains better than I ever can why you should care about FISA. This is worth excerpting in full.
The You've Got Nothing To Hide Act of 2008
by Hunter
Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:00:25
PM PDT
To: U.S. Representative Steny H. Hoyer U.S.
Senator John D. Rockefeller
Honorable Gentlemen --
I see from the news that the telecom industry efforts to receive blanket immunity for violation of this nation's domestic surveillance laws are still quite active. Their campaign to place pressure on the Congress via the placement of industry funded, faux-grassroots ads, their willingness to draft proposals for how, exactly, their own immunity should be phrased, the continuing refusal to actually describe what it is they are asking immunity for -- all impressive efforts. And they have what can only be described as a true champion in the Bush Administration, which has acted nobly to protect the interests of these fine companies. So it seems only natural that right-thinking legislators such as yourselves would want to go along, so as to not rock the boat.
It seems, then, we are at a bit of an impasse. You want to provide the industry immunity for still-unknown years of illegal surveillance, immunity the industry is adamantly demanding. But at the moment, you cannot rouse sufficient support for the act because it would make you all look like cheap, easily bought corporatophiles in the pocket of some of the highest paid lobbyists in the land -- mere legislative hacks who can be bought off with trinkets, or threatened with bullying advertisements, or who believe laws are negotiable things, depending on how much money you have or how powerful your friends are. This isbecause he public, against all expectations, is actually paying attention.
Fear not: I have a bargain to strike. I would like to announce that we, the slovenly and ignorant public, would be willing to drop our unreasonable outrage over corporations in this nation being given blanket retroactive immunity for violating both federal law and our own personal privacy... for a price of our own. A quid pro quo, if you will -- and certainly, I expect you are well familiar with such arrangements. We simply want a little payback, in order to make sure that you in Congress are asked to live according to the same rules as the rest of us.
Here is my proposal. We, the public, should be allowed to spy on you, and all those you come in contact with, with similar promisees of amnesty. For each member of Congress, I propose we set up a collective internet site. This site will allow interested members of the public to, in realtime, monitor your every activity to assure ourselves that none of you are committing illegal or terrorist-enabling acts at any given moment of the day. The primary feature will be the ability to listen in to any conversation you may be having, whether it be on your work phone, your home phone, your cell phone, text messages, email -- whatever. These conversations will be streamed to the internet, so that they may be monitored by responsible members of the public. The contact information of whoever it is you are talking to at that moment at time will also be displayed and tracked -- whether it be your wife or husband, child, doctor, secret mistress, whoever -- so that we can monitor them as well. You know, just to be safe.
You can trust us, as members of the public, to be discreet. We will only listen and watch, and will not abuse the information. After all, what could any of you possibly have to hide? Only someone intent on criminal acts objects to being monitored proactively. On the contrary, you should be grateful to us: by listening to your every phone call and reading your every communication, we can only help you to prove that you have nothing to hide. I am unfamiliar with the vagaries of American law these days, but my understanding is that this ongoing surveillance will make you even more innocent than you were before. Perhaps you will even be twice as innocent as before, or four times as innocent -- what patriot could resist?
This, though, is still not quite the proper balance between your privacy and our needs as citizens. We need more of a total information awareness into your doings -- you know, just to be sure you are not terrorists, or at the very least secretly drug dealers or ethnic or something. You will therefore have all your personal bills posted to the same website: credit card bills, mortgage statements, monthly electricity usage, bank statements, etc. You need not worry, of course, about doing this yourself: there are companies already tracking all of this information, and government projects dedicated to sweeping it up to look for suspicious patterns.Again, there is nothing you could possibly have to hide... unless, perhaps, you have taken any trips abroad lately? That could cause some problems. Or if you have eaten at the same restaurants as other people being investigated... or have an unusual pattern of travel within the country... or have moved, recently. Oh -- or have bought more than one bottle of cough syrup in the last few months, or have acquaintances withsuspicious-sounding names, or own your own business. Aside from that, you should be in the clear.
I admit, this at first sounds intrusive. Consider this, though: what if one of your fellow Congressmen turned out to be -- and I pause, here, for dramatic effect -- a terrorist sympathizer? Sure, you consider the possibility unlikely, but if there was even the slightest, slightest chance that someone surrounding you was a secret Jihadist, would you not be willing to give up any amount of privacy, in order to prove your own innocence and help the authorities (in this case, we watchful members of the public) narrow down the list of subjects by conducting surveillance upon each of you, one by one, to ensure you are not planning something criminal?
There is, of course, one small detail that ruins all of this. Surveillance of American citizens without due process or cause is, sadly, illegal. In order for us to do it, then, you will have to grant us, your own constituents, the same immunities that you have been struggling so valiantly to provide to the telecommunications industry. I am sorry to report we have no lobbyists. We have few people willing to type up the laws for you, in order to deliver them onto your desks. We do, however, have the advantage of being voters -- one of the few remaining perks of being a citizen of this nation that is not yet shared by corporations -- and so one can certainly presume that we would look favorably upon any grant of immunity for our own illegal acts, come your next election. And I cannot help but point out that while the Bush administration and telecommunications companies conspired to do something illegal, then demand immunity after the fact, we mere citizens are following a much more responsible path of asking you up front to let us do the deed. Surely, that shows far more respect for the laws of this great nation than either Bush or his compatriots have deigned, does it not?
So, what say you? Can we citizens be granted these extra-legal powers that the telecommunications companies have been demanding, lest they have to face civil suits for violating the laws of the nation? Can we be granted the same illegal powers of espionage that the Bush administration has squeezed from you with barely a squeak, on your parts? Can we violate your privacy with abandon, ignore the laws and the courts, listen in on your most personal phone calls, thumb through your monthly purchases, follow your movements, spy on those that contact you, and if ever caught doing anything that does violate existing law, simply receive immunity from all unfortunate laws that might apply?
You are looking for a deal to be struck in order to condone the violation our privacy and make the illegal legal.
Fine; these are our terms. Unless you are terrorists, I think you will find our requests not only fair, but truly patriotic.There is another matter that needs addressing, which is that it may be necessary at some point to torture one or two of you, just to make very, very certain that you do not know something about terrorists that you perhaps might be hiding. No need to worry about that now; we can address that in separate legislation.
Your humble citizen,
To all my lazy activists
Please, please, PLEASE act on FISA. I really don't think I am being histrionic to suggest that we are smack dab in the middle of a constitutional crisis that most people are refusing to see with this administration. That's what this is really about. The repubs try to frame it as a trial lawyer issue, because of course cash is the only currency they have. But this is about bringing the light of day to just exactly what happened at the hands of this administration, and the only way to do that is through the courts.
Credo/Working Assets is helping you out on FISA. Just click here, and they do all the work for you! Just sign on and use the letter they have composed or do your own.
They were a little too polite for my taste, so I wrote my own.
Actually Winning on FISA
Since he was my primary touchstone throughout the FISA debate, I’ll let Glenn Greenwald give you the good news.
How did this happen? We are so used to losing!
Throughout the FISA struggle, Glenn Greenwald has been both my hero and my nemesis. As a constitutional and civil rights lawyer, his informed and surgical analysis of the issues at stake in the debate were inspirational, and the energy he put behind the netroots campaign, along with the women at FDL, was determinative.
At the same time, Glenzilla always had a gloom and doom tone about the final outcome. It was as if he really believed in the campaign against FISA as an important process in which to engage, while simultaneously discouraging us from having any real hope at ultimate success. He acknowledges that today.
This is the first time in a long time that right-wing fear-mongering on
Terrorism hasn't succeeded. Given that virtually everyone (including me) assumed
that the Congress would ultimately enact the new FISA bill demanded by Bush, it
demonstrates that smart strategies combined with intense citizen activism can
succeed, even when the Establishment -- its lobbyists, Congressional
representatives and pundits -- lines up in bipartisan fashion behind their latest measure. And it removes the Democrats' principal excuse that they cannot resist Bush's Terrorism demands without suffering politically.
Yeah for us!
Reader Poll:
I know most of you are lurkers, but if you did ANYTHING – made one phone call, sent one email, wrote one letter – on the FISA issue, would you comment and let me know? As this blog unfolds, I would like to get a sense of whether readers are willing to engage with me in true activism, or if you would prefer just to read about other people’s activism (snark!).
