Letters to the Editor
Jebbie
Published Letters: 1119
-
TPM
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]is reporting that Obama's campaign is now claiming that unless immunity is removed from the FISA bill, he will vote against it.
Previously, he had said he would try to get immunity pulled out of the bill but also said that even if it was there for the final vote, he would vote for the bill's passage.
Progress?
-
More on Obama change on FISA
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I can't find the story on TPM anymore. Either they pulled it because it was not accurate, or I saw it somewhere else and my brain is fried on meds.
-
-- rufus11
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Please stop spamming this board.
-
-- susan sunflower
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Weren't there people here saying the opposite ... that immunity COULD apply to criminal charges
but not to Civil liability ...
No. Pardons can be applied to criminal acts but not civil acts. That has been discussed here numerous times and is quite possibly what you are thinking of.
-
Bebop-O
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It does no good to attempt to discuss issues with our newest loon but it might help if you would try to understand where he takes his direction from.
Click my signature for a CONFIDENTIAL tape recording (legal under FISA, according to Bush) for details.
-
-- slb
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I wouldn't believe anything said about his position unless it came from Obama himself, and even then I would take it with a grain of salt.
10-4
-
On a brighter note
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has capitulated and vetoed the legislative pay raise that I mentioned to Holly a day or two ago.
All it took was a few active recall petitions and the rath of a whole pile of voters to get The Wonk to crawfish from his original position which was that he would not veto the bill.
It got to the point where legislators were begging him to veto what they passed because they realized they had signed their own political death warrants.
Maybe Jindal will be a good match for McCain after all.
-
Oh! Mona
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]is so much horseshit.
Olbermann seemed like he just couldn't admit he was wrong last week but he tried.
Many folks don't realize that there are two separate and distinct things in play here.
One is the immunity question. That is a product of a desire for retribution and, IMO, isn't anywhere near as important as the lessening of our 4th Amendment protections. Keith, like most others, seems, also IMO, to have his priorities bassackwards also.
I'd rather seem them pass a clean bill with only immunity and stop the assault on the 4th Amendment dead in its tracks than do the opposite. Of course, I'd rather have neither but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.
Which is more important? Retribution or the 4th Amendment?
Question:
If a bill has a sunset provision, can Congress pass a new bill which cancels the provisions of the bill which is sunsetted - prior to the time of the sunset? IOW, could the Congress pass a new FISA next year which effectively restores the protections they are removing this year or do they have to wait until the current bill sunsets?
-
Oh! Mona
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Mom,
My last post didn't look right.
the words "is so much horseshit" were not meant to reflect on you personally, but rather were taken from your previous post. I quoted them because it turns me on when you use dirty words. ;-)
Your Jebbie
-
Oh! Mona
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The reason I asked the sunset question is because I had a brain fart.
If the polls are accurate, it would appear that the Democrats might have a 60/40 seat majority in the Senate next year even without Douchebag Joe. Coupled with a Democrat in the WH, it's possible that some folks are looking ahead to when they might be able to ram through a repeal bill next year and there's not a hell of a lot the GOP will be able to do about it. The GOP might not be so lockstep next year with a Dem administration doling out the money and favors so it might even be possible to ram one through with a simple majority even if the Dems don't get to 60.
I'm not confident that this is the case, but it is worth thinking about. Hell, if we voters here in Louisiana got El Wonko Jindal to veto the legislative pay raise he said he wouldn't veto, maybe other miracles may happen.
Senators must be hit HARD and in the face with this while they're in their districts over the holiday if there is a chance of getting this thing stopped.
And yes, I'm aware that the immunity genies will be out of the bottle and there's no way to put them back..but once again, that's retribution and there's more than one way to skin that mule.
Nite, Mom.
-
-- karrsic
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Of course, if no one is going to be held to the existing laws, whether FISA or the Constitution, what good are they?
They serve as a wonderful standard to which we should aspire to return to.....and improve on.
When someone is drowning, they don't normally refuse a life ring because it's dirty, do they? It would be nice to have a nice clean life ring but until one comes along, a dirty one will do.
This country is drowning.
McCain will throw us an anvil. Obama might through a dirty life ring.
-
Bedtime for this Bonzo
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]through = throw
-
-- dawkinsfan00
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If in a dragnet within the administratively claimed eavesdropping powers, criminal information was dug up about a separate crime unrelated to terrorism (bank robbery, murder, drug related etc), could such evidence be used in a criminal court or does the exclusionary principle apply?
I believe there was language added to the this version of FISA which now includes information relative to criminal (as opposed to national security) activity as fair game where previously, the information had to be national security related to be utilized in a court.
If that's true, it's one of the most egregious aspects of the whole makeover and, I might add, one of the least discussed.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong on this.