I don't know about Indiana as an example, but to flat out say that replacing or running progressives or liberals over so called Democratic candidates or office holders who will vote Republican is "spitting in the wind" is flat denial or ignorance.

You're right, you don't know Indiana.

[DClaw1]: I am truly stumped. News reports far and wide assume this "gap" exists, as do a great many people for whom I have great respect.

[I said]: I've posted several times about this, both here and at Balkinization. You're right, of course. There was no bar against snooping foreign-to-foreign communications regardless of method, and no FISA court order requirement.

Forgot to add that James Risen, in today's paper, states the case properly, to wit that domestic interception was regulated by FISA only if one of the participants was in the U.S.

James Risen seems to be a good and thorough source.

Cheers,

It's getting dark fast. Some fast jottings at sunset:

No more leaks. As the bill was rammed through Congress, Bush raided the home of Thomas Tamm, former DOJ attorney alleged to have leaked the NSA spy program. His computer was seized along with his kids'. (No word yet on the whereabouts of their teddies and blankies.) The by now familiar message: "Mess with us and we'll get you and yours." Sometimes they send by springing a leak. This time they plugged one, or an alleged one, which still gets the point across.

No more judicial review. The "clearly erroneous" standard for FISA review of NSA's guidelines is legalese for "toothless." The substantive question to be presented is also flimsy: directed at people reasonably believed to be outside the US (not really, not primarily, not to the exclusion of people here, not at bad guys). What's the path of a bull in a china shop?

No legislative record. Congress wanted a DNI audit and reports to its intelligence and judiciary committees. This had nothing to do with intelligence gathering but was decreed not the way to make us safe and unceremoniously dropped. Congress will renew in a vacuum just as it launched this murky regime this weekend. And it won't matter if we're attacked or not. If it's not one blind panic, it'll be another.

No fact-finding. The "Get well or else" call had something to do with data-mining, which this bill enables in spades. Does this law let Bush do what James Comey and a mass of others were about to resign over? We'll never know for sure since we don't know what troubled them. The tie-in is just another unknown known on which we've turned the page.

@Kitt

I don't know about Indiana as an example, but to flat out say that replacing or running progressives or liberals over so called Democratic candidates or office holders who will vote Republican is "spitting in the wind" is flat denial or ignorance.

You're right, you don't know Indiana.

-- -Mona-

And that snide remark addresses the premise of my reply to you in what way? Did I miss something?

What the Dems did here, whether fairly or not, shows weakness. But the point is that the Republicans are weak as well, stupid to boot, and mask their weakness with posturing and bullying.

"All Democrats had to do was offer legislation to fix the only real gap in FISA and then demand that the President sign it or risk a Terrorist attack." - GG

That would be an interesting scenario with Bush and Co. threatening Dems with risking a terrorist attack and the Dems threatening Bush back with risking a terrorist attack. That is certainly a better option than what it appears they did, which was unfortunately bowing to GOP threats. If they get anything from this it should be never pass anything under threat. Never, never, never. Goddamn never.

Given that, I'd attack Bush on these two fronts instead.

One He tends to act like a puerile spoiled brat. Compare Bush to a teenager threatening his parents (Congress) that something really dire will happen (Terrorist attack) if they don't give him the keys to the car (Fisa bill). And it will all be the parents (Democrats) fault if something bad happens. It's blackmail, it's childish, it lacks character and is not the behaviour of a leader.

Two. Dems could have expressed that no one knows if another terrorist attack will occur on American soil but what they do know is that they will do a better job at protecting America than Bush and Co. whose administration is the most dysfunctional, cravenly cynical, politically motivated, and operationally inept government in history.

This latest move to threaten the Dems with causing another terrorist attack demonstrates the two defining characteristics of this administration, childish bullying and finger pointing to cover their sorry asses.

Issues such as gun control and abortion, as important as they are and as passionate as many people rightfully feel about them, are simply NOT comparable to core issues such as torture, civil liberties and the constitution itself. Many of us reluctantly supported pro-life candidates such as Bob Casey, since they were almost certainly going to be better than knuckle-draggers such as Santorum. But we drew and draw the line on these core issues, which are simply NOT negotiable, EVER.

It doesn't matter a tinker's damn where either you or I draw lines. In Elkhart, Indiana folks are not sitting at the local Dunkin' Donuts today pissing about how awful it is that Congress just allowed the government to intercept their electronic communications made to persons in foreign nations. They do care about Iraq -- and their guns, and some are fiercely pro-life. Many may well want universal health care instituted. But they don't generally understand what is important about issues like the NSA/FISA matter, and are not going to be voting about such issues. Or, to the extent they do understand these issues, they either may not see much wrong with the changes to FISA, or their opposition is not very deep.

Elkhart is not Oakland or NYC.