Interesting timeline-oriented coverage of FISA related events:

http://tinyurl.com/2orrap

I think it can generate some real attention and passion for him if he took the lead on it, and it really does fit perfectly into his overall message - it's a very populist argument. That's the pitch that we've been making, and I'm hopeful it will get through.

...less "corporatist" than fighting against immunity for the telecomms.

I'm curious as the the Edwards camp's rationale AGAINST vociferously decrying telco immunity. Anything you can divulge?

There's no active opposition to what we're saying, just not yet an evident belief that this is really in their interest. In fairness, they have a lot they're considering right now - they're a bit disoriented after their very poor showing in Nevada, focused on winning an important state for Edwards (South Carolina), and it takes some time for it to seep into the places it needs to be.

I think it can generate some real attention and passion for him if he took the lead on it, and it really does fit perfectly into his overall message - it's a very populist argument. That's the pitch that we've been making, and I'm hopeful it will get through.

I'm curious as the the Edwards camp's rationale AGAINST vociferously decrying telco immunity. Anything you can divulge?

I too would cheerfully bet my own next paycheck that Calabresi is referring to the telecoms' refusal to continue terrorist wiretaps unless the FBI ponies up their paycheck, and was too lazy to re-read the stories that came out about it.

I'd bet half the following paycheck that this was a bit of pre-emptive poison poured directly into his ear by GOP sources who know full well how completely that story blew apart the weepy pleading of the noble patriotism the telecoms showed by their eagerness to break the law. That Calabresi not only didn't "re-read" the stories, but never read them in the first place, just took the word of some right winger who had bestowed on him the blessing of access.

But, I think the Dems figure they have me on the ropes no matter what they do. I can't see myself voting for any of the Republican front runners, so the only other thing I can threaten is to stay home in November.

In most states, though sad to say not mine, you'll also have the option to vote for a number of minor party candidates. My advice: use it and support the candidate who best represents your values.

In Oklahoma, our ridiculous ballot-access laws we'll keep everyone but the Democratic and Republican presidential candidate off the ballot (barring a Bloomburg candidacy...he can afford the $100,000 or so it costs to pay people to collect the necessary signatures). We're not even allowed to write candidates names in. So my most likely presidential vote will be a blank ballot.

Might I remind all who are wondering where John Edwards was that he doesn't have a vote here. Clinton and Obama are both Senators and could have gone back to Washington DC to show their support for Chris Dodd.

You're right that Edwards has no vote, but he does have a voice -- and, at least so far, he hasn't used it on this issue, even though it's so tailor-made for his message about our "rigged political system."

He could put a lot of pressure on Obama and Clinton to do something -- and generate much-needed attention and support for himself -- by getting out in front on this issue. We've been talking to his campaign to try to make that case, so far to no avail. But we'll see.

Edwards may not have a vote here, but he is allowed access to the senate floor, and his appearance there would still be a measure of support for Dodd.

At a minimum, he could provide Dodd with reading materials for the filibuster, and as a former trial lawyer, he's probably got some good stuff on hand.

It would also be one way for Edwards to break through the media's news block...

I couldn't agree more.

It's really hard to maintain intensity about any of this when the concerns of the public seem to be repeatedly ignored by the political power structure (media included). I can't help but feel like the people who can make a difference are laughing at anybody who feels passionately about such trite issues like telecom immunity.

I like coming here and reading this blog. But I'm drained. There isn't a lot left for me to do. And what I've done isn't helping. What most people have done, it just isn't helping. Hell...the opposition party isn't even helping. What's left? Where is the motivation to care?

There needs be an effective new political party. That would be a good first step.

Or just blow it all up.

either way.

I'm guessing you, Firedoglake and others have been putting heads together on a plan of attack for saving our 4th Amendment rights in the upcoming FISA Update battle.

Can I assume you'll be posting on The Plan in the very near future?

Yes. The only way it has any chance at all of working is if it goes far beyond just blogs and their readers, so we're working on coordinating a campaign with lots of other groups and organizations -- the ACLU, EFF, DFA, MoveOn, etc. It needs the bulk, resources and numbers that they can bring, too. The problem is that when you deal with that many parties, especially large organizations, thinks are a little slow - everyone needs to get on board, approve, have various concerns assuaged, etc. But it's close to being done.

While Harry Reid seems to want to stealthly slide the SIC's version past his slumbering Democratic majority, I'm still holding out hope that the Democratic firebrands in the House can hold the line, and particularly in any Conference committee.

They don't have enough votes. Without the presidentials taking a leadership role, it's doomed - at least in the Senate. The Democrats would just as soon get the whole thing done and finished in quiet if they can.

--