Letters to the Editor
-
For the record
I don't know L.W.M. any better than I do bucky1. We disagree on a number of substantive issues, principally having to do with foreign policy and the legitimate uses of the military.
Still, I do like his posts, as they're usually thoughtful, and I'm a big fan of sardonic humor.
There is, however, one other significant difference between us. When he sees fish in a barrel he always shoots 'em. Sometimes I refrain. I don't think that this necessarily makes me a better person -- one with questionable stamina, perhaps, but certainly not one who can legitimately claim any higher moral ground.
-
Does it even matter?
Even if, by some remote chance, Congress manages to slip something worthwhile into this bill, won't Bush just issue another signing statement to nullify it? "Hey, thanks for playing guys, but I don't really like that checks and balances nonsense, so I'm gonna do whatever I want like always. Yours truly, King George"
-
It matters, riles 8:34
Have to keep pushin, man, even though it is not likely we will achieve a dramatic win. Rather we work on a slow steady drip of resistance and change. One apparent setback can end up being a contributing factor to an advance down-stream. A useful metaphor is the Colorado River and the Grand Canyon.
-
To the top of their boots!
It would seem that before the House acts on the FISA Bill, the issue should be exhaustively debated by Clinton, Obama and McCain. It should be a televised debate exclusively dedicated to this issue. As I see it, there are 2 definitions of telecom immunity; #1: the rich and powerful providing protection for Cheney/bush and #2: follow the money. That's it! Let's face it, their all in it "up to the top of their boots!"
-
Enough Already with the Updates!
The update avalanche is cooling my ardor, Mr. Greenwald. Please move on to a different subject instead of updating, updating, updating . . . mostly a waste of time (yours and your readers'), in my insufficiently humble view.
-
The True Sunset Provision
Glenn, you are beating a dead horse with this post. It really does not matter if the sunset provision in the final Bill is 2,4,or 6 years. The true sunset provision, the only one that matters, is this legislation itself. It is another indication of the passing of the rule of law and respect for individual freedoms and the constitutional rights of Americans. The consensus among the political elite seems to be for the surveillance state and some form of authoritarianism couched in democratic garb. No presidential candidate seems to be taking a firm, principled, stand against this proposed law, and they are all, at this point, members of the Senate.
It is the autumn of American democracy. The days are warm,but cooling, the leaves are beautiful, but they are dying, and their brilliant color presages the coming of winter.
-
Overwhelmingly Likely Ultimately
... nobody with whom I've spoken ... denies that the House is overwhelmingly likely ultimately to bestow amnesty to lawbreaking telecoms.
Consider why this is so (in my not-so-humble opinion):
1. In the absence of immunity, legal discovery is likely to show that telecoms were "following orders" for unwarranted wiretaps long before the current program. I suspect that Democrats are not willing to boil Bill Clinton in the same pot with George Bush.
2. Every politician is humbled by the threat (even if frivolous) that they will be held responsible for the next terrorist attack ("when, not if") by denying the administration every power imaginable ... allegedly to evade a forever threat. The Support-Me-Or-Die meme is getting old, but it still works as Support-Me-Or-Lose-Your-Seat.
3. Telecom officers, administrators, and employees are a huge constituency that profits from, and therefore nurtures, expanded political power, stimulating paid political discourse on their corporate resources. I'm sure many of them recognize the risks of expanded totalitarian discretion (some even refused the illegal wiretaps), but many see the huge profits derived from expanded government contracts, legal or not, as a good and very profitable enterprise.
-
Do I lose my citizenship when I cross the border?
One very disturbing aspect that I don't see discussed much is the continuous mention of a difference between "U.S. citizens within the country" ad "persons outside the country". As a U.S. Citizen who frequently travels outside the country, does this bill imply that constitutional protections of search and seizure etc. become null and void once I cross a border? I didn't realize I give up all rights as a U.S. Citizen if I am not on U.S. soil. Hmmm, I don't see where in the Constitution that it implies the U.S. Government can do whatever it wants to me if I go on vacation to Europe. In fact, I really don't really see where it says the constitutional restrictions on Government activity don't apply to foreign nationals as well, since I would like to view the Bill of Rights as principles that we, as a nation, believe in. I know, THAT is just totally loony-tune thinking....
Even if it something isn't at the level of Constitutionality, laws that treat citizens differently whether I am home or abroad scare me...
-
who cares about those "improvements"?
Seriously, I see nothing in the way of safeguards here. The president can replace the IG any time he wants. If he can't get someone he wants, he can just dither with no one there. So I see no protection there.
"exclusivity"? Hah! A signing statement takes care of that (unless our brave congressmen will finally challenge the signing statements. Yeah, I'm holding my breath on that one).
2-year sunset? Well, that's certainly preferable to six years, or no sunset, but really a fairly minor quibble. Ditto the re-review in '09.
What it really comes down to is whether telecom immunity is included. If that's in there, then FISA has no meaning. It will have been stripped of every meaningful protection. The only remaining possibility at that point would be challenging the constitutionality of immunity (based on there being no corresponding compensation fund).
-
A DISGUSTING STATE OF AFFAIRS....
Well, Glenn Greenwald, the ONLY REASON I CAN GIVE FOR THIS MISERABLE, COWARDLY CAPITULATION to this CRAZED RETARDED CHIMPANZEE and commander-in-THIEF Bush by the Democrats in both the House and Senate would be to GAIN a FILIBUSTER and DEBATE-PROOF MAJORITY in both the House and Senate, and a VETO-PROOF MAJORITY IN BOTH HOUSES OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH!!!!! THIS, HOWEVER, IS A MOST COWARDLY AND ROUND-ABOUT WAY OF ACCOMPLISHING THIS GOAL, AND MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE AS I AM SURE YOURS IS, Glenn, IS TO DIRECTLY CONFRONT Bush, Cheney, Bushland Uber Allies and the white house AND FORCE THEM TO ADMIT THEIR WRONGDOING, ILLEGAL ACTIVITY AND LAWBREAKING AND MAKE THEM LEGALLY PAY FOR THEIR HIGH CRIMES. I AM SURE MOST AMERICANS WOULD SETTLE FOR IMPEACHMENT BUT I PREFER EXECUTION IN THE MOST EXCRUCIATING MANNER POSSIBLE! BUT THE GUTLESS Democrats WANT TO PRESERVE THEIR MAJORITY AND OWN POWER RATHER THAN DOING THE RIGHT THING, i.e., PUNISHING THE CRIMINALS Bush & Cheney AND Bushland Uber Allies FOR THEIR MYRIAD HIGH CRIMES IN ACCORDANCE WITH AMERICAN LAW OF THE LAND!!!!!