Letters to the Editor
-
The Sleeping Giant Wakes Up
When I read this post I wondered what on earth happened to turn things around so dramatically on FISA reform. This is very good news. The House is acting in its grand tradition as a defender of individual liberties, while at the same time moving to more fully enable the administration to monitor America's enemies. It is a proud moment. The House has moved away from total compliance with the authoritarian impulses of a radical president and has moved back to its historical roots as a check on executive power and the crafter of legislation benefiting the republic as a whole.
During this entire post 9/11 period it has seemed as if the legislative branch was missing from the scene, asleep at the switch, not alive to its responsibilities. Now the sleeping giant seems to be waking up.
-
Celebrating and Losing
Glenn probably could answer your question also but I understand he's out celebrating by tying one on or something now in celebration. ;o)Kidding.
As well he should. As should we all. I'm looking forward to lifting a glass this evening in honor of all the leaders in this fight.
Also concerned though, that it's not over. Couldn't this go to senate, amnesty put back in, ability to capture traffic through domestic switches (which is fine) put in, and then the thing goes to conference committee and amnesty prevails in conference.
-
yes -- Congratulations
and Thank You!
-
I am not going to say everything is rosy now
But I wonder if in 10 yrs the USA is able to claw back all the crap they've stripped away, they will look back and say that this was the pivotal moment when the people were able to start pushing back.
As Glenn said, this is unprecedented in recent history. And if the people/Dems get a taste of victory through populism, they might find themselves VERY hungry for more.
-
Normally I read GG
and get angry, depressed, annoyed, etc... I am not accustomed to having a smile on my face while reading Glenn's commentary. This is unbelievably fabulous.
-
Help for people writing spine inspiring letters to senators
The following Democrats who supported the Senate Version the last time round (February), also voted to amend it. Since the logic of McConnell and Bush has been that they need the current Senate bill, and only the current Senate bill, with no changes, these are technically people who disagree that it shouldn't be changed at all. If you are writing to them, I'm posting again which amendments they voted for.
Baucus, Bayh, Carper, Casey, Conrad, Kohl, Johnson, Landrieu, Lincoln, McCaskill, Mikulski, Bill Nelson, Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar, Webb, and Whitehouse.
I included info on Feinstein, she helped craft the SSIC bill, but voted against it.
As sysprog posted yesterday, they only need 51 votes to pass this House version this time in the Senate because of some 'privileged form' rule.
Senate Democrats voting Yea on amendments to change the Senate bill, and then Yea on Bill.
Amendment 3915 Limit use of materials (Feingold) - Whitehouse, Webb, Salazar, Bill Nelson, Mikulski, McCaskill, Lincoln, Kohl, Conrad, Casey, Baucus
Amendment 3913 Prevent Reverse Targeting (Feingold) - Baucus, Bayh, Carper, Casey, Conrad, Kohl, McCaskill, Mikulski, Bill Nelson, Webb, Whitehouse
Amendment 3910 Exclusive Means (Feinstein) Whitehouse, Webb, Salazar, Rockefeller, Pryor, Bill Nelson, Mikulski, McCaskill, Lincoln, Landrieu, Kohl, Johnson, Conrad, Casey, Carper, Bayh, Baucus
Amendment 3979 Safeguards for U.S. persons (Feingold) - Baucus, Casey, Kohl, McCaskill, Salazar, Webb, Whitehouse
Amendment 3907 Strike Immunity (Dodd) - Baucus, Carper, Casey, Whitehouse
Amendment 3912 Requirements for certifications (Feingold) - Whitehouse, Salazar, McCaskill, Kohl, Conrad, Casey, Baucus
Amendment 3927 Substitute U.S. in civil actions (Specter) - Casey, Kohl, McCaskill, Bill Nelson, Webb, Whitehouse
Amendment 3919 Hear cases in FISC (Feinstein) - Baucus, Bayh, Casey, Conrad, Kohl, Lincoln, McCaskill, Mikulski, Bill Nelson, Salazar, Webb, Whitehouse
In addition, Feinstein voted against the final bill and supported both of her amendments plus 3915, 3910, 3912, 3919.
-
Ondellette--
I was going to write something witheringly sarcastic about this latest bubble, but then I read this:
"Maybe because sometimes you have to put your faith in people who are doing the right thing. Even if you have to mutter "for once" under your breath to make yourself feel better. If you can't do positive once in a while, you're crippling your own cause."
Dammit!
-
And...
In anti-negatory mode. I suppose its not a complete given that Bush will veto; if he is forced into a prolonged conversation about why telecoms need amnesty he could be hurting his successor McPain. Just thinking--most Americans seem to have a visceral distaste for the "corporation", and double down on that for big telecom. Anti-corporate sentiment is probably THE uniting populist message from the dawn of this nation--and these people are probably the fabled independents that are supposedly the holy grail of victory. Bush hasn't had to talk about this very much, and neither has McCain, but when they do, it might come back to bite them on the ass.
-
strategy for calling republicans?
just curious for anyone's thoughts on calling/emailing/faxing republicans on this. could it be time better spent on wavering democrats? what would be the best tone to take? make a brief statement or engage in a dialogue with a representative? just wondering how to be effective with my actions.
-
Crust1/Phoenix Woman
Re: Ron Paul - I don't know for sure, but I bet Kitt is right - he voted against it because he thinks it gives to much eavesdropping power to the President - same reason that Kucinich, McDermott and Hinchey among others voted against it. This bill does expand eavesdropping powers beyond what FISA gives, and some people think that's not necessary.
I think Phoenix Woman makes an excellent point about the media narrative, supplemented by Paul Dirks. I noticed that this week when they all easily understood that the House bill "protects" telecoms by allowing them to defend themselves in court. That's such a intuitively fair, easy-to-understand solution that it then becomes obvious - even to media people -- that the only reason to oppose this bill is because you believe in the right to break the laws.
-
Ahem...
Yes, I suppose I do come off as a bit of a Gloomy Gus regarding political affairs.
But the least I can do in appreciation of Glenn's heroic work is to publicly acknowledge that he indeed possesses the gift of softening the hardened heart. Perhaps my relationship with Glenn is comparable to that of Scrooge and the Ghost of Christmas Present; I still fear that I am too old to change, but I appreciate the pains he takes to demonstrate that public pressure can produce positive results, while unchecked apathy and despair never will.
So I humbly endeavor to profit by his example-- at least to the extent of not throwing out the embryo with the amniotic fluid.