I was going to make the first political donation of my life next week (on payday, I'm poor), to the Obama campaign. Instead I'll be sending it to ActBlue to fight this amnesty bill. And I won't be donating to Obama ever if he doesn't take a hard stand against amnesty - including a filibuster, if necessary.

I want the remaining funds (including my small contribution) to be used against Barrow, since he has an opponent in an upcoming primary, and thus the campaign can actually result in ridding the congress of a Blue Dog. Plus it would inform Obama that there are lots of progressives watching him closely.

The Wall Street Journal has an article out on the proposed legislation ...

The deal, if adopted, would bring the spy activities of a controversial National Security Agency surveillance program permanently under the law. That would allow the government, in certain circumstances, to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens without a specific warrant. It would also expand government spy powers to monitor communications between the U.S. and overseas to collect intelligence on topics beyond terrorism.

What is this "beyond terrorism" stuff? You mean they will be able to listen in on anything? Out of curiousity, is Canada considered "overseas"?

Critical to sealing the deal was a compromise that would grant conditional immunity to telecommunications companies for assistance they provided from September 2001 through January 2007. If the companies can show a federal district court judge "substantial evidence" they received a written request from the attorney general or head of an intelligence agency stating the president authorized the surveillance and determined it to be lawful, the cases against them will be dismissed.

"Substantial evidence" my ass. It's akin to getting a note from your mom to miss gym class.

I'm so angry, I could spit.

I would provide a link to the full article, but when I tried it, it didn't work. I accessed it through a google search.

The fix is in. The fourth amendment as we've known it will be no more.

My congress woman is no help....from Heather Wilson Website:

Wilson Statement on FISA Agreement June 18, 2008

Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Heather Wilson (R-NM) today made the following statement on the pending agreement on reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA):

“We appear to have an agreement with Majority Leader Hoyer on FISA.

“We will see this week whether pro-defense Democrats can prevail over the far left members of their own party and allow the bill to come to the floor for a vote. I hope common sense will prevail so that we can close this intelligence gap.”

I phoned the Obama campaign, got nothing but full voicemail. Very frustrating!!!

"I don't know what kind of game Obama is playing, but using his remarkable brand to protect conservative Democrats is a move reminiscent of Nancy Pelosi endorsing Al Wynn."

It's a move reminiscent of all popular politicians who lend their political capital to others who need it. It's a way of getting them to owe you favors. Really, that's not hard to figure out.

There's nothing unusual about Obama wanting incumbent legislators in his pocket. What's striking is that his endorsement is so completely tone-deaf regarding telecom amnesty.

If I had to guess, I would say that his campaign — and the party leadership in general — is bunkered down in this mentality that telecom amnesty is the pet issue of a permanently marginalized radical minority among his supporters, paying attention to whom can only harm them.

But in order to continue to believe that, they have to be deliberately ignoring the mounting evidence that telecom amnesty is an active issue for their constituents and is a real factor in real elections. Presumably some well-heeled people are speaking loudly and persuasively in their ears.

So let's speak even more persuasively.

That phrase, from the WSJ article that LunaSea posted (above) could be a careless turn of phrase...or it could be an object lesson in tyranny.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/19/AR2008061901545.html?hpid=topnews

The only thing conceivably worse than an intrusive, unchecked federal government is collusion between such government and the largest media companies in the land.

General Systems Theory

Fascinating stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemic

Yeah, there is a difference. "Systematic was a hard rock band from San Jose, California" and "systematics is the study of the diversity of life on the planet Earth, both past and present, and the relationships among living things through time."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_systems_theory -- L.W.M.

You are correct, the problem is systemic. People are realizing that fact and, as a result, fewer and fewer people are listening to you.

Feel free to keep digging your hole though.

By "permanently marginalized radical minority", do you mean "We, the People"?

As usual, it has been very educational to read the comments and learn about both sides of this important issue. Political decisions such as the one Obama made in regard to Barrow, are a balancing act. I have been strongly opposed to retroactive immunity, and contributed yesterday as so many others have, and believe strongly in Glenn’s taking action against Blue Dog Democrats. I also believe, as you do, the only way to really solve a problem is to not become too involved in the symptoms and instead work on finding the basic problem.

I agree with you Jack, that if we really want to change a system that corrupts politicians who started out with very high integrity and intentions, we have to change the system. When we get mired in the symptoms, we make the task extremely difficult, especially if we blame people who have to work in a broken system. The most progressive thing we progressives could do is to pass legislation that provides public financing for elections and makes it possible for anyone of any means to be elected and then not have to worry about money as the primary means to get reelected. The money is corrupting the M$M and preventing our government from enacting such important legislation as single payer health care. I fail to understand why we progressives can’t give more importance to publicly financed elections when so many good things could happen.