I can understand your saying he has lost my volunteer and/or financial support. I don't understand saying "Lost my vote." When you give up your vote, you either lose your voice or help America on the downward path to disaster. Why do you want to do that?

Glenn--

Nothing wrong with quoting Shakespeare. Or Eugne V. Debs, for that matter; here's what he said to a crowd of supporters in 1910:

I am not a Labor Leader; I do not want you to follow me or anyone else; if you are looking for a Moses to lead you out of this capitalist wilderness, you will stay right where you are. I would not lead you into the promised land if I could, because if I led you in, some one else would lead you out. You must use your heads as well as your hands, and get yourself out of your present condition.

That is as true today as ever,

the author of the diary, Mr. Stone, that Glenn sited. I've never seen him before (I'm not an avid reader of Kos, more a casual one). But for one of the best over there, if not the best, read Hunters submission http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/21/1545/63989

Dear Glenn Greenwald:

I'm happy to see that your "Odd Bedfellows" PAC is having such success. I myself have contributed.

How is it governed? Who's on the Board? How are decusions made?

Thanks,

A Fan

I should know the senate rules better than I do. It seems that, even if a bill makes it to the calendar, there should be ways to derail it, but I'm simply not knowlegable enough to have my bearings on this. filibuster is still available by all accounts, but I wonder what other options are theoretically available.

It's a very bitter irony that our esteemed members of Congress - after spitting in our faces and rubber stamping FISA next week - will make it home in time to celebrate the Fourth of July, using the Constitution as kindling for their oh-so perfect BBQs.

You realize that when you tell me "Get over yourself, commit to _real_ action, and I'll be impressed" you are asking me to vote for a candidate who stands for some of the most radical policies of the Bush administration? Well, what impresses you apparently doesn't impress me. Not impressed by wishful thinking masquerading as some sort of pseudo-realpolitik.

Actually, no, I didn't tell you to vote for Obama, though I think you should, for reasons I will go into below. I said you should do all in your power to make sure the evil McCain is not elected. There's a difference.

I said that, for a political shift to occur, Nader would have to win "eight or nine percent". You then tell the that this supposedly already happened in 2000. Which is false. Nader won, if I remember correctly, about 2.7% of the vote then. Which was not enough. Eight percent, on the other hand, would be enough.

Pretty much everyone agrees that Nader cost Gore the election. That was my point. I noticed your "eight or nine percent" remark after I posted, and I apologize for the misinformation, which is not my style.

However, you just pulled that number out of nowhere, and offer no analysis to support it. The Democrats lost the presidency as a result of the 2000 Nader voters. What greater consequence is there than that? What change has it effected?

As for McCain and true evil, well I think of him as more of a clownish sort of figure than an evil one, but I agree that he would make for a very bad president.

He supports pointless mass murder and mass torture. What exactly could be more evil than that?

Obama would make for a better president, but by embracing the Bush administration's authoritarianism, he is still squarely outside the range of acceptable choices.

Well, I hate to break it to you, but you just might not have any more choices if McCain gets elected. The Republicans have already stolen two presidential elections, and God only knows how many congressional elections. They've saddled us with unverifiable, no receipt black box voting machines. They've illegally suppressed the Democratic vote in every way they can. They've attempted to criminalize being a Democrat, with blatantly political prosecutions.

And they've gotten away with it, carte blanche, not in small part due to people like you, who can't see the forest for the trees.

I wanted to express my gratitude for Glenn Greenwald's unrelenting coverage of this issue and, perhaps more importantly, the tangible actions he has taken to fight this egregious legislation. As an Obama supporter, I just sent a letter to Bill Burton expressing my dismay with Senator Obama's decision to pull a political about-face and support this bill. Though there is little I feel I can do otherwise, I will be re-routing the (admittedly paltry) funds I've been donating to the Obama campaign into donations supporting those elected officials who openly opposed the "compromise." Salon readers owe a debt of gratitude to Greenwald for keeping us so well and objectively informed. This is what journalism should be.

I, too, am curious about the notions Dean put forward re: ambiguities concerning future charges for the telcoms. I'm not an attorney, but it seems that if they can get a pass on civil litigation because of this boneheaded business that The Village Idiot TOLD them warrantless domestic spying was just fine, couldn't the same meme be tossed around if criminal liability were tackled. (Not that it will be.)

As always, well turned article, Mr. G.

I was just about to donate to the Obama campaign, but sent the money to support the Act Bleu campaign against this bill instead.

Nipping potential sore spot issues in the bud, while protecting what could potentially be his spying apparatus.

People claim that principles go out the window when being practical or when politics is involved, and then they play apologist when these things happen. It is absurd.

I'm not sure what can be done besides filibuster, which is of course unlikely. But what CAN be done by the next US President is to encourage the House and/or the Senate to "overturn" this retched FISA bill and reinstate our civil liberties provided in the Constitution. It matters not if this "sunsets" in 2012. To my knowledge, Congress can just as easily undo a bad bill as it can create one.

But I'm certainly not holding my breath. It would take a real leader for real change to push for this whether it be from a member of Congress or the President.