Given our esteemed host’s continuing interest in the Terrorist Surveillance Program and the recent wrangling over proposed amendments to FISA containing telecom immunity, I note the Democrats who punted the issue into 2008, would like to punt it into 2009:
Faced with the growing likelihood that Congress will not meet a looming deadline to approve critical electronic-eavesdropping legislation, the Bush administration is working on a short-term fix–a temporary extension to a law enacted last summer amid Democratic complaints that the White House had muscled the bill through.
***
Some Senate Democrats are discussing another alternative: seeking a temporary extension to the current law for a year. The point of this option, as explained by a congressional official who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive deliberations, would be to postpone the whole process of revising the electronic-surveillance law until after the next president is inaugurated. Democrats in favor of such a move believe it would kick the decision down the road until, they hope, the party has control of the White House as well as both houses of Congressâ€â€strengthening the Democrats’ hand in writing a surveillance bill much more to their liking.
The problem for those Democrats is that the GOP will likely block a one-year extension of the law, leaving them in the same position as last month — with a bipartisan majority in favor of amendments including the immunity provision. It is also an issue that Democrats would probably prefer not to discuss on the campaign trail.
How happy do you think Hillary would be to be inaugurated President, and then have to fight terrorism without an electronic surveillance program? That’s almost hilarious would it not be that it would damage our national security.
There are no adults in the Democratic Party. That’s obvious.
“The problem for those Democrats is that the GOP will likely block a one-year extension of the law”
Dubya said he’d veto anything without immunity. Apparently immunity by the 8th is more important than the emergency authority that the protect america act gave last august.
Because he thinks that people should not be punished for cooperating with the governent at a time of national emergency, and that doing so would set a very bad precedent? Based on the cloture vote last month, there’s bipartisan agreement on that.
“Because he thinks that people should not be punished for cooperating with the governent at a time of national emergency,”
Thats a great big argument to have, including finding out more about the cooperation, to see how deserved it is. But immunity doesn’t have to happen pronto, like the extension of the Protect America Act. The PAA didn’t have immunity. And it will be a while before people have to pay out. Thats why the veto threat is so odd.
“Based on the cloture vote last month, there’s bipartisan agreement on that.”
In the senate. The house passed a bill without immunity. I’m sure you can also get agreement to pass a bill without immunity in the senate. Thats why the veto threat and the lobbying.
The cloture vote disproves that, as does the threat of a filibuster. Try reading. It helps.
“The cloture vote disproves that, as does the threat of a filibuster.”
That a bill with immunity passes doesn’t disprove the fact that a bill without immunity would also pass. The Protect America Act passed, under a supposed exigency, it should be able to pass again, specially if the exigency still exists.
But now you say the GOP is threatening to filibuster an extension of the same bill we urgently needed in august? Got a link? I searched for FISA filibusters and only got Dodd.
The Newsweek article linked above:
I think those Dems have a good read on their own situation. Try reading. It helps.
“some Democrats on Capitol Hill question whether the current GOP minority”
So no GOP threat to block the Protect America Act, just Democrats shivering. Thats much more unsurprising than a GOP threat. Thanks indeed.
“Try reading. It helps”
The GOP threat which passed the Protect America Act will now block it. Gotcha!
I appreciate all the other bloggers, and this post is also a good one,
BUT DAMMIT! WHERE IS JEFF G?????? I COME TO THIS SITE EVERY DAY JUST TO SEE HIS NON-MARKED POST TITLE, AND EVERY DAY ALL i SEE ARE TITLES WITH OTHER BLOGGERS’ NAMES IN BRACKETS IN THE TITLE. JEFF GOLDSTEIN, WHERE ARE YOUUUUUUU!!!! THIS IS AN ELECTION YEAR, PLS DON’T ABANDON US NOW!!!!!!!!
I hope he and his family are alright.
Your position is that the Dems are irrational in their perception of their GOP colleagues.
Gotcha!
CS,
I would really, really, really like to see JeffG retake the helm. I have not heard from him since his return from vacation, but have received fwd’ed tips for topics, so he is not dead, anyway.
My hope is that he is laying the foundation for the “new and improved” PW, with video and such, and will return soon.
“Your position is that the Dems are irrational in their perception of their GOP colleagues.”
I’m not so worried about unnamed “some democrats” in this article. I think the supposed exigency of the Protect America Act will be seen as much more serious than this anonymous concern. And worst comes to worst, we dont get it, because of a GOP filibuster or a Bush veto.
Congress will pass at least an extension, and ultimately telecom liability. They know that a failure to do so hurts them in the polls and will want to get it off the table before it becomes an issue in the presidential campaign.
Because he thinks that people should not be punished for cooperating with the governent at a time of national emergency, and that doing so would set a very bad precedent?
Admittedly tangent, but the Democrats suing Democrats in Nevada – using lawsuits to disenfranchise, punish, manipulate, just popped into my head
SPQR,
I’m a little late to the party, but, about this:
“There are no adults in the Democratic Party. That’s obvious.”
Unfortunately, there are damn few adults left in the whole country. Be they left OR right.
Who are these assholes that are masquerading as Republicans? As far as throwing money down a black hole goes, I don’t think that anyone can hold a candle to the “Repubs”.
Even GWB, who I have given more leeway than any other politician in my life, acts more like a liberal than any liberal I know. GWB has finally convinced me that he is a liberal who opposes abortion(because he must), and wants to kick ass in Iraq.
I want to kick ass in Iraq too, but what the hell was letting the population go insane and loot EVERYTHING about? I STILL can’t understand that.
And what was this crap with the McCain-Feingold bill? I think it is called “passing the buck”. Bush didn’t have the balls to veto it? I don’t know, but I think the words: “Congress shall make no law..” are pretty clear. But Bush passed the buck, stupidly believing that the Supreme Court had justices who actually would take the Constitution at it’s word. Hey! The Marxists might vote against him if he tried to uphold the crystal clear words of the Constitution.
Awwww. I guve up.
McCain? The next president? This man is out of comtrol.
Huckabee? More like Hucksterbee to my mind.
Romney? George Bush from Massachusettes.
Ron Paul? Don’t make me laugh.
Guilianni? Many differences with this man, but we have all seen what he can do. Anyone who has the experience to compare Dinkin’s NYC to Rudy’s NYC is blown away by what Rudy did to that stinking Hellhole.
Personal issues? Who cares? I’ve got enough problems of my own, without worrying about whether Rudy is a God or a human. All I know is what I have seen as a result of Rudy being mayor of NYC. The man has brass balls, and if you want to whine about how “mean” he is, it’s time for you to jump om Kucinich’s bandwagon.
“Poor little criminals”. It’s not their fault, so they should be left alone to wreak any havoc they want to.
I don’t know. If someone refuses to grow up (a burgeoning problem in this country) it’s not my problem. It’s THEIR problem. Let them find out the hard way.
Been there, done that. And somehow found that reality is the only cure for liberalism.
“Congress will pass at least an extension,”
Good. Thats a different tune than before:
“The problem for those Democrats is that the GOP will likely block a one-year extension of the law”
And closer to what I said.
I do agree with you that ultimately some immunity will arrive. The more we find out about the lawbreaking, and the closer we get to it being so large that it would bankrupt telecoms companies, the closer we get to immunity. But there’s no need to hurry, because that eventuality is at least a few years away. And there’s plenty that the victims are entitled to that the telecoms can afford to give.
O/T ,any of you following this . Ezra Levant vs the Alberta Human Rights Council . Mark Steyn is next .
“And there’s plenty that the victims are entitled to that the telecoms can afford to give.”
And there’s plenty that the lawyers are entitled to that the telecoms and their customers can afford to give.
FTFY.
“And there’s plenty that the lawyers are entitled to that the telecoms and their customers can afford to give.”
Customers are the ones that have had their info turned over, they’re the ones gettin!
So their lawyers are all working pro bono?
Who are the victims andy?
Well, we obviously have to monitor terrorist communications and we obviously have to have the phone companies help in this so they obviously have to have protection from being bankrupted when they do so. It isn’t rocket science and there is bipartisan agreement on the basics. The hold up is the Democratic leadership and the BDS fringe that they pander to. To the best of my knowledge no one has been hurt in any substantive way by anything the government or phone companies have done and I don’t believe the critics are earnest in their professions to the contrary. Unfortunately, this has absolutely no relevance on trial lawyer’s abilities to extort a huge settlement (see the existence of John Edward’s mansion if you have any doubts). The fact is that the left used to count on the courts to impose that which they could not get people to vote for. Now that totalitarianism has failed due to there being fewer activist judges inhabiting the higher levels of the judicial system, they have had to fall back on bullying by depending on trial lawyers to bankrupt those whom they disagree with. Al Queda couldn’t damage our telecommunications industry to the extent that the trial lawyers can. Unfortunately, both groups seem to have about the same level of self-restraint.
Those Ezra Levant videos made me forget there was a writer’s strike cause it was so cool to watch that sad little woman get put in her place like that. Canada needs to stop being so showy about how their highly refined sense of moral supremacy masks their highly refined inferiority complex and this stuff would be less of a problem.
“Who are the victims andy?”
The people who’s statutory rights have been violated.
“So their lawyers are all working pro bono?”
I don’t think the EFF is charging its client. Its a non-profit.
Thanks andy. For once again confirming your cluelessness. It isn’t too late to get into a decent trade school.
“Customers are the ones that have had their info turned over, they’re the ones gettin!”
You just can’t make this shit up. But before I leave this thread, as a customer, I want to say fuck you very much andy for supporting the assholes that are about to make my phone and internet rates go up.
It would be nice if they could do it without violating our God given rights to privacy. Seems one of the two will win, secret and illegal wiretaps and our rights; and I bet it’s the guys with the bigger guns who will tell us what to do. It matters not what we think. Why are we putting into office these Socialists that allow this crap? if they vote on this to keep the immunity provisions, they deserve to be voted out, it’s just that simple. Read an interesting quote from a Soviet general who says they never would have invaded the USA, because there are 20 or 50 million guns over here. Why are we just letting this happen?