digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at firedoglake.com

Frustrations On FISA

firedoglake.com — With the Senate's failure to stand up for the rule of law today, the ball goes back to the House's court if the SSCI bill passes. Help push the House in the rule of law direction: please sign this petition asking House members to support the RESTORE Act, and not cave to pressure from the Senate on telecom immunity...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -5/+12Hate to have to say I told you so on this one:

    "Retro-active immunity will be granted. Warrantless domestic spying will be made "legal". And you will still be apologizing for the poor leadership of Obama and Clinton on this issue. Mark my words on that." - Napoleone, February 1, 2008
    http://digg.com/politics/Cheney_We_Haven_t_Violate ...

    I swear to ***** everything that's holy, I will vandalize every goddamn piece of equipment I come across that has an AT&T, Verizon, Sprint or T-Mobile logo on it.
    • swrostmore, on 02/13/2008, -2/+10Obama voted "aye" on the Dodd (no immunity) amendment today. Clinton was not present to vote. McCain voted "no" along with every other republican.
      • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -5/+7Barack Obama stands to be the future President of the United States of America. Do you not think he had the political clout necessary to have a chump like Harry Reid table this legislation? A future president is not to be ignored. This legislation will directly affect the authority of the presidency for the next 6 years. His voice would have been a powerful one if he'd truly wanted to have it heard.

        His "Ayes" and his "Nays" were all about covering his ass and his campaign. Nothing more.
        • triplehelix, on 02/13/2008, -2/+3if he was the clear nominee you might have a point.
      • spankaccount, on 02/13/2008, -2/+2One more reason to LOVE McCain.
    • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -1/+19Bury it all you want, Obama/Clinton supporters, but who do you think it is that's been given the authority to spy on Americans without warrants? It's the next president that's been given that authority. And it's been given to him or her by a Democratically control Congress that did NOT have to bring this bill up for a vote.

      You're all deceiving yourselves. You're all acting against your own interests for the sake of partisan politics. SNAP OUT OF IT. You owe these people no loyalty. They've betrayed you time after time after time after ***** time. How many of Bush's crimes does this Congress have to make legal before you realize they're acting against you? How many times are you going to fall for their good-cop bad-cop routine? Don't you see that both parties are delivering you the same rotten goods?

      God damn. It's so damn frustrating that you people are so blind to their games. You're my neighbors. I'm not trying to make fun of any of you. I'm not trying to keep you away from something good. I'm just trying to wake you. Look at the facts. Look at how things unfold each and every time.

      1. Bush commits crime.
      2. Democrats cry foul.
      3. It's revealed that Democrats knew of crimes before they were made public.
      4. Democrats tell Bush he'll be held to account.
      5. Bush says the "war on terror" demands that he break the law.
      6. Democrats tell Bush to come to the Congress if he needs new unconstitutional powers.
      7. Democrats legalize Bush's crimes and grant retro-active immunity
      8. The Constitution gets *****.

      How many times is this same scenario gonna have to play out before you people notice a ***** trend? It happened with Habeas Corpus, it happened with Posse Comitatus, it happened now with warrant-less domestic spying, and I won't be surprised if it happens with torture.

      You people need to wake the ***** up.
      • Bronnster, on 02/13/2008, -1/+1A real Patriot! Thank you Sir! Agreed - Vandalism: An act of Dissent against Corporate fascism!
      • Timetheos, on 02/13/2008, -0/+1I have to disagree with you on this one. The main reasons for this bill are to protect the Bush and telecom empires. Republicans support the former, and corrupt Dems support the latter.
    • mostlysane, on 02/13/2008, -1/+1unfortunately this is the capitalist USA - while vandalizing all that equipment would certainly feel good for a number of reasons, the fact is that it would only result in higher 'operational' costs that of course must be passed to the consumer so that the corporate bottom line doesnt take a hit
      • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -0/+1It's not about hurting the corporate bottom line, it's about sending a message that needs to be sent.
        • mostlysane, on 02/14/2008, -0/+1no argument here about the need to send it... only very skeptical that it would be heard
          of course, if everyone who saw a piece of equipment that had been messaged paid that message forward...
          /fnord
  • wheninva1, on 02/13/2008, -2/+14I'd like to point out, Obama for FOR the amendment to strike telecom immunity from the bill.
    Hillary didn't bother to vote.
    • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -12/+3I'd like to point out he could have done far more than that, and you're lying to yourself and to everyone else if you think he couldn't.

      Both he and Hillary could have had Harry Reid table this legislation and yet they didn't. They stand to become president next year, and this legislation is about executive powers. They were, by virtue of their future office, in a position to kill this law, yet they did not exert any pressure on Reid. They're both failures.
      • swrostmore, on 02/13/2008, -3/+8I'd like to point out that you'd be flaming Obama no matter what he did. Some people are never satisfied.

        "by virtue of their future office" my ass. You sir are seriously deluded if you think that makes a difference.
      • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -8/+3I'd like to point out that you'd be apologizing for Obama no matter what he did. You're a political hack.

        And you're stupendously naive if you think his potentially being the future president doesn't make a difference in politics. That anyone would deny that just goes to show their ignorance or their disingenousness.
        • swrostmore, on 02/13/2008, -4/+7please cite ANY precedent whatsoever for "potentially being the future president" giving a senator MORE POWER THAN THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER. What the ***** are you on? Are you joking?
      • Timetheos, on 02/13/2008, -0/+1No. Unfortunately, Reid has had a tendency to care more about Republicans think than what Democrats think.

        I'm about ready to start donating to a primary challanger for him.
    • Spoomeister, on 02/13/2008, -0/+2Could have been worse. Clinton could have voted "present'.
  • EllieElliott, on 02/13/2008, -1/+20the American people fiddled while the Constitution burned
    • colonelbuckshot, on 02/13/2008, -0/+3The American people aren't the only ones. Only last week French parliament passed a Euro-federalism treaty that was rejected by their own people three years ago. Politicians basically aren't really interested in democracy
  • AshScholl, on 02/13/2008, -1/+12I am SHOCKED that Lieberman voted with the republicans, SHOCKED I tell you
    • matrixbandit, on 02/13/2008, -1/+1Yea, where's an oven when you need one. Am I right? heheh, *braces for backlash* [/overthetop racism]
  • principle, on 02/13/2008, -3/+8Freedom died on Tuesday, February 12, 2008. Sadly, most people in US do not even have a clue to what has just happened to them. But that does not matter, because the worst is yet to come. The United States of America is next. Bush will suspend the Constitution soon do to catastrophic failure of the Fed’s banking system. He will then proclaim himself as a ruler for life of the North American Union.

    There is not even a glimmer of hope left.
    • joshuabowers, on 02/13/2008, -5/+1My! How radiant and shiny your hat is, sir! Might I inquire as to the material it is fabricated from?
  • dkern, on 02/13/2008, -1/+10Its not a conspiracy when its true, people. Do not give up your weapons- you're gonna need them soon!
  • dkern, on 02/13/2008, -4/+1btw, here is a telecom company that told congress and Buchco to go ***** themselves and apparently they have awesome service: http://www.credomobile.com/
    • swrostmore, on 02/13/2008, -0/+5Nope, Credo Mobile uses the Sprint network. The only major telco to reject warrantless surveillance of their network was QWest.
      • MaceSoul, on 02/13/2008, -0/+2How exactly do they reject it? They don't contol the entire length of the fiber carrying the signal, nor do they control the satellites they connect through.
        • Napoleone, on 02/13/2008, -0/+2They control the switchboards.
          • MaceSoul, on 02/14/2008, -0/+1Ooooh. Ok. Well in that case you're safe. (note to everyone else: this is why the government has gotten away with it for 50+ years)
    • TrevaLVF, on 02/13/2008, -0/+4Sorry, dkern, but swrostmore is right about that. I read something at opednews.com about it.
  • Gabberwok, on 02/13/2008, -1/+10We all knew the Republicans would vote for this bill, but here's a list of the Democrats (and of course Joe Lieberman) who betrayed us. I think a primary challenge should be in store for all of them. In the words of Anonymous, do not forgive and do not forget. Seriously, what was Dianne Feinstein thinking? She's a Democratic senator from California... she should know better. This vote alone is worth removing people from office for... P.S. Hillary Clinton is included in this list, but to be fair, she abstained. As this was a vote on cloture, abstaining is equivalent to nay, but she should have been there to support the filibuster.

    Sen. Blanche Lincoln D AR
    Sen. Mark Pryor D AR
    Sen. Dianne Feinstein D CA
    Sen. Ken Salazar D CO
    Sen. Thomas Carper D DE
    Sen. Bill Nelson D FL
    Sen. Daniel Inouye D HI
    Sen. B. Evan Bayh D IN
    Sen. Mary Landrieu D LA
    Sen. Barbara Mikulski D MD
    Sen. Claire McCaskill D MO
    Sen. Max Baucus D MT
    Sen. Kent Conrad D ND
    Sen. Ben Nelson D NE
    Sen. Hillary Clinton D NY (Abstain)
    Sen. Robert Casey D PA
    Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse D RI
    Sen. Tim Johnson D SD
    Sen. Jim Webb D VA
    Sen. Herbert Kohl D WI
    Sen. John Rockefeller D WV
    Sen. Joseph Lieberman I CT
  • HHP2K, on 02/13/2008, -0/+2On a bit of a lighter note, I saw SCSI in the description before I actually read it letter for letter. :P
  • spankaccount, on 02/13/2008, -0/+6Us Republicans need to thank the Democrats (again) for this. Thank you!!! We couldn't have done it without you!
  • MaceSoul, on 02/13/2008, -7/+1Didn't stand up for the rule of law? What they're doing is completely legal. You all just can't get it through your thick heads.
    • WoollyMittens, on 02/13/2008, -0/+1If you make the ***** laws, you can make anything legal. Spying on someone without a warrant is not legal. It just isn't.
  • Spoomeister, on 02/13/2008, -0/+8It's over to the House? So, it's up to Pelosi?
    Well, we're *****.
  • mrn111, on 02/13/2008, -0/+2This is some *****!!!
  • Okkido, on 02/13/2008, -1/+2This is funny. Fisa means fart in swedish.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.