Democrats to Offer New Surveillance Rules: Bill Aims to Meet Privacy and Security Concerns

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: Washington Post

By Ellen Nakashima
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 7, 2007; Page A04

House Democrats plan to introduce a bill this week that would let a secret court issue one-year "umbrella" warrants to allow the government to intercept e-mails and phone calls of foreign targets and would not require that surveillance of each person be approved individually. The bill is likely to resurrect controversy that erupted this summer when Congress, under White House pressure, rushed through a temporary emergency law that expanded the government's authority to conduct foreign surveillance on U.S. soil without a warrant. The Protect America Act, which expires in February, has been criticized as being too broad and lacking effective court oversight.

The Democrats' legislation, drafted by the Intelligence and Judiciary committee chairmen, is aimed to reconcile civil liberties, privacy and national security concerns. It would overhaul the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a 1978 law amended many times that the Bush administration argues has been outstripped by technology....

The bill would require the Justice Department inspector general to audit the use of the umbrella warrant and issue quarterly reports to a special FISA court and to Congress, according to congressional aides involved in drafting the legislation. It would clarify that no court order is required for intercepting communications between people overseas that are routed through the United States. It would specify that the collections of e-mails and phone calls could come only from communications service providers -- as opposed to hospitals, libraries or advocacy groups. And it would require a court order when the government is seeking communications of a person inside the United States, but only if that person is the target. A target is defined as a person, group, cell or government of interest to a foreign intelligence investigation.

"Democrats have made huge strides in making improvements over the Protect America Act," said Tim Sparapani, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "Yet we think that the Constitution requires as a minimum that an individualized warrant is required whenever an American's communications are targeted. This is going to be the big sticking point."...

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/06/AR2007100601265.html?hpid=moreheadlines

[Mojorabbit]

1. Good God.

Wasn't the uproar enough last time? Will they ever get it. I am really really losing hope.

[madfloridian]

2. "e-mails and phone calls could come only from communications service providers"

Good grief what are they doing to us?

[madfloridian]

3. The ACLU was right all along.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1553

They said new powers would be given. They said a train wreck was coming.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1537

We are going to act so much like the Republicans to win the national security creds that there will soon be no difference.

[Kagemusha]

4. No, Washington Post, what you are describing is not a "foreign target."

That 1st paragraph wording strikes me as completely wrong. Let's look at the last two sentences of the third paragraph.

"And it would require a court order when the government is seeking communications of a person inside the United States, but only if that person is the target. A target is defined as a person, group, cell or government of interest to a foreign intelligence investigation."

If these were true foreign targets, no warrant would be required. A person who is working for a foreign government on US soil can be spied on now with no warrant whatsoever. Of course that is the case. But a person, group or cell "of interest to a foreign intelligence investigation" need not be foreign. They just need to be of interest to a foreign intelligence investigation.

What the hell is "foreign" about that?... Again: If they were foreign, no warrant would be required. A warrant is required because they are NOT foreign, they are just "of interest" in an investigation regarding foreign intelligence... which means, they are domestic, US persons.

And these domestic, US persons will be getting one year umbrella warrants, not as individuals, not with cause having to be shown to a court for individuals, but purely on the basis of being associated with a group - any group - that comes under the government's hostile eye and is declared to be "of interest".

This is plainly unconstitutional.

[Thor_MN]

6. hmm... Maybe I'm misreading this

"And it would require a court order when the government is seeking communications of a person inside the United States, but only if that person is the target."

Doesn't this phrasing imply that no warrant is required if the person is not a target? Or am I wrong in being suspicious that Constitution and Bill of Rights no longer can be assumed to grant us freedom from search without a warrant?

I think what they are going for is that no warrant is required to gather intel if both parties are outside the US. The Umbrella covers spying if a non US citizen inside the US is communicating with someone outside the US. A warrant is required to spy on a non US citizen's communication within the US and a warrant is always required to spy on a US citizens communication within the US.

However, all it would take in this day and age is a little program to divert your call through a router outside the US to make it fair game. Hell, through a router in a foreign embassy in DC and it's open season on any call.

[PSPS]

5. Another misleading WP headline. The article describes just the opposite.

[Orsino]

7. Worse and worse. n/t

[pattmarty]

8. Interesting subject to start here is when did fascism actually start in this country?

[soothsayer]

9. 1947 and 1949 with the creation of the National Security act and the CIA, I believe.

Catherine Austin Fitts sums it up here:

Since 1995 the Federal government has been required by law to produce audited financial statements. I belonged to a group who helped get the laws passed, yet to date the federal government has never once obeyed those laws. I co-authored an article about this called "Fascinating & lucrative patriotism, The negative return economy: a discourse on America's black budget" at http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0408/S00277.htm.

Under The National Security Act of 1947 and the CIA Act of 1949, we have created a legal mechanism to borrow through the Treasury, combine that money with the proceeds of criminal activities, & use it for intelligence & military operations -- no oversight by Congress, no transparency to the American people.

The financial machinery is out of control.

Yet the U.S. government continues to borrow more & more money, no matter how they behave. They produce no audited financial statements, & comply with none of their own laws for appropriations & management. In spite of $4 trillion undocumented "adjustments" that we know of since fiscal 1998, the banks continue to transact & Congress continues to appropriate. There's no mechanism to shut off the money, & the creditors continue to loan.

What is the reality? The people charged with saying No! Stop! are making so much money, why should they stop anything? The ugly question is, What's next?

MUCH MUCH MORE http://www.solari.com/articles/MoneyChangersInterview.htm

[Mojorabbit]

10. kick

[PassingFair]

11. At least there's no immunity in this.

"The bill would not include a key administrative objective: immunity for telecommunications firms facing lawsuits in connection with the administration's post-Sept. 11 surveillance program. House Democrats have said that as long as the administration withholds requested documents explaining the basis for the warrantless surveillance program, they cannot consider immunity for firms alleged to have facilitated it."

And this:

""It's a tough call," he said. "If they were breaking the law, it was not out of any greed -- there was no remuneration or benefit to their business. It was from a sense of patriotism and interest in protecting against terrorist attack."

YEAH.....it was from a "sense" of bootlicking COWARDICE!

[PassingFair]

13. It appears I posted too soon....

Weak kneed bastards!

[gateley]

12. K&R nt

[FourScore]

14. Democrats Seem Ready to Extend Wiretap Powers

Source: NYT

Two months after insisting that they would roll back broad eavesdropping powers won by the Bush administration, Democrats in Congress appear ready to make concessions that could extend some crucial powers given to the National Security Agency.

Administration officials say they are confident they will win approval of the broadened authority that they secured temporarily in August as Congress rushed toward recess. Some Democratic officials concede that they may not come up with enough votes to stop approval...

SNIP

...A Democratic bill to be proposed on Tuesday in the House would maintain for several years the type of broad, blanket authority for N.S.A. eavesdropping that the administration secured in August for six months...

SNIP

...A competing proposal in the Senate, still being drafted, may be even closer in line with the administration plan, with the possibility of including retroactive immunity for telecommunications utilities that participated in the once-secret program to eavesdrop without court warrants...



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/washington/09nsa.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

[OzarkDem]

15. Bush and Hoyer are on the same page

why in the world do the Vichy Dems think they need to go along with this?

[NoodleyAppendage]

21. Because they are COWARDS. Sociopathic cowards.

They care more about their reelection and personal power than the well-being of our Constitutional rights.

J

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

16. My Senator's (Salazar) office maintained they hadn't received their talking points when I called

2 months ago after out of the blue wiretapping number one.

Hmmm, they just can't resist, can they? MKJ

[midnight]

17. If we wanted our lifes to be open, we would not need privacy.

The people who vote for this should be kept on a list of do not call back the next time they run for office.

[grahamhgreen]

42. Everyone in congress should allow us to record all of their phone calls, emails, etc.

and post them here.

[MannyGoldstein]

18. And Again

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2002892&mesg_id=2002934

[NoodleyAppendage]

19. NO MORE. That's it. What's the point in even supporting Dems in Congress?

Dem representatives, please stand for something right and true (like the Constitution) for ONCE...please! Think less of your own re-election and more about what is necessary to maintain our democracy. There's a reason why Congressional approval is at 9%. No one likes fascists (Repukes) and their sycophantic lapdogs (that's you, Dems).

What has happened to our country and political party?

J

[liberalla]

50. I'm supporting the 72 Congressional Progressive Caucus members

(Progressive) Dems Postpone Rollout Of Controversial Wiretapping Bill

The CPC's Position on FISA Reform and Our Civil Liberties

Friday October 05, 2007

We, Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, fully recognizing that we live in a dangerous world but proud of, and deeply committed to, the values that have made the United States an exemplar for the world, affirm the following principles to guide consideration over the debate regarding surveillance of foreign intelligence. We hold that these principles represent the pillars by which America gives no quarter to terrorists who would do our country harm, while at the same time ensuring fidelity to the distinctively American commitment to the rule of law, the dignity of the individual, and separation of powers.


1. It should be the policy of the United States that the objective of any authorized program of foreign intelligence surveillance must be to ensure that American citizens and persons in America are secure in their persons, papers, and effects, but makes terrorists throughout the world feel insecure.

2. The best way to achieve these twin goals is to follow the rule of law. And the exclusive law to follow with respect to authorizing foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). As initially enacted by Congress, the exclusivity of FISA was unambiguous. Legislation must reiterate current law that FISA is the exclusive means to authorize foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil.

3. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) should be modernized to accommodate new technologies and to make clear that foreign to foreign communications are not subject to the FISA, even though modern technology enables that communication to be routed through the United States.

4. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is indispensable and must play a meaningful role in ensuring compliance with the law. This oversight should include, where possible, regular judicial approval and review of surveillance, of whose communications will be collected, of how it will be gathered, and of how content and other data in communications to and from the United States will be handled.

5. Congress must have regular access to information about how many U.S. communications are being collected and the authority to require court orders when it becomes clear that a certain program or surveillance of a target is scooping up communications of U.S. persons.

6. Once the government has reason to believe that a specific account, person or facility will have contact with someone in the United States, the government should be required to return to the FISC to obtain a court order for continued surveillance. Reliance on the FISC will help ensure the privacy of U.S. persons' communications.

7. Congress should not grant amnesty to any telecommunications company or to any other entity or individual for helping the NSA spy illegally on innocent Americans. The availability of amnesty will have the unintended consequence of encouraging telecommunications companies to comply with, rather than contest, illegal requests to spy on Americans.

8. Authorization to conduct foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil must never be made permanent. The threats to America’s security and the liberties of its people will change over time and require constant vigilance by the people’s representatives in Congress.

http://cpc.lee.house.gov/ ">Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC)
CPC 72 Member List
CPC Member Contact Information

[rubberducky]

20. Why , oh why do our dems always cave?

We have a pres with some seriously low numbers and they still cave. :wtf: is up with that?

[MannyGoldstein]

22. Because They Know That We Won't Vote For Anyone Else

So all they need to do is suck slightly less than the Republicans, and they win.

[FiveGoodMen]

74. And we encourage that every time we post, "I'm voting for a Dem no matter what so there!"

We tell them they have no need to listen to us, ever. And when someone objects, the rest of DU jumps on them: "You don't want a puke, do you? I'll bet you're a troll, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc..."

Of course, if those in congress cared about the constitution, we wouldn't even have to sign petitions, email or phone; they'd do the right thing because it is the right thing. But I guess we can pretty much forget about that, can't we?

[backscatter712]

24. Because they're in on the fascism game.

They're playing good cop/bad cop with us, the Dems being the "good cop" the GOP being the "bad cop."

I've said it before. This nation has a cancer, and I fear the prognosis is terminal.

You want my advice, get ready to fight or flee out of the country. You cannot work with these bastards. They don't care about you. All they care about is money and power, and they will kill all of us to get it.

[rubberducky]

28. Maybe it`s time we clean out the old time people in congress.

Get some new blood in there. So many of them seem to feel that they are entitled to those cushy jobs. Time for a wake up call.There is something wrong when we send them there to represent us, withall of our hopes and dreams for this country, and we end up with repub-lite.

[Kablooie]

38. Absolutely! That's why Obama is the only candidate I can support.

[JeanGrey]

58. If I had my way, we'd throw out the lot of them - all of them on both

sides. The only requirement other than being legal would be you'd never held office before. Sometimes I think using a lottery we couldn't do worse in picking reps.

[Le Taz Hot]

65. I hate to break the news to you

but its mostly the "new blood" that's doing this shit -- as in the "new Democrats." NO old-time Democrat would stand for this.

[bdamomma]

69. another good cleaning of the House and Senate is needed

all those Repigs that are resigning is our turn to get some fresh blood in there, people like Jim Webb and Sheldon Whitehouse.

[FiveGoodMen]

75. Careful, though. Congress got a LOT of new blood in '94, remember?

Meanwhile, some old-timers like Kennedy are still among the best.

It's really not old versus new. It's constitution-loving versus mother-fucking traitor.

[CoffeeCat]

29. You're spot on...

Anyone who actually believes that there is a functional two-party system any more,
is fooling themselves.

We've got Fascism. Somewhere along the line, the Dems caved into these bastards.

Right now, we've got the appearance of an opposition party, but hmmmmmm....isn't it
just sooo bewildering than the BushCo train wreck hasn't been in the least bit
affected by a Dem majority.

I'm sorry people, but this is NOT what a Congressional majority looks like.

Remember what the Republicans did when they won back a majority, with Newt leading
the way? They toured the frickin country with their "Contract With America" and
ran a PR blitz bonanza. They declared that they had a mandate and they NEVER
let up, NEVER gave in and they galvanized as a party.

What are the Dems doing? Oh, they write Bush letters when they're unhappy with his
murdering war. Then, if they get really motivated, they speak out and call Bush
a name or two.

NOTHING is being done and it's by design. It's not a mistake. It's not because the
Dems are weak. It's because most of them--especially the Dem power brokers--are in
on this country's demise.

Very sad.

[WarhammerTwo]

33. Then GRIP!

Get
Rid of
Incumbent
Politicians!

Man, I've posted this, like 6 times on various boards here and I'll keep posting it until it catches on. RE-ELECT NO ONE. EVER! Each year, whoever's in office, simply vote them out. Stop listening to political ads. Don't read any political literature. Anything that a candidate puts out as informational media, ignore! Just go into the booth and pull the lever for the "other guy" whoever that may be.

When the yahoos in office realize that no amount of money or spin will secure their jobs, they'll realize who the true power in this country is. Not the big money contributors or the insider lobbyists, but rather you and me! The little guys!

If these power hungry hamandeggers won't administer term limits (something the GOP promised when they won the Congressional majority many moons ago), then we should impose a limit on them: one! One term. That's it. No more career politicians. The founding fathers never intended politics to be a career. They were supposed to be common men who came in, served, then went back to their mundane lives.

Forget about left and right. Forget about blue and red. They are opposite sides of the same military-industrial coin. And the only way to fix it, other than out right revolution, is to slap these pompous a-holes upside their collective heads to make them realize on what side their bread is really buttered.

Please, please, please for the love of God (or whatever Deity you may or may not worship) and country, whenever you hear anyone speak of how all the choices stink, how they have to pick the lesser of two evils, how they're not going to vote at all because they're jaded by the political process, tell them, "Don't get discouraged. GRIP instead. Put aside your partisan pride. Abandon labels like liberal and conservative and just GRIP!"

GET RID OF INCUMBENT POLITICIANS!!

[CoffeeCat]

34. Hey, I like your thinking...

We truly need NEW politicians who are everyday people. People
who don't have a gazillion bucks or people who truly represent
the citizens of this country.

At this point, I wouldn't care if the candidate was a Dem or a Rep.

If he represents the citizens of this country and is willing to
uphold the Constitution and our civil rights...he/she would have
my vote!!

I think that America is ripe for a bunch of "Joe Six Pack" candidates
who are willing to go in and break the broken system and return
government back to "We The People".

[Le Taz Hot]

66. Great rant!

And can I add one more? RUN FOR OFFICE! In a perfect world your Senator/Congressciritter would be a hair stylist, or nurse, or machinist, or something OTHER than a lawyer. As in real people who understood the important issues that affect other real people.

[Freddie Stubbs]

49. They don't want the give the Republicans an issue to beat Democrats over the head with

as was done in 2002 with the Department of Homeland Security bill.

[hatrack]

51. Because if they don't, the Republicans would NEVER just invent some bullshit issue, would they?

Yes, let's just let political tactics take control of everything, shall we?

Let's just take a big smelly dump on the Constitution, because if we don't, the GOP will accuse us of lack of patriotism for not taking a big smelly dump on the Constitution.

Brilliant. Just freakin brilliant.

[Freddie Stubbs]

55. A lot DUers criticized congressional Democrats' strategy leading up to the 2006 elections

Look at how that turned out.

[hatrack]

61. That's what I'm doing - I'm looking at how that turned out

Action to restore Habeus Corpus to the application of federal criminal law? Nope.

Action to end the Iraq fiasaco? Nope.

Action to close Guantanamo and to end the practice of outsourced torture & illegal imprisonment? Nope.

Action to bring people like Myers, Rove, Gonzalez and their spawn to account for contempt of Congress? Nope.

Action to remove trigger-happy Bible-thumping crazies like Blackwater from the public tit? Nope.

Impeachment "off the table"? Yep!

Action to approve Bush's request for more and more wiretapping & surveilence powers? Yep!

Action now to make those increased wiretapping & surveilence powers permanent? Yep!

Action to condemn political groups for exercising their right to free speech & criticizing government policy? You betcha!

Action to produce a non-binding resolution supporting military action against Iran. Coming right up, Mr. Commander-in-chief!!

Action to actually raise CAFE standards and implement a renewable energy standard? Highly unlikely.

Action to do anything - ANYTHING - meaningful on accelerating climate breakdown? Nope - not yet! Need more studies!

Other than that, it's been one long parade of dry powder, strongly-worded statements, bargains not kept, promises forgotten, threats not followed up on, pressure not exerted, subpoenas not issued and an endless gray river of press releases and talking points justifying Congressional Democrats' pandering and inaction.

Of course, there was that $2.00 increase in the minimum wage . . . .

[spotbird]

53. Because they agree

When the Democrats decided to accept anyone, regardless of their positions, who was willing to run as a Democrat, the distinction between the parties blurred. Now, only about half of Democrats vote Democratic, the rest are just in it for themselves.

There is no point in voting for a "Democrat" simply because of his or her party id. It's got to be about issues.

[Mojorabbit]

23. Time to hit

the phones again. I understand when the right wingers do this kind of thing but I want to rest. I am so sick of over and over having to ask them to follow the constitution and hoped the dems would give me that rest. What is wrong with them? It makes no sense.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

25. Agreed. And compare notes.

:toast:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead
MKJ

[liberalla]

57. I love that Margaret Mead quote. It's hopeful and inspiring.

I'm supporting the 72 member Congressional Progressive Caucus in their effort to block this bush-pleasing FISA bill. We need to get more Reps to join them.

The CPC's Position on FISA Reform and our Civil Liberties

They postponed it last Friday, I hope they have picked up more support!

Dems Postpone Rollout Of Controversial Wiretapping Bill (Oct 5, 2007)

:kick:

[liberalla]

54. Yes, we need to hit the phones and tell them to join with the

Congressional Progressive Caucus in blocking any FISA Reform that doesn't protect our civil liberties.

Read the eight key points of the plan in post #36 or at:
The CPC's Position on FISA Reform and our Civil Liberties

[asjr]

26. The Democrats huff and puff and huff

and puff and make us think they "are in charge." That they are going to make things better. And I fall for it every time. Well, this time they just might blow our house down.

[WCGreen]

27. I give up....

I'm just glad I have no children to come of age under this devolving government of ours...

[movonne]

30. The DLC has taken over our party.....this is why they worked so

hard to get the blue dog dems in...this is going to be another bush type WH...they will have the senate the congress and they will do just just like the bush administration...I do not see a rosie future for us.

[Dr.Phool]

31. "We don't have the fucking votes to stop it"!

You have the fucking speakership and the leadership! Why the fuck is the bill even coming to the floor for a fucking vote!!!!?

Why am I a Democrat anymore? I don't have a clue!

We're in full scale fascism now. We don't have an opposition party. And you can't blame it on the so-called "cowardice" or "spinelessness" anymore. That's a good story to cover their asses. They're getting exactly what they want. And they can blame it on the repukes.

I'm done with ya.

[Kablooie]

39. Just wait till the Democratic Abramoff is exposed.

They are just doing what the Repubs did.
Grabbing money and power for themselves individually.

[JCMach1]

32. Can anyone tell me what the Dems do precisely stand for at this point

that is different from what Bush wants?

This is insane!

[Emillereid]

35. I didn't leave my party; my party left me. Why oh why oh why?

What the hell do they think we worked so hard to put them in Congress for -- not this crap! They are supposed to oppose BUSH, not enable him. How can we in good conscience work and vote for this lot anymore.

Progressives, we really do need to form our own party - the Democratic party doesn't even pretend to represent us. So maybe I'll just pretend to vote for them.

[Kablooie]

37. The Republicans left the Republicans and now the Democrats are leaving the Democrats.

Looks like America is self destructing.

Bin Laden REALLY knew what he was doing, didn't he?

[Kablooie]

36. The Dems expect to win and want the same ability to spy on enemies.

As people have often said, people do not give up power once they have it.

All the Constitutional protections that have been broken will remain broken, perhaps forever more.

The only thing left is for Congress to officially change the Constitution to reflect our new facist government.



FAREWELL AMERICA. I hardly knew ye.

[IndianaGreen]

40. There they go again! Our freedoms mean nothing to the Democratic Congress.

They are as guilty as Bush is! They were a party in the dismantling of the Constitution and in the death of the Republic.

[kimmylavin]

41. Oh, my sainted aunt!

This is NOT what I voted for!!!

[grahamhgreen]

43. This is about retroactive immunity for Bush. This was the simplest impeachment argument.

Bush admitted to breaking the FISA law not once, but 30 times. Each count is a felony. But they are granting him immunity.

[Tesha]

44. For about twenty years, I've been voting "pragmatically". I think that's just about done.

For about twenty years, I've been voting "pragmatically".
Even though the Democratic candidate often sucks, I voted
for them because, well, they suck less than the Republican
candidate. And because I, and many people like me, have been
willing to vote for the "D" no matter what, the candidates
have drifted farther and farther towards suckage all these
years.

I think I'm just about done with "pragmatism".

The current crop of Democrats in Congress suck *SO BADLY*
that I really think we would do better, in the long run,
if they didn't exist at all because all they're doing
is putting "paid" to Ralph Nader's claim in 2000 that
there is only one party, the Corporatist Party. The
country elected the Democrats in 2006 with the thought
that they would make *CERTAIN CHANGES* in our governance,
but with the term well under way, it's clear that they
are nothing but *MISERABLE FAILURES* in creating change.

It's time for a political upheaval.

So from now on, if you suck and if you support policies
that suck, you're not getting my vote even if you are
running as the "Democrat".

Sure, there may be a painful interregnum while a new
crop of progressive Liberals emerges, but it's
manifestly clear to everyone but the DLC partisans
that the current crop of Democrats is only worthy of
being shipped to the political junkyard.

Tesha

[TechBear_Seattle]

45. Is anyone really surprised? Come on, a show of hands

Same shit, different (sic) party.

But thank God these are Democrats who are the enemies of the Constitution; that makes all the difference. :grr:

[jonnyra]

46. Pelosi is on record

saying the FISA bill "does violence to the constitution". I guess we need to remind this bitch that she is sworn to protect the constitution. What is she doing to protect the constitution? WHAT? Shes allowing more violence to be done...she stands by and watches the constitution get ripped to shreds and does NOTHING!

This is so disturbing...so disgusting. Pelosi couldnt lead a class of first graders to the lunch room without fucking it up. And we can do nothing about it. We cant stop Pelosi and we cant stop the violence being done to the constitution. Those we elected to do just that are refusing in the face of republican attack.

Pelosi and Reid are sanding by while the America burns. These people some how, some day will pay for this.

[Freddie Stubbs]

48. Is it really necessary to refer to a female Democratic elected official as a 'bitch?'

Why must people use the same tactics as Freepers?

[jonnyra]

76. Me use the tactics of freepers

I would say YOU are the one doing that by focusing on my use of bad word instead of commenting on the point of my comment. I would say YOU are part of the problem...Pelosi is helping the Bush crime family and you have no more to say than point out my use of a relatively common term?? I can think of a lot worse terms to label her with considering how angry I am at her and Reid and all the other fucked up dems in congress.

Get a clue...there is a trashing of OUR CONSTITUTION going on and this fucked up individual who we put our trust in to stop it has just joined their side. Seriously...I cant believe you would point out my use of that term when there is a legitimate constitutional crisis going on. Come on...grow up and lets work together to stop this fascist regime which Pelosi is now a part of!

[liberalla]

47. Just last Friday the Dems postponed this!

or the Progressive Caucus did. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1981984

Dems Postpone Rollout Of Controversial Wiretapping Bill

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the House Majority Leader, postponed a press conference announcing new reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act after progressive lawmakers banded together and said they would fight any legislation that did not include a set of eight principles on wiretapping that preserve the "rule of law."]

"What's most significant is that the Progressive Caucus came together and said to the leadership that all 72 of us require that these provisions be included," said Caroline Fredercikson, Legislative Director for the American Civil Liberties Union. "This changes the dynamic significantly."

Rep. Hoyer had planned to roll out the new FISA reform bill at 1:30 PM today. A spokesperson from his office told the Huffington Post that the House Intelligence Committee had decided to postpone completion of the legislation, though it's not clear that the announcement from the Progressive Caucus influenced their decision. Votes in the House were also canceled today. The committee was not available at press time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/05/dems-postpone-rollout-of-_n_67293.html

We need to support the 72 Progressive Caucus members on this, and push the other Dems to support them, too.

Congressional Progressive Caucus Homepage

[PassingFair]

52. R.I.P. 4th Amendment

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

:cry:

I am HEARTSICK.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

56. I just called Sen Salazar's office, he hasn't "decided" on whether he'll vote for the bill.

I was asked to leave my comment by a polite staffer.

MKJ

[Joanne98]

59. What is it going to take? grrrrrrrrrrrrr

[Javaman]

60. It's over, folks...

heck of a job by our dems. heck of a job.

[PassingFair]

62. Some of them TRIED.

Let's put the blame on the REPUBLICANS, where the lion's share
belongs, okay?

The frightened 'pukes in the streets have allowed them to do this.

:puke:

[Javaman]

63. That's just it, only some of the try. nt

[PassingFair]

67. I know, and I'm as big an opponent of the DLC as anyone here...

but the Republicans are ALL actively working on destroying this country.

[Javaman]

68. I know, it's almost like the widows delema...

Marry that bastard next door or keep hoping your dead husband returns.

I'm beginning to think that the 3rd option of living independent is the way to go. lol

[midlife_mo_Jo]

64. Because they believe they will win the next election

and now want the power in THEIR hands.

It sucks, but let's face it - most of our politicians don't give a damn about the the constitution and bill of rights, anymore.

[ImpeechBush]

70. Seems like the Democrats were just using the issue to raise money

I hate to admit it, but I fell for the rhetoric. One day they are battling for our rights and the Constitution and freedoms against the encroachment of Bushco. The check clears and they are actually voting to give him more powers.

[robinlynne]

71. NNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[superconnected]

72. Pelosi is a republican whore. And so is every dem who votes for this.

Sorry, but we've been so sold out.

And yeah, I'm made about it.

[sakabatou]

73. Oh hell no.