Dems need to act like majority: Surveillance Bill pulled because of politically vulnerable Dems

[dajoki]

House Surveillance Bill Pulled
Thursday October 18, 2007 2:01 AM
By PAMELA HESS
Associated Press Writer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7004733,00.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans successfully maneuvered to derail a Democratic government eavesdropping bill Wednesday, delaying a House vote until next week at the earliest.

The bill, which seeks to expand court oversight of government surveillance in the United States, fell victim to a gambit by the chamber's Republican minority. Democrats were forced to pull the bill from the House floor with no certainty about how it might be revived.

<<snip>>

The Democratic eavesdropping bill would have allowed unfettered telephone and e-mail surveillance of foreign intelligence targets but would require special authorization if the foreign targets were likely to be in contact with people inside the United States, a provision designed to safeguard Americans' privacy.

<<snip>>

Republican critics, however, said the blanket warrants would tie up intelligence agents in legal red tape, impeding them from conducting urgent surveillance of terrorist suspects. ``Congress needs to move forward, not backward,'' President Bush said at a White House news conference as the debate in Congress began. Bush had vowed to veto the bill if it reached his desk.

The House's Democratic leaders pulled the bill after discovering that Republicans planned to offer a motion that politically vulnerable Democrats would have a hard time voting against.

[gateley]

1. I read a subsequent article that stated the bill - as it stands now - actually `

DOES address the faux concerns that the Repugs used to throw a wrench in the works. Don't know how that will affect the timing of the vote.

They're absolutely despicable human beings.

[EST]

2. It takes courage to do the right thing, especially when

you are "politically vulnerable." Do these people think the objective is to provide them a job for life?
How in the hell do we get people in there whose priorities are doing what's right instead of whatever keeps them (they think) employed?

[dajoki]

3. You are right on EST n/t

[madfloridian]

4. I am afraid you are right.

They have been thinking this way so long, being politically expedient, that they don't know how to be any other way.

[jmp]

5. Dear Santa ...

Please bring Congressional Democrats a spine.

[ShortnFiery]

6. Yes, and consider having them behave like ...

"The Loyal Opposition" placing the welfare of their constituents above their LOVE of all things gifted TO THEM from their corporate masters within the Military Industrial Complex?

Please Santa?

I want to believe. :shrug:

[sampsonblk]

7. They caved because of THIS???

"The amendment would have said that nothing in the bill could limit surveillance of Osama bin Laden and terrorist organizations. While Democrats say their bill already provides that authority, voting against the amendment could make it seem as though a member of Congress were against spying on al-Qaida."

That's IT? No attempt to make our case? No effort to fight back? Wow...

When we were in the minority, we caved and they fought. Now, nothing seems to have changed.

[dajoki]

8. You nailed it...

"That's IT? No attempt to make our case? No effort to fight back? Wow...
When we were in the minority, we caved and they fought. Now, nothing seems to have changed."

But please tell me why? I'm clueless.
:shrug:

[sampsonblk]

9. Scared of their own shadows

They are so afraid of a 9/11 Era backlash, that they will go along with anything to avoid risk.

Its time for them to get a grip.