FISA in 30 seconds or less

I posted this back in February, but it bears repeating:

Russ Feingold explains it all:

Chipping away at your Constitutional rights -- all in the name of fighting "terrorism"

I'm starting to think "the terrorists" have won. Terror: intense, sharp, overmastering fear. And Terrorism: the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

Fear and submission? Point in case, from the Baltimore Sun:

Spying uncovered
Documents show state police monitored peace, anti-death penalty groups

Undercover Maryland State Police officers repeatedly spied on peace activists and anti-death penalty groups in recent years and entered the names of some in a law-enforcement database of people thought to be terrorists or drug traffickers, newly released documents show.

The files, made public Thursday by the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland, depict a pattern of infiltration of the activists' organizations in 2005 and 2006. The activists contend that the authorities were trying to determine whether they posed a security threat to the United States. But none of the 43 pages of summaries and computer logs - some with agents' names and whole paragraphs blacked out - mention criminal or even potentially criminal acts, the legal standard for initiating such surveillance.

In other words, the State has become so afraid of "terrorism" that it has violated the law to spy on Americans who speak out against State sanctioned executions. Unless I missed something, we're still allowed to dissent? Remember, freedom of speech and all that? First Amendment?

The ACLU says it best:

"Everything noted in these logs is a lawful, First Amendment activity .... For undercover police officers to spend hundreds of hours entering information about lawful political protest activities into a criminal database is an unconscionable waste of taxpayer dollars and does nothing to make us safer from actual terrorists or drug dealers."

Because this is what the undercover agents found:

The only potentially unlawful activity mentioned anywhere in the documents, she said, were two instances of nonviolent civil disobedience. In one, activists refused to leave a guard station during a protest at the National Security Agency after bringing cookies and drinks for the guards, and in the other, they hatched a plan to place photographs of soldiers who died in Iraq on the fence surrounding the White House.

Do you still wonder why I'm so upset about Barack Obama's vote on FISA? These rights are worth protecting. If we don't speak up now, will we be be able to later?

UPDATE: From RawStory:

Kucinich to investigate police surveillance of protest groups

"[M]ost people would be upset to know that police were spying on lawful citizens and infiltrating peaceful organizations, rather than chasing down real criminals," said Kucinich in a press release delivered to RAW STORY. "At a minimum, such police spying is clearly a waste of taxpayer dollars and a diversion from the mission of protecting and serving the people.

"I want the subcommittee to determine how widespread these activities are and who ordered them," the Ohio Democrat and former presidential candidate said.

Things that frustrate me to no end: The short guy with big ears from Ohio loses out big time to the charming smooth-talker from Chicago. But who's got your back, folks?

UPDATED: Sen. Obama, I'm trying, but you're not making it easy for me

UPDATE: MyBarackObama.com is back up and running. I encourage anyone who's as frustrated by Obama's vote on FISA as I am to sign up for the "President Obama, Please Get FISA Right" group. So far, it seems to be a fairly polite and articulate discussion of the issues. And hopefully if enough of us object to Obama's stand on FISA, our collective voice may be heard.

***

Yes, it's true that I wore an Obama sticker when I marched in the 4th of July parade. The next president of the United States will be either John McCain or Barack Obama, so ....

Part of the reason why I felt comfortable with the sticker is that I had some really good conversations with my cousin in Vermont who is a strong Obama supporter. I felt that he respected my previous support of Hillary Clinton, and that he understood my concerns with Obama's recent stands on issues such as FISA. In fact, my cousin encouraged me to go to the Obama web site, where many progressives who are displeased with this recent move to the center have been leaving comments urging Obama to reconsider some of his recent statements. Enough people have been commenting that it has made the news. Computer World reports:

In a development that shows how users can take Web 2.0 sites in unexpected directions, a group of Barack Obama supporters is using his presidential campaign's official social network to protest the Illinois senator's stance on a bill extending the so-called warrantless wiretapping program.

The social networking group set up on the MyBarackObama.com site to urge Obama to vote against the extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) had attracted more than 24,000 member entries as of last Friday, although some of the entries appeared to be duplicates.

So I thought that I'd check it out this morning and see if I left a thoughtful and polite comment, would I be attacked as a "troll" and all the rest of the things I was called at Americablog, Huffington Post, and the rest. Unfortunately, this is what you get today when you go to mybarackobama.com:

I'll keep checking. Hopefully it'll be back up soon ....

Sometimes I hate it when I'm right

Back in February, on the day of the Maryland Democratic Primary, I wrote this:

Watching the coverage makes me anxious. While Clinton's shown shaking hands with workers at the GM transmission plant, Obama's got crowds of young people waving signs and chanting. As Morra Aarons wites over at BlogHer:

Being a Hillary supporter is like being the person in the dorm who yells at her partying neighbors to shut up, because she's studying for a final exam. You know you have a good reason, but you’re a little annoyed at yourself for being such a pill.

I feel like a party pooper because I'm not shouting "Si, se puede!" But Senator Obama, se puede? Could I have some more details on how se puede?

At the time, many of my Obama supportin' friends (and I do have some diehards), thought I was being a stick in the mud by continually asking for more detail from Obama, and because I said my biggest concern about Obama was that we just don't know much about him -- not enough to know what he will do once in office.

And this week, Barack Obama has been very busy proving me right, crassly moving to the center on 3 important issues: gun control, death penalty, and FISA. Where is the "new" kind of politics? Where is the "Washington outsider"? Where is the man who spoke before thousands of adoring followers in Iowa and said:

Years from now, you'll look back and you'll say that this was the moment, this was the place where America remembered what it means to hope. For many months, we've been teased, even derided for talking about hope. But we always knew that hope is not blind optimism. It's not ignoring the enormity of the tasks ahead or the roadblocks that stand in our path.

It's not sitting on the sidelines or shirking from a fight. Hope is that thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us if we have the courage to reach for it and to work for it and to fight for it.

I thought that was too good to be true. I thought the Obama supporters were being naive to believe him when he said he would stand up and "fight for it." Now it turns out he's just another politician running for office, saying whatever he has to in order to get elected.

Crap. Sometimes I really hate it when I'm right.

Joel Stein of the LA Times received much grief for this characterization of Obama:

What the Cult of Obama doesn't realize is that he's a politician. Not a brave one taking risky positions like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich, but a mainstream one. He has not been firing up the Senate with stirring Cross-of-Gold-type speeches to end the war. He's a politician so soft and safe, Oprah likes him. There's talk about his charisma and good looks, but I know a nerd when I see one. The dude is Urkel with a better tailor.

So. What's next, Mr Mainstream Senator Obama?

Still looking for a "different" kind of politician?

Rep. Dennis Kucinich is still standing up in Congress and fighting for what is right. Let's hope Barack Obama can find the same backbone fortitude as Kucinich when the FISA bill hits the Senate floor today.



H/t to AfterDowningStreet, who also includes this from MoveOn.org:

On Friday, House Democrats caved to the Bush administration and passed a bill giving a get-out-of-jail-free card to phone companies that helped Bush illegally spy on innocent Americans.

This Monday, the fight moves to the Senate. Senator Russ Feingold says the "deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation." Barack Obama announced his partial support for the bill, but said, "It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."

Last year, after phone calls from MoveOn members and others, Obama went so far as to vow to "support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies." We need him to honor that promise.

Can you call Senator Obama today and tell him you're counting on him to keep his word? Ask him to block any compromise that includes immunity for phone companies that helped Bush break the law.

Obama's presidential campaign: (866) 675-2008.

FISA in 30 seconds or less

Russ Feingold explains it all:

Yes America, you should be afraid ... of the Republicans

Prepare to be frightened tonight when President Bush gives his state of the union address. He will try to frighten you by saying "9/11, 9/11, 9/11." But even more frightening is the bill he wants Congress to pass, which extends the expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). From ThinkProgress:

This afternoon, “the Senate will vote on whether to cut off debate about reauthorizing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-NV) is working against the motion, and it is expected that Republicans will not have the 60 votes needed to end the discussion.”

Democratic support of the bill is contentious due to the inclusion of retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies, so Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is pushing for a temporary extension of the expiring legislation in order to reach a compromise. But President Bush is threatening to veto it.

Big man on campus is thumping his chest, posturing before he gives his speech tonight. And now he has his lackeys lined up in the Senate. I nearly drove off the road this morning when I heard this on NPR this morning:

Speaking to NPR today, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell bellowed that “the American people should be frightened”:

It’s not about frightening the American people. The American people should be frightened and remember full well what happened on 9/11. They also remember with gratitude that this has not happened again for six years.

And no matter what your opinion of either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, give them both credit for returning to Washington today to vote on this important issue. (That's right -- they both have day jobs, don't they?)