What Al said. And, moreover, it isn’t just a disconnect between traditional big-statist Democrats and social justice/civil-libertarians that is causing confusion, but a major disconnect between academic progressives and urban progressives. And the one area where Obama really is creating genuine dissonance is over FISA. That’s because the privacy of personal communications is a major concern to all three of Obama’s major constituencies.
1. Urban progressives remember Operation Shamrock and Operation Minaret and how they were used against the civil rights movement.
2. Academic progressives are the most likely to travel abroad and maintain routine contact with foreign colleagues.
3. Social Justice/Civil Libertarians are by definition concerned with civil liberties, including especially the First and Fourth Amendments.
On FISA, Obama has aligned himself with Blue Dog/DLC Democrats that share few of the cultural qualms about state power with progressives and libertarians. But in most other regards, all Obama’s recent moves have been easily understandable to at least one or two (but not all three) of his main constituent groups.
with wanting more troops (we’ve done a number on our troops trying to do war on the cheap!) And we have Afghanistan to deal with and probably that lawless area of Pakistan as well.
I can deal with delays in getting the troops home as long as the mission is getting them home from Iraq. It doesn’t surprise me that it is easier deploying than extracting.
FISA is another kettle of fish. FISA means that we are truly never going to let this bunch of crooks get their commupence. It means that neither will the phone companies get theirs with their complicit allying themselves with these crooks.
Does Obama feel that he needs the total information junk dreamed up by these fascists? Would he also torture?
Never in my lifetime are we going to get that wound lanced and let healing begin. That is what this so called Protect America Act is all about. GD, why are these titles so 180 degrees wrong? They are not protecting us, they are strangling us.
I just discovered JustinTV Live streaming from all over the world, Movie channel, sports etc. Right now I am watching Brazilian news (snif, snif)
to try to analyze Obama’s position on FISA as an attempt to deal with constituencies. He may be looking at the bill itself as a complex puzzle, which has some good and a lot of bad…
But also, part of a bigger puzzle, where if Obama gets accused of being negligent and responsible for some undiscovered terrorist attack, we get a crazy, gambling, risk-addictive president–McCain.
must be something in the water there in pennsylvania:
via wired:
where’s the congressional outrage over this bit of war profiteering?
<crickets>
via TPM
Looking good for Dems in the House seats – Cook Political Report sees a gain of 10-20 seats
question- off topic- does anyone know how many troops are still in Iraq?
146,000 according to rawstory/AP. 154,000 according to this: Iraq War Results & Statistics at July 1, 2008…split the difference, call it 150,ooo. more than were there before the surge™.
not counting the 32,000, and going up, in afghanistan.
thank you for your info. would have responded earlier but no access.even if we take the lower figure, the liars are at it again. the surge injected more than 40 thousand if support personel are included so – it is july!
yet, where are the critics regarding this latest biggie?
I’ve been trying to figure out where this whole FISA/telecom immunity thing is going.
Now, retroactive immunity, by ITSELF, is a terrible precident. Regardless of who gets the immunity, and what laws are affected. Take that as granted.
And, in addition, it would be sweet to have the USSC just slap down the whole “I’m the preznit, I can wiretap at will!” b.s. (not sure the odds are favorable with this court)
BUT, I was thinking about what happens if the lawsuits against the telecoms go forward. There’s discovery, and suppose that it’s bad: democrats, activists, reporters all snooped on for political dirt. But the telecoms pull out a letter from W, saying “do this”, and they’re off the hook as far as any real legal consequences.
You would think that it would be a PR disaster for BushCo, but I think the last 7 years should teach us that there’s no low they can stoop to and not get called on it. Indictments? Not this DOJ. Impeachment? Not this Congress. Scathing editorials? Maybe from KO, but otherwise crickets. Pardons all ’round come 20 Jan 2009.
Damn, these monsters have TORTURED, and killed thousands upon thousands of innocents. The FISA violations are penny-ante by comparison. Unfortately, I think that the best likely outcome is just “a tiny bit more bad PR” for Bush.
The thing is, I’m having a hard time seeing what the court could do, that couldn’t be done better in a congressional hearing. And retroactive immunity just makes it HARDER to stonewall congress, not easier. And a hearing can be put on TV, with fewer constraints on evidence and witnesses.
Now, there is one little corner of this whole issue that can blow up in BushCo’s face: FISA violations between 21 Jan 2001 and 10 Sept 2001. According to whatshisface, the Qwest CEO that didn’t want to cooperate and got indicted on trumped-up charges, BushCo was pushing for illegal eavesdropping BEFORE 9/11. And retroactive immunity only covers 9/11 and later. Not sure if this can survive to make it to court, but it is certainly something congress can investigate.
Certainly, all of this requires our representives in congress to suddenly grow a spine, and we wouldn’t even be having this situation if that were the case. Still, a handful of congressmen (a committee chair + dem members) can probably do more to expose the corruption than any court case.
So perhaps the pressure should be directed more along the lines of “no immunity for FISA felons, and INVESTIGATE dammit!”