You mean those lousy, do nothing Dems running that place actually did something right?

And, to do it right, they simply had to NOT DO ANYTHING?

Inconceivable!

I project that this will be a polite, well-mannered thread with no straw men, flame baiting, or otherwise trollish arguments.

I also predict that there will be a pony waiting for me when I get home from work.

Good.

Now when some asshat asks "what have they done since taking congress?" I can say, on top of explaining what a meaningless majority is and handing them an education on how our system works, that they stood up for the constitution and against fear mongering.

Where is the Hero tag?

/Obama 08

YAY!

The article fails to mention that the GOPers walked out like a bunch of whiny biatches, then started calling "protest votes" during the memorial service for Tom Lantos.

Remember - if you can't get your way, take your ball and go home, then disrupt memorials for dead people.

Good on them. Now wait for the Republicans to cry that America is unsafe, and wait for the media to endlessly repeat the lie. Anything ordered under the previous law is still good for a year, and new orders can still be issued under old law. Allowing this bill to expire changes nothing about how the US gains intelligence.

Well, after a little more than a full year lets tally the things they've done right: 1. Good job, 110th House Dems.

The Dreaded Rear Admiral: You mean those lousy, do nothing Dems running that place actually did something right?

And, to do it right, they simply had to NOT DO ANYTHING?

Inconceivable!

Those that govern best, govern least?

Gawd knows my wire could use a good tap.

Good to know that at least a few people in Washington still believe in the Constitution.

Bush doesn't need authority to spy illegally. The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper.

I hope you all realize that the practice isn't going to end, just that Congress no longer approves of it.

Pelosi didn't allow a vote on a bi-partisan senate bill that was authored by senator Rockefeller(D). If voted on the bill would have passed easily. She instead tried to inject the Whitehouse attorney firing scandal to cover her ass when republicans walked out.

She is a farking discrace...but that is nothing new.

Wow. The Dems screw up by doing nothing. Then they do something right by doing nothing.

So, it's not that they're spineless; they just don't do anything!

You know, I can live with that.

Nestea Plunge Cry baby cry. You're a pretty piss poor excuse for an American.

Comming from a nut job like yourself I'll take that as a compliment.

Three Crooked Squirrels: Bush doesn't need authority to spy illegally. The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper.

THIS.

People that argue it was good to pardon Nixon to 'heal' the nation are morons. It did innumerable harm. Administrations learned to stick it out -- it's not like there are consequences for breaking the law.

I'll call for a tag when I see Bush rotting in prison rather than cutting cedar a year from now.

bush has already called the saudi's and made plans to wag the dog.

/adjusts tinfoil

jonescollectables: I hope you all realize that the practice isn't going to end, just that Congress no longer approves of it.

The practice of zero oversight on eavesdropping ends.

Those already being listened to can be under continued surveillance for up to one year, if I read that correctly.

Styro Foam: Good on them. Now wait for the Republicans to cry that America is unsafe, and wait for the media to endlessly repeat the lie. Anything ordered under the previous law is still good for a year, and new orders can still be issued under old law. Allowing this bill to expire changes nothing about how the US gains intelligence.

This.

Some moron is going to come in here, raving about how the spineless Dems (and I agree with you there, they have been pretty spineless) are leaving us open to terrorist attack.

THIS IS NOT TRUE.

Though the law has expired, the wire taps issued under it have not, and will not, expire for another year. So any dangerous nutjob who had his phone tapped before will still have it tapped now. Further, should a NEW dangerous nutjob suddenly crop up, the special courts who deal with issuing warrants for wiretaps are still there for the consulting. The only thing this changes is the administration's ability to wiretap journalists or political enemies without ever having a court of law looking over their shoulder.

The funniest thing about this is that the courts will practically NEVER turn down a request for a wiretapping warrant. At the very least, they'll tap the phones for a year and see if anything comes out of it. There is essentially no legitimate need for this power so, in their wisdom, the House stripped his bloated, self-important Executive of it.

Well done, Dems
/first time I've said that this year

Nestea Plunge: MFL: Nestea Plunge Cry baby cry. You're a pretty piss poor excuse for an American.

Comming from a nut job like yourself I'll take that as a compliment.

Yeah okay bub, your yellow magnet just fell off your car, you popinjay.

Don't forget to call him vainglorious too!

The bill she didn't allow a vote on was WRITTEN BY A DEMOCRAT.

Good...

These bastards don't need more power. Bush said obtaining warrants to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists was a "hinderance". Absolutely disgraceful, considering these warrants are basically rubber stamped and can be obtained days after the actual eavesdropping takes place.

'Course that would mean a paper trail, and that might lead to some oversight and regulation of the Executive branch's actions, and we can't have that, according to Bush and his apologists.

doublesecretprobation,

Not under his watch. Under Obama or Clinton, of course!

So what do I do now if a terrorist calls me? The NSA used to take care of that for me.

And they go underground again. If you think this changes anything, enjoy the rose colored glasses.

This is all for show to appease their constituents. They'll hold a vote and pass it when no one is looking.

g026r: I also predict that there will be a pony waiting for me when I get home from work.

Eh...ponies are overrated.

Isn't this a stupid program anyway?

The officials can get retroactive warrants in emergency situations (where time doesn't permit them to get a warrant before surveillance).

So...seems like "protect America" may be a straw man argument.

Do I recall most of the people here balasting McCain(myself included) on voting against a bill that banned waterboarding and expanded government police powers. Now these people are lauding the Dems for not voting on a law that expands police powers of the government.
/changed my mind on McCain
// Should have voted against the bill
/// Devil was in the details.

GOOD!!

Sorry subby, the world will not come to an end if some poor NSA schmuck happens to come across a conversation that MIGHT involve terrorists and GWB's law is not in effect. Why? Because if that happens that poor schmuck can continue to copy/monitor the conversation while superiors FAR above him work on getting the FISA approval that schmucks like him have received for all but a very few cases (I believe that prior to GWB's tenure only 4 cases were ever disapproved, but don't quote me on it) out of thousands since the late 70's.

/used to be "that schmuck."

Humean_Nature: The funniest thing about this is that the courts will practically NEVER turn down a request for a wiretapping warrant. At the very least, they'll tap the phones for a year and see if anything comes out of it. There is essentially no legitimate need for this power so, in their wisdom, the House stripped his bloated, self-important Executive of it.

This.

I believe the courts have only turned down 1 or 2 requests from the thousands of requests put before them.

MFL: The bill she didn't allow a vote on was WRITTEN BY A DEMOCRAT.

Bi-Partisan bills can be wrong too.

See: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.

The Onanist: Humean_Nature: The funniest thing about this is that the courts will practically NEVER turn down a request for a wiretapping warrant. At the very least, they'll tap the phones for a year and see if anything comes out of it. There is essentially no legitimate need for this power so, in their wisdom, the House stripped his bloated, self-important Executive of it.

This.

I believe the courts have only turned down 1 or 2 requests from the thousands of requests put before them.


Except to provide liability protection for the telecoms who were involved in (potentially) illegal spying.

Lieutenant Rad: I think the point is the current administrations rejection of any form of oversight.

You're right, in this case the bill is stupid when the existing laws cover most all scenarios. But this is a group that fights in court over a list of names at an energy policy meeting.

They simply don't want to have to answer to anyone, for anything.

The Onanist: I believe the courts have only turned down 1 or 2 requests from the thousands of requests put before them.

Lost_in_Korea: (I believe that prior to GWB's tenure only 4 cases were ever disapproved, but don't quote me on it) out of thousands since the late 70's.

Huh...13 seconds...not bad.

Nestea Plunge
MFL: Nestea Plunge Cry baby cry. You're a pretty piss poor excuse for an American.

Comming from a nut job like yourself I'll take that as a compliment.

Yeah okay bub, your yellow magnet just fell off your car, you popinjay.

Don't you have a Yoga class to be at in 26 minutes?

AAAAAAAAAAAAnd I suck at italics.

The Dems let the current version lapse because BushCo wants to give telecom companies a free pass on breaking the law. No current wiretaps are affected for a year, and Bush refused to sign an extension that simply stripped telecom immunity. All he has to do is sign the version Congress passes, which has everything he wants except telecom retroactive immunity.

What is it about protecting Verizon from lawsuits for possibly violating the Constitution that will make our country safer or keep one more American alive?

Lieutenant Rad: Except to provide liability protection for the telecoms who were involved in (potentially) illegal spying.

Well there's always THAT angle...

Good for them, I always thought the 4th amendment was good for something. Granted it is amusing to see that in order for the Dems to do something, they must do nothing. On a side note, damn I wish I could work 3-4 days a week and then gets weeks of vacation. Ah my tax dollars at work.

Nestea Plunge: MFL: Nestea Plunge Cry baby cry. You're a pretty piss poor excuse for an American.

Comming from a nut job like yourself I'll take that as a compliment.

Yeah okay bub, your yellow magnet just fell off your car, you popinjay.

Is he also an improvident lackwit? Do you write the dialogue for Monty Burns?

If the bill is that important then remove the immunity for Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and the tel-coms and pass the bill. Then take up immunity as a separate issue in its own bill. Simple fix and done.

Styro Foam: Good on them. Now wait for the Republicans to cry that America is unsafe, and wait for the media to endlessly repeat the lie.

Yea because we all know how today's conservative media likes to praise Bush all the time.

?

Nestea Plunge: Don't you have goose stepping practice in 25 minutes?

You know who else liked goose-stepping?

FruitlandGenerics: What is it about protecting Verizon from lawsuits for possibly violating the Constitution that will make our country safer or keep one more American alive?

It sends a message that you can refuse a request from the president because his office simply "asking you to do something" doesn't make it legal.

Once again, they simply want zero oversight.

Lost_in_Korea: GOOD!!

Sorry subby, the world will not come to an end if some poor NSA schmuck happens to come across a conversation that MIGHT involve terrorists and GWB's law is not in effect. Why? Because if that happens that poor schmuck can continue to copy/monitor the conversation while superiors FAR above him work on getting the FISA approval that schmucks like him have received for all but a very few cases (I believe that prior to GWB's tenure only 4 cases were ever disapproved, but don't quote me on it) out of thousands since the late 70's.

/used to be "that schmuck."

And "that schmuck" gets 72 hours AFTER he's already started listening to get the FISA warrant. That's the "odious process" the Bushies want to overturn and say threatens our country.

Why is this so hard? Oh, I forgot - Bush wants to make his buddies rich while stripping away our 1st Amendment freedoms.

I'm glad this stupid FISA crap is out of the way. I only hope my party doesn't do something stupid to erase the good they did with not passing that ridiculous renewal. Like allowing Hillary to be nominated.

/POW! ZING!

The Dreaded Rear Admiral:

THIS.

The trolls aren't always wrong, and the calm, rational posts aren't always right, but that is the way to bet.

AgeOfReason: If the bill is that important then remove the immunity for Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and the tel-coms and pass the bill. Then take up immunity as a separate issue in its own bill. Simple fix and done.

You've taken away the actual reason that the bill is impostant