Now that takes balls... no brains, but gigantic balls.

/Like Fark squirrel balls

Maybe because the Senate has already passed FISA, there are enough votes to pass it in the House, but the Democratic leaders STILL wouldn't let it be brought to the floor for a vote?

But don't let that stop you from a good frothing...

If he had said wrong action he would be right.

FOAD, President Fear.

This douche is truly a one trick pony.

"House leaders blocked a good piece of legislation that would give our intelligence community the tools they need to protect America from a terrorist attack," Bush said after speaking with congressional Republican leaders.


Bullshiat, Georgie. Complete bullshiat.

Anyone surprised?

The party of personal responsibility has spoken!

I really hope that the dems in the house don't fold like their senate counterparts did. What am I saying, of course they are going to fold. They'll give Bush everything he wants.

I'm not a fan of either Bush or this Bill, but Smitty is sadly confused if he thinks the Republican walk-out is somehow the cause of the delay.

BravadoGT: Maybe because the Senate has already passed FISA, there are enough votes to pass it in the House, but the Democratic leaders STILL wouldn't let it be brought to the floor for a vote?

That sort of gets lost in the poo flinging. Now, I thought the expanded FISA provisions were a travesty, but after the Senate worked a bipartisan version, debated it, voted on it, and passed it, it seems like House leadership decided to throw a dog and pony show to avoid the issue. At least debate the bill and put it to a vote. Meh, theatrics for an election year, I guess.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said they would not be bullied

What the hell? Did I somehow Slide into a parallel world?

Nabb1: Meh, theatrics for an election year, I guess.

Sadly, this. I REALLY want to believe that the Dem leadership is doing this so that finally somebody will stand up to the promises they made in 2006, to finally stop rolling over and asking for more.

I REALLY want to believe that.

/can't

vid: I'm not a fan of either Bush or this Bill, but Smitty is sadly confused if he thinks the Republican walk-out is somehow the cause of the delay.

It's kind of a non sequitur, really. The GOP walk-out was a shameless grandstanding ploy when they realized the House wasn't going to cave to their demands. They walked right back in to vote on the next bill.

This whole thing is really because Congress offered Bush an extension of existing law and he turned it down because he wanted telco immunity. That's why the law's about to expire.

Meanwhile, AT&T disconnected the FBI/NSA surveillance because the Feds didn't pay their phone bill. Taking it at Bush's word, it looks like they didn't care enough about terrorism to fund the operation, and oh-so-patriotic AT&T's patriotism ain't free.

This is one of the ugliest messes I've seen since they outed Plame.

I love when he gets all angwy, he's like a little strawberry...

Epic FAIL SUBBY!! The FISA bill was not even in consideration by the house yesterday. The Republican members walked out b/c Pelosi and the dems were more worried about going on a political witch hunt as opposed to taking up the FISA bill.

You are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

dragonchild: vid: I'm not a fan of either Bush or this Bill, but Smitty is sadly confused if he thinks the Republican walk-out is somehow the cause of the delay.

It's kind of a non sequitur, really. The GOP walk-out was a shameless grandstanding ploy when they realized the House wasn't going to cave to their demands. They walked right back in to vote on the next bill.

This whole thing is really because Congress offered Bush an extension of existing law and he turned it down because he wanted telco immunity. That's why the law's about to expire.

Meanwhile, AT&T disconnected the FBI/NSA surveillance because the Feds didn't pay their phone bill. Taking it at Bush's word, it looks like they didn't care enough about terrorism to fund the operation, and oh-so-patriotic AT&T's patriotism ain't free.

This is one of the ugliest messes I've seen since they outed Plame.

Yep, the Plame thing was blatant treason, but it is down the ol' memory hole. People are sheep.

This bill is immunity for Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, and Gonzales. The TelCo piece is the just what they are throwing to the public. This is amnesty for the criminal enterprise that is the Bush administration. The illegal wiretapping was occurring before 9/11, and guess what, it failed to prevent that attack! The illegal wiretapping is about unlimited executive power, not about preventing terrorism.

jpo2269: Epic FAIL SUBBY!! The FISA bill was not even in consideration by the house yesterday. The Republican members walked out b/c Pelosi and the dems were more worried about going on a political witch hunt as opposed to taking up the FISA bill.

You are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Your boy could have had everything he needed to "fight terrorists" except the immunity and he said no. Doesn't he want to fight the terrorists? DOes he care more about AT&T than civilians?

Boomaze:

There is nothing preventing "W" from caring about both Citizens and AT&T. Farking lawyers don't need anymore handouts.

boomaze: jpo2269: Epic FAIL SUBBY!! The FISA bill was not even in consideration by the house yesterday. The Republican members walked out b/c Pelosi and the dems were more worried about going on a political witch hunt as opposed to taking up the FISA bill.

You are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Your boy could have had everything he needed to "fight terrorists" except the immunity and he said no. Doesn't he want to fight the terrorists? DOes he care more about AT&T than civilians?

Read the bill, the immunity that Bush cares about ain't the immunity for the TelCos.

boomaze: Your boy could have had everything he needed to "fight terrorists" except the immunity and he said no. Doesn't he want to fight the terrorists? DOes he care more about AT&T than civilians?

I think he just wants the House to bring the matter to a vote before going on vacation. He's not the one keeping the bill from being voted on-that blame falls squarely on the Democratic leadership, who know that the bill already has enough votes to pass if and when is brought to the floor...If the elected president endorses it, the elected senate passed a bipartisan version, and the majority of the elected House will pass it if and when it gets the chance to--who is it that's thwarting the will of the people here?

All quack...

Bush: "It is a matter of national security to get FISA renewed."
Bush: "I will veto any FISA law without immunity for telecoms."

Telecom immunity > national security?

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. released the following statement to President Bush's commitment to work on foreign surveillance legislation through the recess:

"The President's efforts to cast blame on FISA, echoed by his allies in Congress, show an appalling disregard for the facts. He threatened to veto any extension of the Protect America Act and, following his lead, every single Republican in the House voted against the 21 day extension I sponsored in the House. The President and House Republicans cannot have it both ways, simultaneously arguing that the PAA is essential to national security and also engineering the defeat of an extension of it. The consequences for inaction are their responsibility.

"Unfortunately, it is the same old tired rhetoric of fear that the country overwhelmingly rejected in the 2006 elections.

"From what I have seen from the Justice Department documents so far, there is no need to provide amnesty to telecommunication companies who are protected under current law, as long as they and the government are acting accordingly. I have not seen anything that leads me to believe, as the President seems to believe, that providing amnesty to these companies is a more compelling public interest than our Constitutionally protected right to privacy.

Chairman Silvestre Reyes of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence also issued a statement challenging Bush to "put partisanship aside" on the FISA debate:

The proper course is now to conference the House bill with the Senate bill that was passed on Tuesday. There are significant differences between these two bills and a conference, in regular order, is the appropriate mechanism to resolve the differences between these two bills. I urge you, Mr. President, to put partisanship aside and allow Republicans in Congress to arrive at a compromise that will protect America and protect our Constitution.

I, for one, do not intend to back down - not to the terrorists and not to anyone, including a President, who wants Americans to cower in fear.

We are a strong nation. We cannot allow ourselves to be scared into suspending the Constitution. If we do that, we might as well call the terrorists and tell them that they have won.

Nabb1: BravadoGT: Maybe because the Senate has already passed FISA, there are enough votes to pass it in the House, but the Democratic leaders STILL wouldn't let it be brought to the floor for a vote?

That sort of gets lost in the poo flinging. Now, I thought the expanded FISA provisions were a travesty, but after the Senate worked a bipartisan version, debated it, voted on it, and passed it, it seems like House leadership decided to throw a dog and pony show to avoid the issue. At least debate the bill and put it to a vote. Meh, theatrics for an election year, I guess.

It's not bipartisan in any way. The telcom immunity and continued warrantless wiretapping provisions are a result of Bush bullying Democrats, and Democrats being too spineless/afraid of appearing weak on national security.

"Bipartisan" implies a rational, give and take process that in no way occurred in the Senate's consideration of FISA.

AgeofReason:

Honestly, don't y'all ever get tired of trying to creat a conspiracy out of everything???? Please share a specific citation where FISA grants blanket amnesty to pre 9-11 actions.

BravadoGT: boomaze: Your boy could have had everything he needed to "fight terrorists" except the immunity and he said no. Doesn't he want to fight the terrorists? DOes he care more about AT&T than civilians?

I think he just wants the House to bring the matter to a vote before going on vacation. He's not the one keeping the bill from being voted on-that blame falls squarely on the Democratic leadership, who know that the bill already has enough votes to pass if and when is brought to the floor...If the elected president endorses it, the elected senate passed a bipartisan version, and the majority of the elected House will pass it if and when it gets the chance to--who is it that's thwarting the will of the people here?

See, I'm willing to bet the majority of The People agree with the House leadership on this.
And the prior GOP congress regularly kept bills from being voted on, and scheduled votes for the wee hours of the morning without bothering to tell the Dems. I'm sure you were decrying the thwarting of The People's will then, right?

You're an asshole, Mr. Bush
You really are a heel.
You're as cuddly as a cactus,
You're as charming as an eel.
Mr. Bush.

You're a bad banana
With a greasy black peel.

You're a monster, Mr. Bush.
Your heart's an empty hole.
Your brain is full of spiders,
You've got garlic in your soul.
Mr. Bush.

I wouldn't touch you, with a
thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole.

You're a vile one, Mr. Bush.
You have termites in your smile.
You have all the tender sweetness
Of a seasick crocodile.
Mr. Bush.

Given the choice between the two of you
I'd take the seasick crocodile.

You're a dickwad, Mr. Bush.
You're a nasty, wasty skunk.
Your heart is full of unwashed socks
Your soul is full of gunk.
Mr. Bush.

The three words that best describe you,
are, and I quote: "Stink. Stank. Stunk."

You're a rotter, Mr. Bush.
You're the king of sinful sots.
Your heart's a dead tomato splot
With moldy purple spots,
Mr. Bush.

Your soul is an apalling dump heap
overflowing with the most disgraceful assortment
of deplorable rubbish imaginable,
Mangled up in tangled up knots.

You nauseate me, Mr. Bush.
With a nauseaus super-naus.
You're a crooked jerky jockey
And you drive a crooked horse.
Mr. Bush.

You're a three decker saurkraut and toadstool sandwich
With arsenic sauce.

El_Dan: Nabb1: BravadoGT: Maybe because the Senate has already passed FISA, there are enough votes to pass it in the House, but the Democratic leaders STILL wouldn't let it be brought to the floor for a vote?

That sort of gets lost in the poo flinging. Now, I thought the expanded FISA provisions were a travesty, but after the Senate worked a bipartisan version, debated it, voted on it, and passed it, it seems like House leadership decided to throw a dog and pony show to avoid the issue. At least debate the bill and put it to a vote. Meh, theatrics for an election year, I guess.

It's not bipartisan in any way. The telcom immunity and continued warrantless wiretapping provisions are a result of Bush bullying Democrats, and Democrats being too spineless/afraid of appearing weak on national security.

"Bipartisan" implies a rational, give and take process that in no way occurred in the Senate's consideration of FISA.

Let me get this straight-you're explaining the senate vote away as the result of lame duck, dumb-as-bricks Dubya and the Senate MINORITY having somehow bullied the noble, principled, MAJORITY, with the anti-war mandate from the people in-hand...

THAT'S how it happened?

Man, I am dizzy from all that spin...

Here's a wonderful letter to the president:

Dear Mr. President:

The Preamble to our Constitution states that one of our highest duties as public officials is to "provide for the common defence." As an elected Member of Congress, a senior Member of the House Armed Services Committee, and Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I work everyday to ensure that our defense and intelligence capabilities remain strong in the face of serious threats to our national security.

Because I care so deeply about protecting our country, I take strong offense to your suggestion in recent days that the country will be vulnerable to terrorist attack unless Congress immediately enacts legislation giving you broader powers to conduct warrantless surveillance of Americans' communications and provides legal immunity for telecommunications companies that participated in the Administration's warrantless surveillance program.

Today, the National Security Agency (NSA) has authority to conduct surveillance in at least three different ways, all of which provide strong capability to monitor the communications of possible terrorists.

First, NSA can use its authority under Executive Order 12333 to conduct surveillance abroad of any known or suspected terrorist. There is no requirement for a warrant. There is no requirement for probable cause. Most of NSA's collection occurs under this authority.

Second, NSA can use its authority under the Protect America Act, enacted last August, to conduct surveillance here in the U.S of any foreign target. This authority does not "expire" on Saturday, as you have stated. Under the PAA, orders authorizing surveillance may last for one year - until at least August 2008. These orders may cover every terrorist group without limitation. If a new member of the group is identified, or if a new phone number or email address is identified, the NSA may add it to the existing orders, and surveillance can begin immediately. We will not "go dark."

Third, in the remote possibility that a new terrorist organization emerges that we have never previously identified, the NSA could use existing authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to monitor those communications. Since its establishment nearly 30 years ago, the FISA Court has approved nearly every application for a warrant from the Department of Justice. In an emergency, NSA or the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) may begin surveillance immediately, and a FISA Court order does not have to be obtained for three days. The former head of FISA operations for the Department of Justice has testified publicly that emergency authorization may be granted in a matter of minutes.

As you know, the 1978 FISA law, which has been modernized and updated numerous times since 9/11, was instrumental in disrupting the terrorist plot in Germany last summer. Those who say that FISA is outdated do not understand the strength of this important tool.

If our nation is left vulnerable in the coming months, it will not be because we don't have enough domestic spying powers. It will be because your Administration has not done enough to defeat terrorist organizations - including al Qaeda -- that have gained strength since 9/11. We do not have nearly enough linguists to translate the reams of information we currently collect. We do not have enough intelligence officers who can penetrate the hardest targets, such as al Qaeda. We have surged so many intelligence resources into Iraq that we have taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As a result, you have allowed al Qaeda to reconstitute itself on your watch.

You have also suggested that Congress must grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies. As someone who has been briefed on our most sensitive intelligence programs, I can see no argument why the future security of our country depends on whether past actions of telecommunications companies are immunized.

The issue of telecom liability should be carefully considered based on a full review of the documents that your Administration withheld from Congress for eight months. However, it is an insult to the intelligence of the American people to say that we will be vulnerable unless we grant immunity for actions that happened years ago.

Congress has not been sitting on its hands. Last November, the House passed responsible legislation to authorize the NSA to conduct surveillance of foreign terrorists and to provide clarity and legal protection to our private sector partners who assist in that surveillance.

The proper course is now to conference the House bill with the Senate bill that was passed on Tuesday. There are significant differences between these two bills and a conference, in regular order, is the appropriate mechanism to resolve the differences between these two bills. I urge you, Mr. President, to put partisanship aside and allow Republicans in Congress to arrive at a compromise that will protect America and protect our Constitution.

I, for one, do not intend to back down - not to the terrorists and not to anyone, including a President, who wants Americans to cower in fear.

We are a strong nation. We cannot allow ourselves to be scared into suspending the Constitution. If we do that, we might as well call the terrorists and tell them that they have won.

Sincerely,

Silvestre Reyes
Member of Congress
Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence


So we do still have patriots in Washington.

It's proven now, Democrats don't care about national security.

Too bad, because I was starting to get the ol' warm and fuzzy feeling from Obama's public speeches, starting to like him. No chance in hell I'll vote for him now.

/McCain '08

jpo2269: Honestly, don't y'all ever get tired of trying to creat a conspiracy out of everything???? Please share a specific citation where FISA grants blanket amnesty to pre 9-11 actions.

FISA dosen't grant amnesty to telcos. It never has. FISA has been in effect since it was created in... 1970-something (crap, can't remember). FISA remains in effect, FISA will continue to be in effect in the future no matter what the President and Congress do in the next few days. FISA isn't the issue.

The issue is this other bill that is set to expire, which added to FISA (Protect America Act, or something Orwellian name). The President wants it renewed, but ONLY if it includes Telco immunity. For once, Congression Dems seem to be on the threshold of telling him no, which is refreshing.

By the Presidents own words, this renewal is critical to America security AND he'll veto any that doesn't include telco immunity. So he admits that protecting a few corporations (and by extension, his own administration) is more important to him than protecting America.

To that, many of us say Duh.

Dead_Mandela: Too bad, because I was starting to get the ol' warm and fuzzy feeling from Obama's public speeches, starting to like him. No chance in hell I'll vote for him now.

/McCain '08

People you are fooling: 0

BravadoGT: Let me get this straight-you're explaining the senate vote away as the result of lame duck, dumb-as-bricks Dubya and the Senate MINORITY having somehow bullied the noble, principled, spineless, cowardly, and very narrow MAJORITY, with the anti-war mandate from the people in-hand...

FTFY

On War on Terror™ issues, the Dems don't really have a majority at all anyway. Lieberman is always eager to do the administration's bidding.

Car_Ramrod: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said they would not be bullied

What the hell? Did I somehow Slide into a parallel world?

You can't be bullied if you intend to roll over.

VictoryCabal: jpo2269: Honestly, don't y'all ever get tired of trying to creat a conspiracy out of everything???? Please share a specific citation where FISA grants blanket amnesty to pre 9-11 actions.

FISA dosen't grant amnesty to telcos. It never has. FISA has been in effect since it was created in... 1970-something (crap, can't remember). FISA remains in effect, FISA will continue to be in effect in the future no matter what the President and Congress do in the next few days. FISA isn't the issue.

The issue is this other bill that is set to expire, which added to FISA (Protect America Act, or something Orwellian name). The President wants it renewed, but ONLY if it includes Telco immunity. For once, Congression Dems seem to be on the threshold of telling him no, which is refreshing.

By the Presidents own words, this renewal is critical to America security AND he'll veto any that doesn't include telco immunity. So he admits that protecting a few corporations (and by extension, his own administration) is more important to him than protecting America.

To that, many of us say Duh.

THIS. If you STILL see Bush as honest or even decent after this you are an idiot. He is either lying about the threat or cares more about the immunity than safety. Chcikens coming home and all that... Sheep

It's honestly getting harder and harder to tell apart Republicans and trolls.

With FISA still in effect and Congress having already offered Bush an extension of current law (which Bush refused), the only issue at stake here is retroactive immunity for the phone companies.

Liking Bush is one thing, but who in their right mind sides with phone companies demanding retroactive immunity??

Wiretaps are so critical for national security then why didn't the FBI pay its phone bill? pop

Anyone who believes this administrations' fear mongering to get orwellian laws passed are complete cowards.Why give up our hard fought rights because some idiot claims they make us less safe?

I'm not worried about another terrorist attack, nor do I believe any of these laws have prevented any to date. I seriously doubt this administration could protect us even with absolute power.

"House Dems blasted by Bush"

Mind Bleach plskkthx.

/House Republicans left to blast each other with their wide stances

dragonchild: Liking Bush is one thing, but who in their right mind sides with phone companies demanding retroactive immunity??

People who decided to put a little Verizon stock in their portfolio along with their Raytheon stock?

wigglebiscuit: And the prior GOP congress regularly kept bills from being voted on, and scheduled votes for the wee hours of the morning without bothering to tell the Dems. I'm sure you were decrying the thwarting of The People's will then, right?

Well, I guess that makes it alright then. And people wonder why so many Americans are disgusted with both parties...

vernonFL: Wiretaps are so critical for national security then why didn't the FBI pay its phone bill? pop

this cartoon should clear all that up.

Philip J. Fry: Bush: "It is a matter of national security to get FISA renewed."
Bush: "I will veto any FISA law without immunity for telecoms."

Telecom immunity > national security?

Telecoms: you dont protect us, we stop writing checks.

/and leak all the stuff people dont know about yet...

Nabb1: Well, I guess that makes it alright then. And people wonder why so many Americans are disgusted with both parties...

I'm not sure what would make anyone disgusted with the Dems...

Except, of course, the whole part of them caving in to this bullshiat for too long.

Nabb1: wigglebiscuit: And the prior GOP congress regularly kept bills from being voted on, and scheduled votes for the wee hours of the morning without bothering to tell the Dems. I'm sure you were decrying the thwarting of The People's will then, right?

Well, I guess that makes it alright then. And people wonder why so many Americans are disgusted with both parties...

Well, there have always been many bills that are not brought up for a vote, many more that don't even make it out of committee. It's the leadership's prerogative. I don't have a problem with this from either side, actually. BravadoGT seems to, but only when the Dems do it I wager.
The late night, little or no warning votes the last Congress practiced sucked tho. And would suck if the Dems did it too.

Dead_Mandela :
....... BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.....HA......

Sultan Of Herf: Telecoms: you dont protect us, we stop writing checks.

/and leak all the stuff people dont know about yet...

THIS

\\\The administration cares more about protecting itself for its' own illegal activities more than anything; including the Telcoms and National Security

Philip J. Fry
Bush: "It is a matter of national security to get FISA renewed."
Bush: "I will veto any FISA law without immunity for telecoms."

Telecom immunity > national security?

This. This over, and over, and over again until the idiots who are determined to give away our freedoms over some religious freaks in caves in Pakistan finally absorb it.

Is Bush still talking? Someone give him something shiny so he'll STFU.