Above the law
That’s the status of telecommunications companies following the failure of the Dodd-Feingold amendment in the Senate today. The amendment, had it passed, would have stripped the telecom immunity provisions from the surveillance authorization bill. The final vote was 31-67, with Obama voting yes, McCain voting no, and Hillary not even bothering to show up.
As I understand it, there is still no immunity provision in the House version of the legislation. That seems likely to change given the margins in play here. Certainly, there can now be no excuse at all for a vote in favor of the bill proper–I myself would have been inclined to oppose it even had this amendment passed.
Your Democratic Congress, ladies and gentlemen. Willing and eager to sacrifice civil liberties in the hope that doing so will enable them to enact earmarks and other forms of social spending. It’s damn sad, but there is simply no political party willing to advocate the rule of law.
>>Certainly, there can now be no excuse at all for a vote in favor of the bill proper
Well that’s the sticker isn’t it? Senator McOffkilter who is claimed by some to be a fiscal conservative (which he isn’t) is more than happy to vote against a bill that would protect the citizens of the respective states from 530+ tiny tyrants in DC and at the same time hold the companies responsible when they hand over information which is not the government’s business. Of course if you’re waving your flag (appropriate size of course), watching Fix News, and think Junior was a good President you have nothing to fear from your government. For now.
Protecting your freedoms by taking away your freedoms. But do please continue to vote for the one party system. Allows them to continue to do something to, I mean for, you….
Comment by nighttrain — 2/12/2008 @ 2:57 pm
Nothing else herein is quite so persuasive, to me, as the hilarious parodies of the names of the candidate and Fox News.
Comment by Rojas — 2/12/2008 @ 3:03 pm
Sorry I have offended you. I don’t think you really want me to type out exactly what I think of Senator John McCain and Fox News. After all children may be reading this.
It really has come to this point though hasn’t it? I have no respect whatsoever, save a very small handful, for any politician in Washington DC no matter what side of the aisle. I do not believe Republicans are trying to protect me and I do not believe Democrats truly care about my civil liberties. They can rot for all I care.
What I do care about is seeing what once was a great nation of states devolve into a mass bundle of nerves and feeling led by simple minded, slow witted, slack jawed fools with no other concern than as to how much power they can gain for themselves or there party. As to what I think of those who would ardently advocate their election OTOH is somewhat more of sympathy for a belief that a vote for one to keep another out really matters
Comment by nighttrain — 2/12/2008 @ 3:19 pm
nighttrain, get real. Do you really think you offended Rojas with McOffkilter and Fix news? We have all said far worse to him than that. If I had to guess, I would say that his reply to you was meant to convey that your argument looses strength and influence when you do the name parody thing. You might note that he Rojas has been rather critical of the wiretapping and retro immunity.
Comment by Jack — 2/12/2008 @ 4:14 pm
Jack’s got the basic idea. I think rather highly of the commentators here, really, yourself included; on the other hand, I have nothing but the most enthusiastic contempt for the tactics that prevail on most public message boards, and the whole name-parody “Osama Obama” thing is, I think, beneath us. It’s not offensive; it’s lazy and unpersuasive.
I do, however, understand and sympathize with your feelings regarding American politicians in general. I don’t quite share your contempt where this year’s major presidential contenders are concerned–I think two of the four survivors are well above the modern standard, and I was out and out enthusiastic about Paul–but I don’t hold it against anyone if they don’t share my enthusiasm.
Comment by Rojas — 2/12/2008 @ 4:40 pm
I was actually going to write a post on just that (admittedly minor) subject. I’ve mentioned it in posts before. The whole name-parody thing is a dumb habit particularly prevalent in libertarian circles these days (though hardcore partisans on all sides do it), and for some reason it annoys the hell out of me. Not because I’m offended—really no political reason at all—just because it’s about up there with a fart joke in terms of humor. It’s lame. It’s low-rated syndicated radio talk show funny.
The only one that was even mildly funny was when people were saying “Ghouliani” but got it to the point where they were spelling it in leetspeak so they could work 911 in there.
Comment by Brad — 2/12/2008 @ 5:13 pm
“9iu11ani” was funny, I agree. Well, not FUNNY funny, but it had a patina of cleverness about it, at least.
It’s been really disheartening to see this trend replicated by senior posters at LRC, including Rockwell himself.
This is NOT the way to gain political legitimacy.
Comment by Rojas — 2/12/2008 @ 5:32 pm
Leave it to the Paulbearers to complain about this.
Comment by Jack — 2/12/2008 @ 6:38 pm
Hillary couldn’t show up despite the fact that the only Presidential race thing going on was…the DC/Virginia/Maryland primary.
She’s in Texas.
Comment by Brad — 2/12/2008 @ 10:21 pm