Dems Reluctantly Back Terror Surveillance Bill

[Rhino]

Senate Dems Reluctantly Back Terror Surveillance Bill
Saturday, August 04, 2007

WASHINGTON — The White House was halfway to its goal of winning expanded powers to eavesdrop on suspected foreign terrorists.

Senate Democrats reluctantly agreed to passing a bill Friday night to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The House of Representatives was expected to consider it Saturday after rejecting a Democratic alternative the night before.

The high-stakes showdown over national security hinged largely on how early a special court will review the government's surveillance of foreigners' overseas phone calls and Internet messages without warrants....

...The Senate-approved plan, largely crafted by the White House, was barely pushed through after Bush promised to veto a stricter proposal that would have required a court review to begin within 10 days. It gives Bush the expanded eavesdropping authority for six months....http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,292029,00.html

[DoctorDoom]

The RAT "reluctance" is due to the party's lip-lock on the asses of the terrorists. Skroom.

[Maggie_T]

Quite.

Aw, poor wittle peace-wuvving democwats. They were forced by big bad conservatives to vote sensibly. Sniff, sniff. :crying:

Bunch of yellow-bellied pharisees. When push comes to shove, they know which side their bread is buttered.

[DeclinetoState]

Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/) reaction:


by Meteor Blades (http://meteor-blades.dailykos.com/)

Fri Aug 03, 2007 at 10:00:24 PM PDT

The Senate has surrendered to Mister Bush on domestic spying, yielding ignominiously to the White House’s demands that the unitary executive be given more authority when it seeks to wiretap suspected terrorists without warrants. The vote was 60-28. If passed by the House, the bill would be law for six months. Meanwhile, Congress would use that time to put together a permanent one.
The New York Times notes (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/04/washington/04nsa.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1186201626-1eXX77xmZk9ZXwmbDZAbaw):
The White House and Congressional Republicans hailed the Senate vote as critical to plugging what they saw as dangerous gaps in the intelligence agencies’ ability to detect terrorist threats.

"I can sleep a little safer tonight," Senator Christopher S. Bond, the Missouri Republican who co-sponsored the measure, declared after the Senate vote.

The measure approved by the Senate expires in six months and would have to be re-authorized. The White House’s grudging agreement to make it temporary helped to attract the votes of some moderate Democrats who said they thought it was important for Congress to approve some version of the wiretapping bill before its recess.

The White House and Republican leaders pressed the point throughout the day that a vote against the measure would put the nation at greater risk of attack.
No Republicans voted against the bill. The following Democrats voted for it: Evan Bayh (Indiana); Tom Carper (Delaware); Bob Casey (Pennsylvania); Kent Conrad (North Dakota); Dianne Feinstein (California); Daniel Inouye (Hawai‘i); Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota); <DEL>Nancy</DEL> Mary Landrieu (Louisiana); Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Barbara Mikulski (Maryland); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Mark Pryor (Arkansas); Ken Salazar (Colorado); Jim Webb (Virginia).

Senators Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Barack Obama all opposed the bill, as did 23 other Democrats and Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont. Joe Lieberman voted ...well, you know how he voted.




Libs aren't too happy with some fairly liberal members of their party.

[dPrasse]

The RAT "reluctance" is due to the party's lip-lock on the asses of the terrorists. Skroom.

Have to love the arrogance ...

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., chastised his colleagues for bending to the administration's will.
"The day we start deferring to someone who's not a member of this body ... is a sad day for the U.S. Senate," Feingold said.

does that mean that the Dimocraps will stop deferring to the pro-terrorist CAIR or the Illegal Immigrant LaRaza folks ?:question:

[Maggie_T]

Yeah, right! :rolleyes:

Besides, CAIR and La Raza ARE members of the body ... the body of the demunist party. ;)

[Naturalized-Texan]

does that mean that the Dimocraps will stop deferring to the pro-terrorist CAIR or the Illegal Immigrant LaRaza folks ?
Or to al Qaeda? Or to Hamas? :question:

[DeclinetoState]

"The day we start deferring to someone who's not a member of this body ... is a sad day for the U.S. Senate," Feingold said. Most American citizens are not members of the Senate. Is he thinking of us?

[dPrasse]

Most American citizens are not members of the Senate. Is he thinking of us?

The Senate stopped thinking of US citizens long ago ...

[DoctorDoom]

Most American citizens are not members of the Senate. Is he thinking of us?Precisely. In the last few decades they have shown only contempt for the people who put them in power. All they want from us is our votes and our tax payments. Other than that, we can piss off.

Small wonder they're obsessed with destroying the "new media", especially talk radio. The people can be stirred to action in a way that the arrogrant bastards can't ignore, and they don't like that.

[Maggie_T]

Most American citizens are not members of the Senate. Is he thinking of us?

Think of us? You and me?! Now really, Decline. Since when does the aristocracy (them) bother with what the hoi-polloi (you and me, dear) want?

Honestly. Some people will get above themselves.

:rolleyes:

[BuckeyeMike]

The Senate stopped thinking of US citizens long ago ...

Damn near every politician that enters within the beltway stops thinking of us......until it is time for re-election. Then they throw out a few proverbial "bones" to make the simple minded think they reeaaaalllly give a shit about us. To quote a famous desert dwelling fox.........."SKROOOM"!

edit: The quote shoulda been attributed to the Doctor of Doomness.....but the sand bound fox woulda (and on occasion probably has) said it!

[Maggie_T]

What Mike said.

[DeclinetoState]

Damn near every politician that enters within the beltway stops thinking of us......until it is time for re-election. You could probably say the same for just about every politician who enters whatever surrounds his respective state's capital, as well.

Nice Freudian slip there, Russ F.!

[Jester21]

This is exactly why I think the Democrats are the biggst bunch of wimps I've ever seen. WTF is the problem with having someone outside the Administration review these wiretaps?

The only thing worse than republicans who roll over for this White House is democrats who do it...they don't even have party loyalty as an excuse. Pathetic.

[Naturalized-Texan]

This is exactly why I think the Democrats are the biggst bunch of wimps I've ever seen. WTF is the problem with having someone outside the Administration review these wiretaps?

The only thing worse than republicans who roll over for this White House is democrats who do it...they don't even have party loyalty as an excuse. Pathetic.
Why don't you think that our government has the Constitutional right to conduct surveillance of enemy communications in a time of war? Our government has always had that right and we have conducted such surveillance ever since the Revolutionary War.

[Jester21]

Why don't you think that our government has the Constitutional right to conduct surveillance of enemy communications in a time of war?
I have no issue with terrorists being wiretapped; I have an issue with nobody double-checking that its only terrorists being wiretapped. I fail to see the problem-- if the government has a valid reason to wiretap, then there should be no issue with getting a FISA court judge to agree.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I have no issue with terrorists being wiretapped; I have an issue with nobody double-checking that its only terrorists being wiretapped. I fail to see the problem-- if the government has a valid reason to wiretap, then there should be no issue with getting a FISA court judge to agree.
The FISA Court has already ruled that no warrant is needed in the case of enemy surveillance and enemy surveillance is the ONLY surveillance that is being conducted. In most, if not all, cases, time is of the essence and if authorities had to wait for judge to issue a warrant, it would likely be too late to save the lives of American troops or innocent civilians who are about to be attacked.

BTW, no one is wiretapping anyone. The technology being used by our enemies is WAY beyond wiretapping. That was the main reason for the expanded bill that Congress passed and the president just signed.

[Rhino]

It is more than double checked.