Fitz.

More fitz. Lots more fitz

Rootz!

Christy

This is a good thing you are doing.

I will make calls today.
Soon as I get to the office.

Kennedy said he’s against it and will fight it.

YEAH!

And I urge EVERYONE to make the calls. From what we hear in talking to the aides, the quantity of calls DOES make a difference.

this might be the single most impoortant thig we can do if we are to save our democracy

I think the dnc has to get on board big with this movement and we have to MAKE SURE this bill does not pass

we have to philibuster if we need to do it, we can not let spector take America prisoner

of all things progressives have ever done to date, this is the one that needs ev every ounce of energy we can muster.

in this fight we will GAIN resources we won’t be expending them.

we need to contact EVERYONE…muhtha, feingold, who will be with us, but we have to make sure they take advantage of their spotlight

last quarter, 2nd and ten and we are much more then one goal behind.

this is it

Its not out of committee yet, so other senators are not necessarily paying attention. Case in point, Collins has not position yet and Snowe’s office is UNAWARE of any such bill.

This has been skillfully done under the radar by Specter. There is no reason to be thinking about it for other Senator’s I think, which is strange given how amazingly little is going on in Congress. What have they done lately except have some staged debates on election-year issues? The stem cell bill was the only piece of actual work going on as far as I can tell.

If you’re stressing RH’s point about the use of secret courts, it might be worth bringing up a recent example of what happens when things are done in secret: the Cunninghams of the world take advantage of it.

Great stuff Christy.

Another point - lhp posted a link a couple of days back to a piece by Jane Harman. I haven’t seen the legislation, but the piece said that she and Conyers have their own version of a bill (I tend to trust Conyers, if maybe notsomuch Harman). Her points in the piece were that a)SHE has been briefed on the program and Specter has NOT (so how does someone who knows nothing about the program draft legislation for them) and b) there is NOTHING about the program that prevents the it from being handled by FISA.

DiFi, in particular should rally around the point that someone who has been well briefed on the program (Harman) as has Feinstein, says there is no reason to make an illegalprogram legal when it can be fitted within existing law.

fwiw.

Kohl and Feingold here. Left messages at their desks with a request for a written response. Which means I’ll get a slightly off topic boiler plate from Kohl and something germane from Feingold.

Shutting my office door and picking up the phone. Don’t think Saxby and Johnny want to hear it, though. Maybe I’ll play a concern troll…

OT- CHS your “Broken” post is a mindblower. I’ve got a real bad feeling…
All in. What can I do to help (rhetorical)?

Great catch Professor Foland at 6:33.
Government does a horrible job of auditing budgets that don’t have any clearance. BTW, this is one reason I really like the Federal False Claims Act. I wish more States would enact a version.

I do not have a website.

I called to the 888# to find out the positions of the two SD Senators.

Sen. Tim Johnson (D)–no position, perhaps waiting for debateb according the aide.

Sen John Thune (R)–aide did not know his position (but I would suspect he would vote yes because the NRC worked big time for him to defeat Sen. Dashcle.

Thank you for the good work you are doing for all the American people. I support your efforts and hope very much the Rove-Cheney machine can be stopped.

Harry Everhart
Artesian SD 57314

heverhart AT santel DOT net

“If I was president, this wouldn’t have happened.”

– Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), quoted by the Detroit News, on the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.

Making the big jump. Gonna call Steve (Specter). Tell him to tell dad, no dice. This can’t stand. Hopefully, this will help. I NEVER ask Steve to intercede with his dad but this has got to stop. Friendship is a funny thing, you don’t want to endanger it but you want to feel you can “go to it” when neccesary. I’ll check in about this later.

These guys are on the Judiciary committee for goshsakes. One thing they should know is that a whole array of laws are impacted by the wiretap issues and that there are CONSTITUTIONAL issues, which they cannot just “legislate away.” At least, not while there are any judges with de minimis integrity left on the bench.

Judge Walker’s opinion out of CA went way further than I expected from a dist. ct in the 9th and they should take note of the number of times he mentioned the fact that whether or not certain claims would fall under legislation if an AG certification could be produced (which negated making claims under the legislation) THAT HAS NO IMPACT ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS.

The biggest problem has been and remains that this has all been structured in such a way that it becomes difficult to address the illegality of the program without jeopardizng good people who are working hard and doing a good job. IMO, whatever gets done in the end needs to include sealed and unsealed testimony (depending on nature) from the people at NSA administering the program and that needs to be given with Congressional immunity. That way you tie up the loose ends of Congress actually getting the correct info it needs to legislate correctly - and no one getting a free pass without Congressional cooperation - while basically taking everyone off the hook for the hundreds and thousands of existing felony violations. Again fwiw and beyond scope of this post.

re: #15
“I coulda been a contender” (except for Ohio)

What RevDeb #6 said. There’s a big difference between 35 calls and 135 calls. Here, you can be 1% of of what’s needed, which is (as our friends in the DoD would say) an overpowering “force multiplier” of your ballot-box vote.

If they don’t ask for it, actively tell them your zip code. This will helpfully remind them that they need to mark you on their tally.

And we’ve heard from our bluest-of-blue-state Senate staffers that they get organized call campaigns from the wingnuts on issues even when it’s well known there’s no chance the Senator will take the position. I was left with the unstated impression that it really does have a long-term effect when Senators calculate how strongly to stand on things. So if you’re in a Red state, take that to heart.

Good Mornin’ Firedogs,

sent faxes to both DC & Austin offices for Cornyn

also telephoned DC office -

Staffer: ‘the Senator hasn’t taken a position, don’t think that bill is out of committee yet ‘

Me: really ? can the Senator guarantee privacy to his most loyal corporate donors ? Can the good Senator definitively state none of their phone calls, faxes, e mails, IM’s are subject to snooping - b/c ya know I’ve written to their Corporate Counsels and am prepared to write them again explaining how Chairman Specter’s bill is mere cover for the WH . . .and nothing out of Senator Cornyn’s office to date ensures privacy . . .

Staffer: Oh Hi Mrs. xxx, how y’all doin’ , the Austin office told us all about your peach cobbler . . .

OfT: Why Is Iran the Biggest Threat, Again?
by emptywheel
“I thought it a good time–now that we have evidence Pakistan is expanding its nuclear program–to reiterate an argument I made several weeks ago. Iran is not the nuclear threat we should be most worried about.

“South Asia may be heading for a nuclear arms race that could lead to arsenals growing into the hundreds of nuclear weapons, or at minimum, vastly expanded stockpiles of military fissile material,” the institute’s David Albright and Paul Brannan concluded in the technical assessment, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post….”"

I hope our candiates can use this. It’s a huge counterweight to the Rove “surrender monkey,… the Dems want to give the terrorists therapy,” narrative that Rove wants paint them into.

Sounds like HSAT is “all in,” too.

Isaakson (R-GA)doesn’t have a position, yet. And the aide wasn’t interested in hearing my views or transferring me to someone that wanted to hear my views. Sounds like he’s part of bushco…

Chambliss (R-GA) [yes the one that put Osama’s picture up next to Max Cleland, Vietnam Veteran and triple amputee, in the campaign], is having his staff meeting right now.

I’m going to call them both back later on.

cbl at 20 — hehehe Oh, that is hilarious. Had you told them your name, or did they know you from the advocacy? (And where’s our copy of that peach cobbler recipe? *G*)

Sorry for the double post (thanks for fixing) I’ve had lots of computer glitches in this thread and the Soros thread yesterday.

Here was lhp’s Harman link -

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....25231.html

- and a brief blurb from the end.

A far better approach is the legislation Rep. John Conyers and I have drafted. The Lawful Intelligence and Surveillance of Terrorists in an Emergency by the NSA (’LISTEN’) Act (H.R. 5371) would require the program to comply with FISA and would provide the resources needed to do just that. The bill has 58 co-sponsors and has been endorsed by the American Bar Association, the ACLU, the Center for Democracy Technology (CDT), former Reagan Justice lawyer Bruce Fein, and the Open Society Policy Center.

It’s not like there are no alternatives.

HSAT 16–you’re on slightly touchy territory. Maybe someone here has a good idea how to approach it creatively–which you’ll probably need because I bet your friend gets lobbied constantly.

A Greenwaldian approach: buy a little toy Minuteman and ask him to pass it along to Senator Dad with the question, “What would this guy have thought of your bill?”

I don’t know if this is necessarily a good approach–obviously depends on your friendship–just trying to think of a way to cut through the noise.

Before reading this post, gotta share with you the next-to-last graf of the NY Metro article that *ilson linked to, last thread:

Back in the liquor-store parking lot, a well-wisher yelled, “Go get ‘em, Joe!” And he called back, “Spread the word.” He was feeling loose now, so much so that he began telling aides about a dream he’d had the other night in which long-dead Democratic Connecticut governor John Dempsey had walked across a stage and waved at him. Lieberman was puzzled by the dream. It was hard not to wonder what his unconscious was telling him: Was this the Democratic organization from the past wishing the senator well or waving good-bye?

My sense of it: both in one.

THIS IS WORKING, y’all!

Okay, now back up top to snag our workplan for today …

[Tony Blair, on CNN, looking 10 years older than last week . . .]

Good, a project for lunchtime.

I already know what my senators will say:

Dodd - with the progressives

LIEberman - supporting Codpiece

Hi all.
I called Grassley. Like other Senators called by other firedoggers Grassley had no position yet. But I made all the points passionately and sincerely hope Grassley and his staff are getting used to my calls, e-mails, and letters. Keep the faith!

In a bizarre WaPo op-ed defending his supposed compromise bill codifying President Bush’s illegal domestic surveillance, Arlen Specter asks:

“If someone has a better idea for legislation that would resolve the program’s legality or can negotiate a better compromise with the president, I will be glad to listen.”

Here’s an idea. Don’t compromise with criminals. Follow the law. Hold the hearings. Subpoena the officials. Do your job.

For the full story, see:
“Specter’s Op-Ed: Cowardice He Can Live With.”

Interesting, lengthy article in New York Magazine about Lamont/Lieberman.

It includes the tidbit that Hillary was cornered by Lieberman on the Senate floor in his attempt to convince her to send Bill to CT to campaign for Lieberman.

http://newyorkmetro.com/news/p.....ndex5.html

I called my senators, Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez, and the staff in both of their offices said that they had not yet taken a position on Spector’s proposed legislation.

Christy,

the Cornyn folks remember me from ‘advocacy’ - on one of our “To The Phones !” threads, I mentioned contacting the Senator’s 5 largest Corporate Donors about their privacy and did so. I then faxed copies of my correspondence to the Senator’s office - and got put through to his Chief of Staff (Stewart ??) Following the advice on the threads to bring goodies, I showed up at both local offices with the cobbler - apparently it was a hit

some morning coffee cake for all the lawyers -
Prof. Kerr gets referenced by everyone from SCOTUS Blog to EFF - thought y’all might enjoy the comments (note FDL regular slothrop makes an appearance)
http://www.orinkerr.com/2006/0.....urt-rules/

FYI - hat tip to Lamont Blog for the New York Magazine story. Credit where credit is due.

http://lamontblog.blogspot.com/

Hillary (D - NY): has not put out position; no press release or press conference re position scheduled. Took my comments.

Chuck (D- NY): He is apparently having a hearing on this bill on Wednesday. Took my comments. Told him that if he votes the wrong way on this that a Joe Liberman-esque primary challenge is in his future.

I will call Burr and Dole…but I can already tell you what they’re going to say. I’ve banged my ahead against these two walls before.

no formal stance from Leahy yet - his aide wasn’t even aware of the wednesday meeting. however (thanks to handy talking points) when informed of the content of the specter bill he was noticably alarmed and assured me that Pat would here of my concerns pronto.

ok, we are in a war of words and even though WE know what’s at stake, the republciann base DOES NOT

they actually believe they are doing the right ting by defending these actions

we have been loosing the war of words and it’s time to start winning it

“the ONLY reason to conduct searches without warrants is if a person wants to gather information that has nothing to do with national security, information nobody would agree they should have.

it doesn’t matter if you think you haven’t done anything wrong so you are not ocncerned, because there is stealing going on.

with this program and no warrants, with no doubt these people can and WILL steal your company secrets, with the financial information they are able to gather they can and WILL take over your most valuable contracts, find your sources, they can out bid you whenever they want, they can learn the people and contacts tou have spent your entire carrer to aquire.

they can steal your trade secrets, they can tell where you’ve been, where you are going, what you are doing, what you have done, what you are buying, who you are buying from, to who you are selling, what price you pay, what price you get, how you manufacture your goods, how you develope your product

ONCE keeping our personal affairs private was a concervative position and you need to insure you keep people from taking from you what they are not entitled

there is NOTHING that would not have been gathered WITH warrants and WITHOUT breaking both the law and the oath this president made to god and country

nothing…not one thing….nada…zilcho…zero…ummm…nothing

the ONLY reason to conduct searches without warrants is if you want to gather information that has nothing to do with national security, information nobody would agree you should have.”

now THAT’S the way to bring the point home to the base

me to me @ 37:

Typical wingnut response: “People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing”.

Blind allegience is a tough nut to crack.

“they can steal your trade secrets, they can tell where you’ve been, where you are going, what you are doing, what you have done, what you are buying, who you are buying from, to who you are selling, what price you pay, what price you get, how you manufacture your goods, how you develop your product”

pretty much the gist of my letters to Cornyn’s/Hutchison’s Corporate Donors - I added that even if they feel quite comfortable/safe with the current Admin., will they feel equally comfortable with the same set up/laws but different Admin. ??

38Dr. Bong says

July 24th, 2006 at 7:27 am
me to me @ 37:

Typical wingnut response: “People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing”.

Blind allegience is a tough nut to crack.

that’s the point, we HAVE things to hide, and we HAVE things we don’t want people to see…that’s the very point of my post

i called senator schumer’s office and spoke to a rep. he said the senator hadn’t taken a position yet but had requested that specter do a second hearing which is the one that will be held this wednesday. i stated my objections to this particular abomination.

I’ll be happy to call my “reps” but…what is the bill number? I am reticent to call my reps with only “Specter’s bill” as a moniker. I want an SB# to make sure there is no misunderstanding of what bill, precisely, I am railing against.

What is the identifier for Bush’s/Cheney’s (yeah right, “Specter’s bill” my ass) free pass bill?

Dr. Bong at 38 — My response on something like that from a wingnut is the following: “Since when did the Republican party start taking lessons from the former Soviet Union on intrusive, secret government action with no oversight? I thought you guys were for less government and strict construction of the Constitution. This violates the Fourth Amendment, among other things. I don’t know about you, but I don’t take my governmental operational tips from Stalin or Mao.” Stand back. Watch head spin.

Senator Bayh has no position on Specter’s bill. It appears he is waiting to triangulate on it.

Speaking of votes, why is it that no one in Lieberman’s office can tell me his stand on the so-called “Child Custody Protection Act” that’s slated to be voted on tomorrow?

As a “pro-choice” senator, one might assume he’d oppose making it a federal crime for a young woman’s grandparents, religious counselor, or other close friend or relative to accompany her across state lines to obtain an abortion. But given his recent track record with EC, who know where he stands on this issue?

Certainly not his staffers, unfortunately.

Senator Lugar has no position…his office doesn’t even know about the bill, apparently, nor about what FISA is. At least the aide that answered the phone is totally unaware.

For those who gets “The Senator does not yet have a postition.”…I’d throw in that the Senator took an oath of office to uphold, defend etc the Constitution. This is not about any mundane spending bill we’re talking about. This is about the Constitution, and whatever is left of it for the future generations of citizens (and the current citizens too, of course.)
——-
Charlie Savage’s lede in today’s Globe wrt ABA/signing statements says the ABA committee of 38 was UNANIMOUS.
Isn’t that rather remarkable in and of itself?

CHS (43):

Hear, Hear!

Called Coleman, Brownback and Congresscritter McCollum (will call Dayton later). So far, getting the standard “we don’t have a position on it yet” which to me is a good sign — it means we can put the squeeze on them.

When talking to the Republicans, remind them that they didn’t like it when Janet “Conflict of Interest” Reno was doing things they felt were Constitutionally icky, and that the way the polls are going, the GOP will lose Congress in ‘06 and the White House in ‘08, and that they REALLY don’t want Specter’s bill to be law when there’s a Democratic AG.

“Isn’t that rather remarkable in and of itself? “

pretty much. last time they evinced unanimity was their ‘ranking’ of SCOTUS candidate C Thomas (lowest ABA rating ever!)

Will be trying Feinstein and my rep later today, but also wanted to throw this sunset commission bill on the table to go in the cue for contemplation. Are folks looking at this?

link
via Talk to Action

Praedor at 42 — It’s Senate Bill 2453. You can take a peek at it here. (And I updated the post above with this link as well.)

O/T

catty but true,

Condi looks like hammered crap on a ritz - this whole diplomatting thing is hard

Huge thanks to everyone who is making calls — thus far, I’m getting answering machines from my WV reps, so I’m going to try local offices next.

The staffer in Sen. Byrd’s office doesn’t know if he’s taken a position as yet, but I’ll likely get a written reply from him sometime this week (if I know Sen. Byrd’s efficient staff…and, if I had to guess, I’d say he won’t like the bill, but I’ll wait for the reponse to say for sure).

Buncha jaw-dropping headlines on RawStory right now, among them:

Flash: 15 current and former members of Congress queried
by FBI on disclosure of NSA spy program… Developing….

Boxer of CA — says she has not yet taken a stance on the Spector bill.

Feinstein — has her own bill. Does anyone know what the provisions of her bill are?

Just called Lieberman’s office, spoke with a pleasant staffer who took the time to look into what I was talking about.

Acccording to the staffer, who had not previously heard of the bill, the Junior Senator has formulated no position on this at this time.

(cross post w/ Atrios)

OT: Effective new video up at Kos regarding Lieberman’s greatest mistakes:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo.....74835/3547

Spectre in WaPo today:

In my opinion, it is intolerable to let this matter drift indefinitely. If someone has a better idea for legislation that would resolve the program’s legality or can negotiate a better compromise with the president, I will be glad to listen.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00578.html

Here’s Teddy’s $.02:
Well, Arlen, ya could make the Preznit obey the frickin’ law, or impeach the bastard.

========
Had Enough?
========

Here’s Teddy’s $.02:
Well, Arlen, ya could make the Preznit obey the frickin’ law, or impeach the bastard.

You took the words out of my mouth. The answer is quite simple: obey the law, but if you have a problem with some provision of the law, express what it is and seek congressional redress, if possible (if it is compatible with the Constitution and Bill of Rights).

dweb at 57 — I don’t see anything on the Thomas service. Did they give you a number? Is it perhaps an Amendment to be proposed to the Specter bill?

Just coz the person answering your phonecall is a totally clueless dimwit, you can politely request to speak to a more specialized and informed staffer. Do it !

dweb,
can’t find any reference anywhere to bill by DiFi - in Teddy’s link above there are references to a bill from Rep Heather Wilson -NM, endorsed by Sensenbrenner and Hoekstra (opposed by House dems) and of course there’s always Senator DeWine’s bill - oh yeah, can’t wait

sherocket—nicely done with those linky thingies.

wow, spector is holding himself up to a kick in the butt with that statement

we ALL have better ideas to keep this from “drifitng indefinately”

MAKE THE PRESIDENT FOLLOW THE FRIGGIN LAW, PROVIDE OVERSIGHT TO KEEP HIM FROM STEALING FORM US AND DO YOUR FRIGGIN JOB GA DAM IT!

Hi there from Illinois. Regarding S. 2453, Our Senator Dick Durbin is very uncomfortable with the bill as it now stands in committee and his office said that if the bill is reported out as it now stands he will likely work against it and vote no. Obama’s office basically gave a no comment because the committe hasn’t written final language before reporting a bill to the floor (or not).

Dr Bong @ 38 & me to me @ 37 -

Typical wingnut response: “People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing”.

Progressive reply: “Investigators who have nothing to hide should have no problem going before a court to get a warrant.”

in our phone calls we HAVE to put to reality what we wnat stopped

we want the president to STOP STEALING FROM US

that’s what he’s doing with these taps and there is no denying it

that’s the way we have to do it

we have to appeal to the base and that will hit home hard

Dang!

I’ve been emailing myself my fave bits of this thread to draft a script for my calls, but so far the stoopid tubes are bogartin’ ‘em!

Phoned my congressman’s office this morning, whoever answered had never heard of the FISA bill and had no idea what his position might be, but promised to get back to me. I expected better from George Miller, he’s been a decent democrat.

Boxer’s office says “she hasn’t stated a position”, Feinstein’s office says she is offering her own bill and promises it will be tough on judicial review; I have my doubts.

Spectre rolling over, asking BushCo, Inc., to rub his tummy:

Not only would the bill permit a determination of the program’s legality but if it were found unlawful in whole or in part, a framework would exist for modifying the program.

Like there’s gonna be modifications, Arlen, even if the FISC finds anything wrong with the program! Jeeeesh! He also says

The negotiations with administration officials and the president himself were fierce.

Were the big mean Preznit and his bully friends BigTime, Abu, and Davey Addington mean to you on the playground, Arlen? Boo-hoo, fierce negotiations! Of course they were fierce, Arlen, proto-fascists on their way to full-blown will be fierce. Fierce is what they do really well.

What do you do well, Arlen?

tell the roots project: (is there a better way to do this?)

OBAMA: NO POSITION YET

DURBIN: see above — doesn’t like it.

lotus — go to file and open the send an email…only don’t send it, just put it down on your bottom toolbar and add to it as needed.

This is news to me (haven’t followed the active cases/rulings too closely.) Based on the District Ct. throwing out ’state secrets’ in the AT&T case, the EFF is filing for an injunction on the NSA ‘program’. Just fyi…
——
http://www.pacifica.org/progra.....60721.html

…”Now, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is seeking an injunction that would order the government to stop surveillance activities until the lawsuit is resolved.”
—–
If that happens, wouldn’t that set the stage for a ‘Constitutional crisis’? Not that it isn’t already ongoing, but that certain institutions would have their hands FORCED to take a stand?
—-

Well, THIS has certainly made the wait more pleasant!

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/b.....ntral.html

[SPEW ALERT: COLBERT]

Sybil,

Cong. Miller’s office -

here’s link to Congresswoman Wilson’s bill (endorsed by Hoekstra & Sensenbrenner - opposed by House Dems)

http://wilson.house.gov/NewsAc.....mp;ID=1280

and yeah, George Miller is usually one of the good guys a la’ Waxman

TSF -

Arlen’s good at crafting ‘magic bullets’. This bill is another example, that’s all.

oh, and Arlen, why oh why do you cave to the bozo who vetoed the stem cell bill you wanted so badly, anyway? Fierce, you say? Well fight then and stop being a coward and lackey. You certainly are not being like the civil libertarian you claim to be.

There’s this big orange blog… that has a ton of readers. I figure this is so important that it should be brought to their attention.

Those of your reading this might want to recommend this diary there to enlist a few more tens of thousands to this cause: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/24/112337/441

I am SCARED SHIT out og obama.

I think he’s another judas sheep who has drunk the kool aid

ie…alito

WE MUST MAKE IT CLEAR TO HIM HE HAS NO CHOICE ON THIS BILL

if he wavers on this issue he is a republican stealing our resources

OT
CSPAN 2 is airing a debate on net neutrality at 8pm ET. It’s called The Great Communicators.

it is critical that Lamont gets the nomination in CT…. provides excellent leverage with the other Senators… “ya’ see what happened to Lieberman? Do your job or we’ll get rid of the lot of you!”

Seems a terrible shame to have to threaten as opposed to expressing our opinions, but whatever it takes to get our country back….

malacandra at 80 — thanks, meant to get over to Kos and put something up this morning, but I’ve been on the phone and working on the follow-up post on this. Much appreciated and I threw a recommend your way. :)

Thanks for the tip, PS — stuff just got here, so I’m off to work on my script.

Email from a friend just now has this memorable bottom-line:

“Fate succumbs many a species: one alone jeopardizes itself.”
–W.H. Auden

OfT:
fwiw, I just sent this to Howard Kurtz for his online chat at noon est. Pretty sure Howie won’t publish it.
“Interested in any observations you have about Tim Russert and Josh Bolten yesterday on Meet the Press.
Also, the U.S. kidnaps people in the Middle East all the time, but we call it “extreme rendition.” Then we torture them at Gitmo and other secret prisons, but President Bush says the AUMF makes all this legal.
When Hezbolah kidnaps two Israeli soldiers, that is an act of terrorism.
Why can’t the people in the Middle East and around the world understand the difference?

Senator Bingaman supports “The Opposite” of what this bill calls for. Senator Dominici’s staff “was not at liberty, I mean, I can’t say what his position is.” Took my info, will have “someone get back to you” on this.

Neither Levin or Stabenow have a position yet. I voiced my oppostition. I talked to Specter’s office and they said he felt he needed to propose a bill, any bill, otherwise, there could be no jucicial review of the NSA surveillance program. I told them that I didn’t understand this rational as there already were several cases moving within the courts and that Spector’s bill would remove the cases to the secret FISA court.

I completely agree oldcoastie at 8:36.

Californians — When you call Feinstein urge the staffer to get the Feinstein alternate bill posted on her website. I also was told she was offering her own bill (”strong on judicial review”) in opposition to Specter’s, but that the staffer didn’t know when it would be available to read.

One – there is nothing wrong with the current FISA; what is wrong is in not demanding that it be enforced and that the administration comply with it. It disturbs me greatly that we seem to have come to the point where the Congress is writing legislation designed to accommodate this administration’s disdain for, and refusal to adhere to, current law.

Two – if the administration believes that provisions of the Act are unconstitutional, or that the president can circumvent the provisions during a time of war, let them bring suit and argue their case and subject themselves to a court ruling.

Oh, yeah - that’s right - they don’t pay attention to court rulings that go against them, either.

Sen. Salazar (D-CO): His staff wasn’t aware of the bill, he hadn’t taken a position on it yet. They said they would pass my concerns along.

Sen. Allard (R-CO): May be aware of it, but definitely hasn’t taken a position. Staff said they would pass along my concerns.

Lotus 70

Me, too, but I just cut and paste them to those “stickies” for later assembly.

If PC’s don’t have stickies, you can cut and paste them into a draft email which should go to your drafts folder when you save it, as long as you don’t put anything in the address field.

A wee suggestion if using bold or italics:

Put it in the middle, not the end, and preview to make sure you closed it with [/whatever].

OT…well isn’t this disturbing…if not completely surprising with this administration:

Click me

Marshals: Innocent People Placed On ‘Watch List’ To Meet Quota

“….was not at liberty…”
An elected official’s staff is “not at liberty” to disclose the elected official’s position on an issue to a constituent.
That gets my blood pressure into the danger zone in a big hurry.
“Breathing now, relax. Visualize a babbling brook with the front face of the snow-capped Rockies in the distance, breathe now. Visualize….”

that’s what we need…alternate bills

but if we are to compete in the war of words those bills need to say what’s at stake in practical terms

not just “violate the constitution”, not just “violate the bill of rights”, not just “provide oversight”

we need to use the language to drive home the point…the bill MUST say things like;

“to prevent government organizations from stealing from their constituents”

and

“to insure officials cannot have information they are not entitled and have nothing to do with national security”

we really HAVE TO start using the phrases that mean something

You forgot to add asking your senate candidates where they would stand on this issue. We have a right to know what they would vote for if given a chance. For example, those in NJ might like to know how Tom Kean Jr. would answer those questions.

The text for Arlen’s bill isn’t up yet. and DIFi’s bill doesn’t ahve a number yet.
DiFi’s position is obviously against Specter.
The Bill should have a number by tomorrow.

Prof.F

Thanks for the suggestion. I called and left a message. Steve is really busy but he’ll get back to me by tonight. That should give me some time to come up with an approach to this.
And if you’re friends with him, you know not to ask about dad. And no one does. This will be my first time. Though I have enquired through an alternate source previously. Anyway.

Anyone that has a ’suggestion’ on how to ask a good friend about something extremely sensitive. Pleas pipe up.

I’d also like to highlight a rerun of an important hearing in the House Intelligence Committee that was held to consider proposed changes to FISA last Wednesday. C-SPAN 3 will be replaying it this afternoon (according to their schedule):

On C-SPAN3 at 2:30 p.m.(running just over 2 hours) it can be viewed streaming online here (RealPlayer):

http://c-span.org/watch/cspan3.....p;Code=CS3

Two of the witnesses are pretty dreadful/incoherent (Richard Posner of the University of Chicago Law School and Kim Taipale of a center for studies in science and technology policy) but two are excellent (ABA President Michael Greco and James Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology, who did his homework on FISA and on pending House legislation to change it from Heather Wilson and Hoekstra et al).

The most enlightening part comes about half an hour from the end, I believe (4 p.m. or so), when Dempsey starts explaining to the clueless members of the Intelligence Committee just what FISA requires and what it does not require (this committee clearly needs to take a FISA 101 class to get up to speed on its intricacies). So that part is quite informative. And earlier in the hearing Greco defends the Fourth Amendment beautifully. His initial presentation is a powerful defense of our Constitution.

The wise advice given at that hearing (but probably immediately ignored by Hoekstra and company) was to delay any changes to the carefully constructed FISA law unless and until members are given a REASON why FISA must be changed by the administration. Otherwise bills are “a solution in search of a problem,” as I believe Rep. Jane Harman put it.

good one, John Casper @ 87– I hope Howie does take it. You have hit a very important nail on the head, imho, and I have thought long and hard about your post yesterday wrt this.

Called Schumer and Clinton’s office.

Schumer does not have a public position on th ebill, but has asked Specter for another hearing on the issue which will take place this Wed.

Clinton’s office was overwhelmed with calls today (not sure why) the sweet little intern didn’t navigate the call, but put me through to Clinton’s leg affairs office where I laft a detailed voicemail.

Thanks angie.