Thursday, February 21, 2008

House Republican Conference ... There really is no urgency on the Protect America Act/FISA


Perhaps I owe Steny Hoyer some good press after scolding him for the futile effort in keeping Al Wynn in Congress representing MD-4 (and more importantly for some of the powers that be like Steny representing Corporate America) so let us turn to how the GOP's House Republican Conference tried to handle the "Protect America Act". They've got Steny coming on after allegedly our own Senator Jay Rockefeller was claiming ruin if provisions of the PAA didn't continue with Steny saying repeatedly "There is no urgency." After each of Steny's statements they flash pictures of various bad guys holding AKs and otherwise looking very menacing.

As an aside, I worry way more about sophisticated terrorists/extremists than those bouncing about like the ones they picture. As a second aside, the Senate's "overwhelming" vote was 67-31. All the GOP's Senators supported Bu$hCo on PAA but "we" lost 19 "Democrats" plus Joe "Honest Independent" Lieberman. Those "For the meat of the matter as to this YouTube, I'd merely state the plain truth is that Steny is right. We've got the regular old FISA laws that we managed to fight the Cold War with still in place. The so called the "Protect America Act" let efforts initiated under it go on for a full year! Clearly the claim that exigent circumstances require hasty action fails and yet the GOP apparently is more than willing to just ignore the facts. As The Economist opines just today ...

In reality, the statute's demise has done little practical harm. Existing wiretaps can continue. American spies can also tap away as long as they get permission from the attorney-general; warrants, which have to be signed by a judge, can be obtained subsequently. (Preparing warrant applications, even after the fact, is time-consuming, but that should not be an immediate problem.) And telecommunications firms worried about lawsuits are no worse off than they were before.
What gives? Is telecom immunity that critical? I'm guessing that civil trials which would allow some digging in places the current administration and their corporate enabalers don't care to have tapped is one reason behind their efforts. Maybe they are doubling down on the fear factor that worked in 2002 and then in 2004 to a lesser extent (as the sanctity of marriage effort made the difference then) as they get ready for 2008? The Economist piece above reveals some good insights into the GOP's wailing and posturing. Where is the reporting from on our side of the pond that dares contextualize the news?

At least Newt Gingrich got in a shot at those pesky trial lawyers. And Newt is just one of thousands on that side of the mix that will work this and similar votes into their message machine. This Faux News effort to blend the PAA vote and "the Surge" is another taste of things to come. Better gird our loins and all that stuff here on the left. John Gunn

No comments: