FISA Act needs to be modernized
And what he wants to do is broden the governments ability to spy on average ordinary American citizens.
And shemefully, democrats once again caved to the administration and have taken us further away from the freedoms gauranteed by the constitution.
Is it any wonder that approval ratings for this Congress are even lower than for the President himself? Democrats have squandered thier chance to lead this country away from the failed policies of the Bush administration. It’s time to pull in the reins, but I don’t hold out much hope for this Congress.
This letter has not been edited.
So here we go again...
FISA was crafted back in the late 70's long before the widespread growth of the "internets" as GW calls it. Additionally, cellphone technology wasn't around then either. Times have changed and the methods of communication have changed with it, but the law hasn't kept pace.
You've gotta love all these worry worts that are convinced the feds are snooping on their boring mundane lives.
Do you really think your day to day life is of any interest to the federal law enforcement agencies?
Please...
this was the peanut farmers golden idea
Posted by on September 17, 2007 03:17 PMAfter 9/11 Prreznit Shrub was offered moderniazation bills to update FISA, but refused any effort at a legislative fix. Instead he chose (led by constiutional assasin David Addington) to do extrajudicial wiretapping as a statement of "Unitary Executive" power. Once the unconstitutional warrantless wiretaps were revealed, the right wing started clamoring for a modernization of FISA. They could have had it long ago and with much more favorable terms if they'd chosen the way of legislation instead of executive fiat, but that wouldn't befit Chimpy's Imperial hubris.
Posted by Repugnants are Liars on September 17, 2007 03:23 PMWorry worts,
Come on now you have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide. i mean why would we care about you unless you were of the opposing political party, and even then why would we want to listen in? If you disagree with the way things are going and are starting a revolution or protest of some kind because of the way you are controlled why would we care. We have a decider for a reason!! He decides and you comply, Why worry if you are of the opposing party? We would never want to listen in and see what was happening, it is only our jobs, our power and control we want. Just kick back and agree with us and all will be fine!!!
Posted by Karl Cheney on September 17, 2007 03:32 PMIt is to laugh!
The Party that gave us Watergate - a felony burglary; and a felony coverup resulting in felony convictions and prison terms for Republican Admisistration big-wigs, including the then Attorney General; as well as naming of the President, Nixon, as an unindicted CRIMINAL co-conspirator - this party now assures us that its furrther illegal wiretaps, etc., are all just peachy keen by way of National Security. And no one has anythig to worry about.
Reminds me of nothing so much as "The Over-the-Hill-Gang"; and their rationalizations, excuses, and just plain damn foolishness when their fungles and bungles were caught out, or exposed.
Republicans, YECH! Cheap rest-room level con-men and lame duck failures, pretending to be important movers and shakers in the nation and the world - as well as holding themselves forth as self-righteous and holier than thou upholders of "family values" and "conservative christian moral superiority".
Oh! Well! As Democrats, we can wait! 'Cause We'll make things straight in 2008!
Posted by Old Grouch on September 17, 2007 04:39 PMOld Grouch,
In 2008 the Dems will make it straight alright.
Straight down the toilet!!
Old Grouch,
Thanks for telling us what you think of Republicans. Would you care to humor us with your opinion on whether or not the FISA law should be modernized?
Posted by John II on September 17, 2007 06:28 PM> Is it any wonder that approval ratings for this Congress are even lower than for the President himself?
Not in the least. Congressional ratings virtually always trail the president, since it is much easier to express disapproval of a large clumsy legislative body than a specific individual. Approval ratings for Bush should of course only be compared to those for other presidents, by which standard he is a pathetic failure.
Posted by on September 17, 2007 06:34 PM"Congressional ratings virtually always trail the president, since it is much easier to express disapproval of a large clumsy legislative body than a specific individual."
Nonsense. Why wouldn't it be easier to blame one man?
"Approval ratings for Bush should of course only be compared to those for other presidents, by which standard he is a pathetic failure."
Do you think Mr. Truman was a failure?
Grouch,Stay on subject or shut your crusty kum funnel.
Posted by on September 17, 2007 07:46 PMTo the people who don't mind goverment snooping, will you feel the same way if a Dem by the name Hilly is in charge?
Posted by k2ken on September 17, 2007 09:20 PMSomeone said wrongly:
"FISA was crafted back in the late 70's long before the widespread growth of the "internets" as GW calls it. Additionally, cellphone technology wasn't around then either. Times have changed and the methods of communication have changed with it, but the law hasn't kept pace."
FISA is not written in stone. It has been amended several times over the years, including post-9/11 as part of the original "Patriot Act". Bush can request that it be amended any time he wants. He hasn't.
Bush simply doesn't want judicial oversight.
"You've gotta love all these worry worts that are convinced the feds are snooping on their boring mundane lives.Do you really think your day to day life is of any interest to the federal law enforcement agencies?"
Every President in the age of telecommunications abused their authority to wiretap prior to the creation of FISA, and you think Bush should be trusted?
Nobody can be trusted with that kind of power.
That's why we have (had?) FISA.
Posted by Charles B on September 17, 2007 10:24 PMBut... One minor "glitch"... They are not wiretaps. Culling records for calling patterns isn't a wiretap. They're not listening to any calls. This technology is nothing new than what your local telcom company currently does to investigate call fraud, long distance calling patterns, etc. But in the case of the government, if they find evidence of calling patterns to "known" targets, they then go get the "required" warrants. If it involves a US citizen, they get a warrant, as required by FISA.
Culling records for calling patterns is a violation of the fourth amendment when you do it without a warrant.
And Bush has been wiretapping without a warrant. He has admitted as much in public.
But you can keep apologizing for Bush since you appear to have no shame.
Posted by Charles B on September 18, 2007 07:48 PMAlways amazing how quickly people give away their liberty and freedoms.
Also how amazingly hard it is to get them back again.
I prefer to have the risk of the odd "terrorist" than have governments or corporations collecting this kind of information.