Loves me some Jonathan Turley!

The problem isn't JUST that these powers shouldn't be expanded, it's that the very existence of a secret court is an assault on the basic values of our country.

He's TOTALLY correct -- it is an utter abomination.

It's something out of the Soviet Union, or Nazi Germany -- extremist totalitarian governments.

FISA -- all of it -- is anti-American!

And the real irony is that they think this is going to secure them the election, when in fact, it's the main thing that's endangering the vote, because now rather than voting FOR the Democrats, we're in YET ANOTHER "lesser of two evils" elections, and that is the reason why we don't have utter LANDSLIDES in favor of the Democrats!!

If we ever just STOOD UP for the real Liberal American Values that FOUNDED this country, we'd win in a walk!!

We are sooooo in trouble.

AMEN! I swear, the more these guys twist themselves, and democracy, into knots trying to please everyone, the less they please anyone.

There's nothing wrong with the FISA court IMO. How else are they going to get legitimate warrants related to top secret national security matters? And the fact that the warrants are issued by an actual court, gives people a legitimate forum in which to dispute the warrants. I swear, if Obama said we should bomb Switzerland, a majority of his followers would try to find a way to rationalize to themselves why that's a good idea. It's EXACTLY what the conservatives did for FAR TOO LONG when Bush was doing things that no republican would do. And we thought they were nuts . . .

Shrub used FISA for political advantage, not for Nat'l. security, that's the problem. He has been listening in on his opponents, not us, he couldn't care less about what we think, it's all about spying on political enemies, PERIOD!!! That's why he fight's it so hard, he doesn't want to get caught playing politics by using the telecoms, who by the way, gave him a shitload of money, that's why they "Cooperated" with him in the first place.

Bush didn't use FISA at all. That's the issue here. Bush decided HE alone could decide who to spy on, and cut the FISA court out of the picture. Right now, Bush is trying to get amnesty for those telecoms who complied with subpoenas not properly issued by the FISA court. Or maybe I'm totally missing your point.

FISA might seem a rational approach if the FISA court were real, but it isn't. And even under the new bill, a warrant from the "court" doesn't have to be sought unless the gov't wants to spy on someone beyond a week. The court is a fraud and isn't a real judicial review. If you don't believe me, listen to the guys who have resigned from it saying it's a fraud.

5by5, I agree entirely with you. And the abuse goes far beyond what most people realize. The gov't is archiving all kinds of information about us, including every email we send or receive, every Web site we access, every phone call we make or receive, and all kinds of health and credit information. What does all this have to do with fighting terrorism? Wouldn't we be better off if they used their resources to secure our chemical plants, ports, and power plants? Do you how much has been done to secure our approximately 460 chemical plants? Nothing. Most are protected by no more than a chain link fence and (often unarmed) private security guards.

Well, maybe I need to read up on this some more. I understood that the one's who quit saying the court was a joke did so BECAUSE Bush made it a joke.

Uh, WHICH people?

Which people are "disputing" the warrants? How do we know they are being disputed? How do we know any such disputes are even listened to? Who are the judges? How are they chosen? Why are they chosen? How are their actions reviewed?

Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? ["Who watches the watchers?"]

The fact is, you have NO BASIS to assume that the FISA court is in any way just or honorable. NONE.

You have no way to independently and objectively verify that justice occurs within that court.

Another fact is that far too many things are considered secret, that frankly shouldn't be. The national security state's relentless growth is only rivaled by the larger military industrial complex.

It's gotten out of control, and it's costing the taxpayers billions for which they have no say in the usage of their money, something which last time I checked, was one of the principle reasons why we rebelled, and became a country in the first place.

This shit is insane.

We've now got both a weird soldier fetish in this country, and we're becoming slaves to a cult of secrecy.

It's gotta stop, or America is dead, and they'll be nothing left to protect.

What I find fascinating is that Obama went for the "compromise" because right now there is no FISA Court in effect....get it?? So we are arguing about the need for warrants when obviously they are not even being used!!! Is that against the law?? This seems like just such a farce! Plus, doesn't the NSA record everything anyway......?

We need you use whatever tools you can to inspire all Americans to contact every Democratic Senator to insure there is NO TELECOM IMMUNITY for actions taken before 9/11/01 in the Senate version of the FISA bill, regardless of how telecom immunity is handled for what they did after that horrific day. If there are to be two votes on Tuesday, one for the FISA bill itself and one for the telecom immunity question, then Democrats need to make sure the second vote applies ONLY TO ACTIONS AFTER 9/11/01. By effectively putting that divider into the timeline of telecom compliance to Bush's illegal desires, Democrats are saying that the Constitution DOES matter.

And if that move is to be taken, having Barack Obama introduce it would bring the unity the party desires.

THIS ACTION REPRESENTS OUR ONLY HOPE AS A NATION to retain the rule of law and our Constitutional rights. My hope is that when Democrats do this, some or all of the pending lawsuits against the telecoms can retain their standing. This would allow the discovery portion of these lawsuits to provide the testimony to unearth President Bush’s willing violations of the Constitution prior to his presumed powers in the aftermath of 9/11.

The Senate has the power to undo a tremendously unpopular betrayal by House Democrats in caving in to Bush, the GOP, and the telecoms which are throwing money around left and right to insure their desired result. But by stripping pre-9/11 telecom immunity Democrats can turn the tables on the Republo-Fascists controlling the GOP. This simple change CANNOT BE FOUGHT without forcing opponents to directly side with corporations and against the Constitution. ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS CHANGE CAN AND SHOULD BE USED TO DEFEAT any vulnerable Senators this fall.

This act CAN AND SHOULD BE THE TRUMP CARD THAT caring Democrats should play after the July 4th recess when they bring their version of the House FISA bill up for a vote. With it they will expose the corporate shills and the Nero Cons willing to tap-dance on the Constitution, and put our side on the offensive for once. If the FISA bill passes the Senate with the above amendment in place, then Congress will finally receive the list of who Bush spied on, abuse of wiretapping can be capped, and telecoms may finally get what they deserve. And from there a Bush veto will be broadly seen for its true intentions which have nothing to do with homeland security. A simple filibuster would not expose the chinks in the Republican armor the way this would.

Imagine if Barack Obama were to say this on the Senate floor July 7th:

"Whether telecoms are granted some immunity in the FISA bill before us can be debated, and voted on separately as Senator Reid suggests. What we CANNOT allow, however, is any debate on allowing telecom immunity for actions taken before 9/11/01. Only after 9/11 could the Bush administration have shown justification to telecoms to grant their information requests. Asking for personal communication data before that is outside the bounds of the Fourth Amendment and the Patriot Act.

If Bush wants to claim Executive Privilege, it's time we reclaim our Citizen Privilege which is the foundation of this country: the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The Senate will not consider granting telecom immunity for actions before September 11, 2001. There can be no legal grounds to support that. Any bill that clears committee cannot provide telecom immunity for actions taken before 9/11/01."

That's the world that I want to live in; a world where a strong leader takes the opportunity to force change for the better. An act like this would insure him the presidency; and teetering progressive would return to the fold.

Todd Telford
founder, Miniprotests.com
Portland, Ore.

Barack is supporting the new FISA bill. As far as I'm concerned, that makes him a lying piece of conservative garbage. I guess the "change" we're supposed to believe in is his political cowardice. I enthusiastically supported him during the primaries. Now, I'm going to carry signs denouncing him him as a liar, a coward, and a fraud. Obama and McCain can both go f*ck themselves.

Like my husband says...the Dems are Jelly-fish........why do they cave in to Bush every freakin' time?