Pelosi Planning FISA Capitulation Shortly

by: Matt Stoller

Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 15:22


Glenn Greenwald has the scoop.

The plan of the House leadership is to pass this specific bill in the House, send it to the Senate (where telecom immunity will be added in by the same bipartisan Senate faction that already voted for immunity), have it go back to the House for an up-or-down-vote on the House-bill-plus-telecom-immunity (which will pass with the support of the Blue Dogs), and then compliantly sent on to a happy and satisfied President, who will sign the bill that he demanded.

So that's the plan for now.  I'm pleased that both Obama and Clinton have chosen to make their case for President based on stupid identity politics instead of fighting on core Constitutional issues like this.

Matt Stoller :: Pelosi Planning FISA Capitulation Shortly

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Pelosi Planning FISA Capitulation Shortly | 30 comments
Action? (0.00 / 0)
Who do we call?  The House committee?  The Senate intel committee?  Faxes to Pelosi's office?  Pushback on this has stopped it so far.  It seems like the Bush Dogs are just pushing back waiting for us to be asleep.  
Christy Hardin Smith says faxes to (0.00 / 0)
Pelosi and Reyes (house intel chairman) over at FDL


Speaker Pelosi:
Phone: (202) 225-4965
Fax: 202-225-8259

Rep. Reyes:
Phone: 202-225-4831
Fax: 202-225-2016

[ Parent ]
I'm sure Obama would never do that... (0.00 / 1)
I'm sure Obama would never do that, especially considering that his chosen mentor in the Senate is Joe Lieberman (judgment issue?) and his mentor on "bipartisanship' is the master at capitulation, Tom Daschle. You know Daschle's idea of bipartisanship is "Democrats doing what Republicans want them to do."

Oh, wait. This Just In:

Obama Adviser: I 'Strongly' Believe Telecoms 'Should Be Granted Immunity'
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has consistently spoken out and voted against granting retroactive immunity for telecoms that participated with the administration's warrantless wiretapping program. This stance was part of the reason he won the support of Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), a leader on civil liberties issues.

One of Obama's advisers on intelligence and foreign policy advisers, however, is someone who "strongly" supports telecomm immunity. John Brennan is a former CIA official and the current chairman of the Intelligence and National Security Alliance. In a new National Journal interview, Brennan makes it clear that he agrees with the Bush administration on the issue of immunity:

There is this great debate over whether or not the telecom companies should in fact be given immunity for their agreement to provide support and cooperate with the government after 9/11. I do believe strongly that they should be granted that immunity, because they were told to do so by the appropriate authorities that were operating in a legal context, and so I think that's important. And I know people are concerned about that, but I do believe that's the right thing to do. I do believe the Senate version of the FISA bill addresses the issues appropriately.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/...

You're so right (0.00 / 0)
What did Senator Clinton do today again?
[ Parent ]
Let's wait and see (4.00 / 1)
how they both vote in the Senate. That is if Obama doesn't skip this vote to.
[ Parent ]
on FISA, you should be saying that the other way around (0.00 / 0)
Obama voted, Clinton skipped the vote, even though she was campaigning in MD at the time, and hence, presumably, could have easily made the vote.
[ Parent ]
Well they both have skipped votes (0.00 / 0)
as do all Reps from time to time but Obama has skipped an extraordinary amount of them.

And just for a cherry on top he was the one who skipped the vote condemning MoveOn while Clinton voted not to condemn MoveOn. Who was the Profiles in Courage on that vote?

As they say: Just saying.

[ Parent ]
Yes, yes, I know (0.00 / 0)
but you were complaining about them on FISA, and on this issue, Clinton missed the critical vote, not Obama.  We're not talking about MoveOn.  I'm not particularly fond of either of them, and I understand a lot of the Clinton camps frustruation, but this is one issue where Obama has ended up looking better than Clinton.

[ Parent ]
To Clinton's Credit (0.00 / 0)
She did issue a statement that she would have voted NO. And that statement matches all her comments on the issue so it is believable.
[ Parent ]
Yeah... and then... (0.00 / 0)
Two weeks on, Hillary condemns the MoveOn ad.
http://www.slate.com/id/2174603/

Moveon....

Sigh... How long are we going to have to put up with this crap...

[ Parent ]
Honestly The Ad Sucked (0.00 / 0)
That's what I thought as did many other MoveOn members. Hillary thought it sucked too.

But she didn't think MoveOn should have been condemned for it in the Senate. So she voted not to. Give her credit for that.

[ Parent ]
Why.... (0.00 / 0)
..........the same thing Senator 'SellOut' is doing: Telling you and every other American,

We could give a fuck what you are concerned with! We, We are Teh Awesome Rulers of 'Versailles' you, you are the little people...Now vote for us or the nasty McCain will be President!

Too which I reply,

So fuckin' what. You are just McCain in ID Politics disguise...Rule without my consent without my acquiescence!

Only one solution: Take them Out!

And let's start with Pelosi. She already has one primary challenger and if the big talking bloggers around here are serious about 'change' about 'More and Better Democrats...' it's time for them to step up to the plate and get involved in a primary challenge to Bush's greatest enabler in the House:

Miss Nancy.

Otherwise you all can just go into STFU mode.

Time for action not words.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Immunity and Healthcare (0.00 / 0)
So Obama has Cooper on staff who opposes Universal Healthcare going back to the Clinton administration and we find out today that he also has John Brennan who opposes holding the telecoms accountable. That on top of one of his advisers saying the NAFTA stump speeches are just a sham.

He kind of surrounds himself with real Progressive people eh? What does that reveal?

[ Parent ]
Uh..... (4.00 / 1)
....that he is as progressive as Feinstein?

....that he is as progressive as Webb?

....that he is as progressive as Nelson?

....that he is as progressive as fucking Clinton?

Nope wrong on all counts. According to Progressive Punch Clinton ranks 27th, Obama 41st....heh...right next door to ReThug land.

All the Senators named above are rated more progressive than Obama....but hey...it's just a bunch of voting analysis....who ya gonna believe those wingers at PP or.....

Just exactly who?

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Their lifetime scores are (0.00 / 0)
18th for clinton and 24th for Obama.  PP's methodology for absent votes is a bit weird, and hence the election campaign has thrown things off for both of them--Tim Johnson isn't as conservative as Gordon Smith and Norm Coleman, either.  
[ Parent ]
My numbers are for 'Chips are Down...' (0.00 / 0)
Don't matter the myth of Obama is just that.

A myth.

I don't like either but I do think a few facts are in order when we discuss them.

I do realize I am in a distinct minority with that view.

But....

I don't care.

I also realize that 'facts' only play a very small role in our political dialogue today.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
The whole point is that they are both being penalized for votes (0.00 / 0)
where they were out of town campaigning.  I don't particularly like either of them, either.  But, any objective number that analyzes voting records are going to look really skewed for both of them, either because it counts absent votes as 'no', and makes them both look way more conservative than they are, ro it excludes absent votes, and thereby makes them look way more left wing than they are, as they will only show up for the most important votes where they definitely vote for the Democratic position.  

PP is better than most in this regard, but they still look worse on PP due to the campaign schedule distorting their voting records.  Hence why it's fairer to look at their lifetime scores, where they both end up right in the center of the democratic party--neither progressive nor true Liebercrats.  

[ Parent ]
I take your point but.... (0.00 / 0)

......I am not of the opinion that their campaigning for President is: one, a good thing...neither should be President; two, any sort of excuse as to their voting.

Voting is their job. If they had a regular job, of whatever type, and they missed as much 'work', critical votes that is, as they have any reasonable employer would fire them.

The politics of celebrity is so strong with the citizenry however that both can get away with just walking  away from their jobs with no penalty whatsoever. I believe they get paid their full salaries no matter how much time they spend away from the Senate floor.

Of course their 'missing' these votes has been and is deliberate.

Makes it easy to make the argument you are making. Makes it easy to avoid taking a stand on important issues.

But PP is not oblivious to this. That is why 'missing' votes impact the PP 'Chips are Down' ratings so negatively....their algorithms have been changed to penalize not voting. Why? Because as Josh, the head of PP, and I have discussed not voting is in some ways the least progressive thing you can do.

The 'Chips are Down' algorithm is one I can put some credence in. It shows, to my admittedly biased perspective, a truer picture and that is:

Obama is no progressive.

And....

He's a lot more conservative than Hillary.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Don't be (4.00 / 1)
Don't be an asshole.

We have candidate threads for assholes.

These threads are for people who aren't assholes.

You ruined it.

I support John McCain because children are too healthy anyway.

[ Parent ]
Obama (0.00 / 0)
"I'm sure Obama would never do that, especially considering that his chosen mentor in the Senate is Joe Lieberman..."

What? How does that make any sense?

"Obama Adviser: I 'Strongly' Believe Telecoms 'Should Be Granted Immunity' "

So a candidate's explicit platform is not in accord with the personal beliefs of one of his many advisors. Whose words carry more weight, the candidate's or the advisor's?

I agree with Sam L. If you want to throw dirt then get lost.


The truth about Saxby Chambliss

[ Parent ]
Dodd (0.00 / 0)
So why doesn't Dodd filibuster it?
He will (0.00 / 0)
and the cloture 'no' vote will likely get 30something votes like it did last time.  Maybe it's best to try to call the wavering democrats, who voted for cloture in the senate last time?
[ Parent ]
a REAL filibuster (0.00 / 0)
I mean a good, old-fashioned, refuse to give up the floor type filibuster.  Read from the phone book, whatever.  Didn't Dodd threaten to do that?
[ Parent ]
Well, Reid threatened to force him to do that in the event of a fillibuster (0.00 / 0)
but the impression I got was that cloture still kills that type of fillibuster--you can only delay things for ~1 day int hat manner before a cloture vote.
[ Parent ]
he could (0.00 / 0)
He could do it for as long as he was able.  Strom lasted 24 hours 18 minutes.

http://www.villagevoice.com/ne...

[ Parent ]
That was also before they updated the cloture rule in 1975 (0.00 / 0)
I"m not completely sure how the parliamentary procedure works on this.
[ Parent ]
Got another one for ya (4.00 / 1)
While it's clear we are in a recession, with jobs lost, we have Pelosi planning on increasing guest worker Visas, specifically H-2B and H-1B.

Now isn't that charming?  We're right on the cusp of major job losses and they are busy doing Corporate lobbyists' dictates, which have been shown over and over again to labor arbitrage US workers.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

I think identity politics is far more important (0.00 / 0)
It's certainly been made clear that it's the only thing Team Clinton has to utilize. Just like Republicans, smear, innuendo , secrecy, name-calling and emotional manipulation is all they've got.

And when anyone fires back in the least little way, they go into the 'horrors! they're so mean' routine, and the 'poor me' persona emerges for further manipulation.

I refused to buy the claim that Clinton was so staged and manipulative as her detractors claimed. But ever since she started running ads in my sidebar with Clinton's photo circa early 90s, started photoshopping Obama's picture and otherwise  started taking below the belt potshots, all the claims of unfair treatment have rung more and more hollow.

It becomes apparent after awhile that the game is to make every opponent's criticism look mean and misogynist, while they play by the same campaign rules of Rove, Ailes, Gingrich, Colson, etc.

Anti-Clinton fervor looks unreasonable, but after awhile, it should be obvious that their double standards provoke a big share of it. It is Republican Lite and deserves to be derided and mocked.

Yes, the Constitution, war and other issues is what we all should be fighting for. But Clinton's record is about selling out, aiming low and winning office, not about anything substantive worth voting for.

She champions SNL's characterization of being a no-nonsense bitch but recoils at the term 'monster.' Goody for her. I don't consider either to be a positive.

She is a pathetic joke foisted on the electorate. If she lives by the mud, she should sink in it, into obscurity. I my not be able to bring myself to endorse Obama, but I can fully appreciate the ABC (Anyone But Clinton) attitude.

If she becomes the nominee, I will permanently change my party registration and vote third-party. I will never understand the under-$30K workers thinking she represents their interests. My college education has never raised me above that income level and I've seen only lip service given us by the DLC Dems from 1988 on.

They can take their wonks and stiffs and no-nonsense bitches and shove all of it.

I'm sticking with progressives not neo-progressives, be they called DINOs, pseudo-progressives or whatever. They all smell like rotted fish to me and make me so ashamed of our government. If our country is the pinnacle of civilized societies, we clearly are descended from skunks, jackals and weasels.

No mas! The sliver of hope that I had that 2008 might bring something different is gone.

Enjoy your time with... (0.00 / 0)
..........Ralph. No policy, no program, no organization, nothing but hot air...

Or...

The Greens, useful tools for the ReThugs.

Or...

The libertarians, more useful tools for the ReThugs.

Hillary is not the Democratic Party and neither is Obama.

We are.

But they seem to have convinced you to throw in the towel!

How long have you been a progressive?

A year, six months. Five years...ten....

ReThugs been at it 50 years. Hard to expect real change to be bustin' out all over when the modern progressive movement's only around five years old.

Go back to watching TeeBee where the conclusion is every half hour; no matter how screwed up the plot is.

This is a long term struggle not a one act play.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
You said it, Matt. (0.00 / 0)
I'm pleased that both Obama and Clinton have chosen to make their case for President based on stupid identity politics instead of fighting on core Constitutional issues like this.

Given where the two Democratic candidates for President sit, we're going to be decades digging out.  Obama and Clinton's inability to take this VERY SAFE ISSUE head-on just leaves me gap-jawed.  The public as a whole is against telecom immunity.  The PAA is a clear violation of the Constitution.  Congressional and judicial oversight has been fully ceded to the executive branch.  This one ain't rocket science, and ought to carry no risk.  I don't get it at all.

What Atrios said, Your candidate sucks!

Pelosi Planning FISA Capitulation Shortly | 30 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox