This diary is for folks that want to discuss policy and politics, NOT for gung ho cheerleaders !!!  

If this kind of topic will upset you,
Step away from the diary!
Repeat -
Step away from the diary!

Okay, are they gone?  Now - -

Earlier today, I rushed to the defense of Russ Feingold.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/21/1758 59/643#30

People need to get a grip.

Russ Feingold is a great senator in the best of the midwest labor populist progressive tradition.  

Feingold is reliably progressive on foreign policy.  Feingold is reliably progressive on domestic policy.  He was the ONLY Senator to vote against the USA PATRIOT Act, i.e., to vote in support of the first and fourth amendments.

If we weren't a nation of lingering religious prejudice and sexual hypocracy (OMG!  He's divorced 2 x!), Feingold would be an acknowledged future presidential prospect and on any Democrat's vice presidential short list.

Cross-posted at Clintonistas for Obama.

Senator Russ Feingold's Political Action Committe, the Progressive Patriot's Fund is planning a $5000 donation to one of nine house candidates and you have the opportunity to help choose the recipient. Click here to go to the website and cast your vote.

(Proudly cross-posted at Clintonistas for Obama)

I know, I know. It's been a tough week for all of us who care deeply about our Constitution, the foundation of our republic. And yes, I know what's made this week tougher was Barack Obama's agreeing to this capitulation to Bush-Cheney. So what do we do now? Where can we go? How can we put this disappointment behind us?

Follow me after the flip as I discuss where we can go from here...

Sen. Dodd has a post up at HuffPo on FISA:

Most agree that this law needs to be modernized, as it has been many times over the years. But this time, the president is asking Congress to do something much more: to shield the telecoms from any judicial review of their actions. He wants Congress to declare spying without a warrant both constitutional and necessary to defend this country.

It is neither.

That is why I have done everything I can to stop retroactive immunity from being included in the FISA bill. As written, this bill does not say, "Trust the American people." It does not say, "Trust the courts and judges and juries to come to just decisions" about what happened at the telecoms. Rather, retroactive immunity sends this message:

"Trust me" -- a message that comes straight from the mouth of President Bush. I would never take "trust me" for an answer, not even in the best of times. Not even from a president on Mount Rushmore.

The work to stop this terrible bill is overwhelming, and I know we could lose.

But process-wise, there's been great progress. The issues with FISA are dense (history of why Congress first passed the act/the concept of civil vs. criminal telecom immunity/exclusivity precedent/etc.). Five years ago, would 20,000 activists organize on a politician's website in protest? Would any conversations between activists, online or off, even broach the subject?

There's still time to tell our elected officials not to cave. Blue America has tools, and Christy Hardin Smith writes up the details.

It used to be harder for the average citizen to engage in politics - reading news on specific issues and checking the positions of their representatives pre-internet was time consuming. Advocacy campaigns too-often relied on more heated, visceral issues to engage people.

Even just a few years ago, activism around an issue as weedy as FISA wouldn't stand a chance. And we're certainly not quite where we need to be yet. But it's a thrill watching so many people discuss and organize around a fundamental constitutional issue.

I just read Reaper0bot's diary on the reason Barack Obama is likely supporting the current compromise FISA bill, and there was one comment that jumped out at me: someone said "okay, we'll lose the battle but win the war".  Why?

Hillary Clinton could make some news today.

We already know Dodd and Feingold are fighting FISA.

And, to his credit, Harry Reid is opposing the deal:

It is a position that puts the Democratic Senate leader at odds with his own party's presumptive presidential nominee, Barack Obama, who also has pledged to fight for the removal of immunity but will vote yes on the final package.

"I am not going to vote for the FISA bill," said the Nevada Democrat. "There are people, Mr. President, who have worked on this FISA matter for three months or more and again the administration worked with them. Did they, on the FISA bill, move enough to make me vote for the bill? The answer is no."

But now comes something a little more interesting. Chuck Schumer, Clinton's close Senate ally and a member or the leadership, is also voting no on the capitulation:

Chuck Schumer's spokesman tells us that he's going to oppose the current version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act legislation, which immunizes telcom companies for past implementation of Bush's requests and expands the government's capacity to surveil without court approval.

If Schumer backs an effort to remove the immunity provisions, that could be a big deal. Obama has come out against those provisions, but Schumer is a strategic signal caller in the Senate. The key question: Will Schumer support a filibuster on removing immunity from the bill?

Hillary Clinton was welcomed back to the Senate this week. And with two members of her caucus leadership standing against the deal, she could return with a bang.

Update [2008-6-25 15:58:57 by Josh Orton]: Now might be a great time to head over and buy one of Feingold's great "Don't Spy On Me" shirts, which look like the photo above.

One thing Progressives have constantly been up in arms about since we helped the Democrats win back Congress in 2006 is the FISA fight. Many of us think that this bill was completely unneccesary, and that it was a bad idea. It wasn't that we needed new, broad ranging powers for the Federal Government to keep us safe, we just needed a competent administration in place to use laws already in place to protect us. That is what failed us on that terrible day of 9-11-01.