Thursday, October 11, 2007

Hoekstra's FISA amendment voted down

Ugghhh...OK so I was talking to somebody yesterday and said isn't it terrible that we judge these bills based on if they are not as bad as the previous. But fact is this bill isn't as bad as the temporary bill. It still has problems, like too much leverage for bushco. But a little ray of sunshine peeked through this week
The Committee rejected an amendment by Ranking Member Congressman Pete Hoekstra of Michigan to permanently extend the “Protect America Act,” the Administration’s surveillance bill that passed in August, and to grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies involved in the President’s warrantless surveillance programs.

Chairman Reyes explained that the rejection of this amendment is due to the failure of the White House to first provide documents that would reveal the nature and extent of the President’s warrantless surveillance programs. “Before you can forgive someone,” Chairman Reyes stated, “you need to know what you are forgiving.”

That and Pete Hoekstra says republicans were only given 24 hours on a Monday (Oh the Horror! Sounds like the Patriot Act!) to review the bill before the vote. Thank goodness for small miracles I say.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Hoekstra's worn out FISA talking point

Here we go again Pete says...
the flawed bill has no liability protections for patriotic companies that may have heeded the government’s request to help protect the nation at its time of greatest need.

Bush says:
that he will not sign the bill if it does not give retroactive immunity to U.S. telecommunications companies that helped conduct electronic surveillance without court orders.

Pete says:
“By not including retroactive liability protection,” said Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, “Democrats are trying to resolve their differences with the administration on the backs of patriotic American companies that only wanted, and continue to want, to help keep our nation safe.”

From August of this year in an interview with Paul Gigot for Wall Street Journal's: Journal Editorial Report:
"These are companies who were doing the patriotic thing....They were helping the U.S. government, the American people, get the information that we believe we needed to keep us safe. They voluntarily participated, and now that the program is exposed, they've been open to all kinds of lawsuits."

They broke the law. Even though the clowns in power asked them to do it. That doesn't make it OK.

I did find this wonderful little snippet from his press release though:
"It could open a door for massive civil liberties violations by Congress.."

Pardon my language but since when has Pete Hoekstra even given a sh*t about our civil liberties??? Trick question...He doesn't. It's a classic political trick of attacking your opponent's strong suit. I'm not buying it, and I sure as hell hope you aren't either.

Links to other stories on the same thing:
Michael Roston at Huffington Post
Declan McCullagh at CNET News