Is this really about immunity to the telecoms, or... ?

[garybeck]

I'm no big fan of giving immunity to the telecom companies. But something isn't making sense here.

I just read the article about how Feingold and Dodd will fillibuster as long as the bill includes immunity:

“This is a deeply flawed bill, which does nothing more than offer retroactive immunity by another name. We strongly urge our colleagues to reject this so-called ‘compromise’ legislation and oppose any efforts to consider this bill in its current form. We will oppose efforts to end debate on this bill as long as it provides retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that may have participated in the President’s warrantless wiretapping program, and as long as it fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans,” the senators said in a joint statement Tuesday.

Is that really the biggest problem with the bill? Is all this focus on the immunity divert attention from the real problem?

What about the fact that it gives the authority to wiretap americans without a warrant?

Isn't that something they should be fillibustering? I mean, if they give power to wiretap in the future without a warrant... does it really matter if the telecoms have immunity from the past? Who cares about the telecoms past, if the government is granted permission to spy on us, from here on in?

I mean, put it this way... suppose they fillibuster, and get the immunity taken out of the bill. Then what? The bill still allows them to spy on us without a warrant, right? So did it really accomplish anything?

Silly me... I guess I'm just looking a little deeper than the headlines.

[gateley]

1. Could it just be about money?

http://www.maplight.org/FISA_June08

[leftofthedial]

2. it is ALL about further eroding our rights

can't reestablish feudalism in a democracy now can we?

[garybeck]

3. Don't you think it's a little strange that

they're so preoccupied with the immunity clause when the entire bill belongs in the trash?

[Jane Austin]

4. Maybe it's because BushCo already has their press releases written

for when they stop a terrorist plot - just in the nick of time (or not) -
in late October.

The press releases they have ready to bring out will say this:

"Republicans kept this country safe for seven years after 9/11, until the Democrats destroyed our ability to track and capture terrorists."

They will go on to say, "An entire American city was (almost) destroyed because Barack Obama and the Democrats made it possible for the terrorists to carry out their diabolical plans. They made America weak by preventing us from using the tools we needed to block this plot.

"Republicans kept this country safe for seven years after 9/11, until the Democrats destroyed our ability to track and capture terrorists."

Or something like that.

It doesn't matter what the truth or the facts are - they will frame it in no uncertain terms as the Democrats' responsibility.

And there doesn't even have to be an attack. All they need is to break up one of their bogus "terrorist plots" to make this argument.

It's the only way Obama can lose.