Posted by M. Wright | Filed in: BRCK BM, Politics
I’m pleased to see that 20 Senate Democrats (including Lieberman) were responsible enough to join their Republican colleagues in passing the needed FISA reform (explained previously here). I’m almost equally pleased to find the irresponsible Left unhinged, as usual. Third, I’m pleased to see that Senator McCain recorded a yes vote, while the two waffling Democratic Presidential candidates are found in the Not Voting column.
Update: In a comment, tgirsch says I’m “wrong on Obama,” and provides evidence that Obama voted in favor of an amendment to the bill that failed. There’s a difference between voting for an amendment and voting for a bill, tgirsh. And here’s how Obama voted on the bill itself (or, rather, didn’t vote):
February 13th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Wrong on Obama. Not only was he present, he voted yea, in support of those of us who aren’t crippled enough with pants-wetting terror to want to throw away the fourth amendment and rule of law.
February 13th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Obama voted yea on an amendment to the bill that failed 31-67.
February 13th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
tgirsch, Mick is Right! Although the AMENDMENT that Obama voted Yea was good (he voted well and I agree), Obama did not vote on final passage of the Bill. And I think the Bill was BAD BAD BAD! Micke is Wrong! I believe that Government has oversteped the bounds of the Constitution !
February 13th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Oh Obama is worse than Cliton, God Save Us from them both!
February 13th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Mick:
Mea culpa on the bill itself. The important point, however, is Obama did vote to try and stop the reactionaries from gutting the fourth amendment. Clinton couldn’t even be bothered to do that. To be fair, though, I would have preferred that Obama also cast a Nay vote on the passage of the bill itself, even if that vote didn’t make a difference.
But while you were right about Obama not voting on the bill itself, you’re still wrong on the merits of the bill. I refuse to believe that security from terrorism has to involve allowing the government to outsource fourth-amendment violations to private companies, or that meaningful oversight to prevent abuse would somehow short-circuit our ability to defend against future attacks. Oh, that’s right, I forgot: demanding accountability and rule of law = surrendering to terror. My bad.