Comments on: House passes RESTORE Act.

By: gharlane

gharlane — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 04:19:08 +0000

I hope the Republicans DO fillibuster this legislation. It will be a great sound bite for 2008 to prove to the American people that Republicans cannot be trusted to do the right thing:

Republicanâ€™s refuse to support judicial oversight!

Comment by Democrat Soldier â€” November 16, 2007 @ 10:32 am

That’s not what the headline will read if the Repugs filibuster. It will read “Democrats Fail to Pass Rights Bill” or some such.

Name one time in the 110th Congress that the MSM has actually called a filibuster a filibuster. Name one time in the 110th Congress that Harry Reid has called a filibuster a filibuster. Name one time in the 110th Congress that Harry Reid has actually MADE the REpugs filibuster.

By: world_compass

world_compass — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 05:12:27 +0000

Is Pelosi becoming Katherine Hepburn? No palsy shake yet but her speech functions are failing. She hesitates and stumbles more than my nephew trying to explain what he did when he went to the zoo. I have little faith in either party Dem or Rep they are two sides of the same coin in my opinion. Loyalty is the way of the mafiosa and these parties are loyalists to the future of corporatism.

By: Lefty Patriot

Lefty Patriot — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 16:16:48 +0000

Republicanâ€™s refuse to support judicial oversight!

Comment by Democrat Soldier â€” November 16, 2007 @ 10:32 am

You really can’t blame them; it means long prison terms for them!

By: Democrat Soldier

Democrat Soldier — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:32:22 +0000

I hope the Republicans DO fillibuster this legislation. It will be a great sound bite for 2008 to prove to the American people that Republicans cannot be trusted to do the right thing:

Republican’s refuse to support judicial oversight!

By: Briseadh na Faire

Briseadh na Faire — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:24:51 +0000

Well, if Democrats had filibustered the stripping of our Constitutional rights, they wouldn’t have to RESTORE them!

Now, they face a Republican filibuster and a Presidential veto. Good luck with that.

By: Veritas

Veritas — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:10:45 +0000

It’s about time! Time for Congressional Democrats to represent the people who gave them the majority!

By: hits

hits — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 13:19:06 +0000

It is quite important to adopt a more comprehensive surveillance policy. National security should not be dismissed lightly.

By: jackattaway2

jackattaway2 — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 07:39:02 +0000

Maybe ut would be a better idea to start solving all their own problems in the US before taking care of the world…like, medical insurance, education, homeless people…etc…you know, important stufff….
http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071021221535AAwnj6B

By: Max-1

Max-1 — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 07:37:04 +0000

My “Thank You” to Nancy Pelosi:

While I know you understand the need to end the illegal occupation of a sovereign nation that posed no threat to the U.S.A., her people or Government; Similarly so you understand the need to repair the damage to our own Nation’s form of Government set askew by the actions of the President of the U.S.A. itself, this is to say… OUR president, I have but one question:

Why leave him in as the President of the U.S.A.?

————–

Leaving George W. Bush in as the President of the U.S.A. only means that I too, can become the next President of the U.S.A. AND be A WAR CRIMINAL.

Now, what principle is that?

By: sacopenapa

sacopenapa — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:50:48 +0000

…I’ll wait and see, so far Democrats have played a lot of theatre, but when it comes to the crunch, a total disapointment! Besides, I don’t trust Pelosi, who got there because the american people had enough from the WAR CRIMINALS, and the first thing she does is take ‘IMEACHMENT’ of the table.

By: AngryOne

AngryOne — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:42:14 +0000

As the House prepared to debate the renewal of FISA revisions made in August, President Bush and his Republican allies in Congress are endorsing a unique double-standard when it comes to immunity for telecommunications firms. Within the United States, they argue, service providers such as AT&T and Verizon must cooperate with U.S. government demands for access to Americans’ electronic communications and should be immune from citizens’ lawsuits. But in China and elsewhere, as Republican reaction to this week’s Yahoo saga suggests, not so much.

For the details, see:
“FISA, Yahoo and the GOP Double-Standard on Telecom Immunity.”

By: freeman

freeman — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:32:15 +0000

Well
atleast the rhetoric is correct and thats refreshing .

By: judyinnm

judyinnm — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 04:21:38 +0000

Yeah, but the Senate doesn’t have “60 votes”, so they’ll have to “compromise” and table the entire bill, to avoid a filibuster by the Republics. We’ve all been here before – what will actually be enacted will be the elimination of the 6 month “sunset” and the existing act becomes permanent; plus, the telecoms are immune from any and all liability for sharing our (previously) private communications with anyone who asks – government, corporations, etc.

By: koko the talking gorilla

koko the talking gorilla — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 04:10:17 +0000

Sorry for being skepticalâ€¦but anyone knows the specifics of this?

Your skepticism is well founded, but why don’t you look at the specifics for yourself? Details are here. This has been in the works for some time.

By: Red Pill

Red Pill — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 04:03:52 +0000

FISA out of committee with no telecom immunity, Barry “Flaxseed Oil” Bonds gets indicted for perjury, and now this? I’m with Kryptik on this one…Pelosi must prove she can be trusted on this issue…but at least we have some cause for hope.

By: Kryptik

Kryptik — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 03:59:22 +0000

Sorry for being skeptical…but anyone knows the specifics of this?

I just want to make sure it’s above the board and we didn’t just get covertly rat*bleep*ed again.