Congressman Of The Hour: Senator Christopher Dodd vs The FISA Bill Of Doom
July 9, 2008 at 4:30 amPosted in industry, music Tags: 1984, Christopher Dodd, FISA, senator, shearwater, telecom immunity, wiretapping
Political officials. You elect them. Sometimes their efforts are commendable. This series documents such efforts.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Every four years I wait for the end of the world.
Between the months of July and November I set my television to C-SPAN, brew coffee by the gallon, and wait. This is not a declaration of clairvoyance, but rather a grounded belief in probability and distribution analysis. Why such pessimism? Because, and this is important, the time to capitalize off the current congressional administration’s ineptitude/indifference is running short, and every industry — from health care, to big oil, to telecommunication — wants to a) get away with as much as possible while they still can, and b) ensure that avenues allowing for significant exploitation of the public remain open indefinitely.
Enter Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd. He’s vocally opposed the FISA bill (explained below) from the onset. Dodd’s recent speech served as caveat to the Senate, encouraging its members to consider the numerous, negative consequences their constituents would face were the bill to pass.
Mr. President: I rise—once again—to voice my strong opposition to the misguided FISA legislation before us today…this legislation includes provisions which would grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that apparently have violated the privacy and the trust of millions of Americans by participating in the president’s warrantless wiretapping program. If we pass this legislation, the Senate will ratify a domestic spying regime that has already concentrated far too much unaccountable power in the president’s hands and will place the telecommunications companies above the law.
And let me make clear, at the outset of this debate, that this is not about domestic surveillance itself. We all recognize the importance of domestic surveillance – in an age of unprecedented threats. This is about illegal, unwarranted, unchecked domestic surveillance.
And that difference—the difference between surveillance that is lawful, warranted and that which is not—is everything.
And there you have it, folks.
Retroactive telecom immunity + unlimited, legalized spying = a castrated democratic state.
Godspeed, Senator Dodd. Hopefully they’ll hear you out.
[Visit Senator Christopher Dodd's Website, Buy Shearwater]
4 Responses to “Congressman Of The Hour: Senator Christopher Dodd vs The FISA Bill Of Doom”
By Jeff on Jul 9, 2008
Really, it's a shameful thing, and I'm not sure why we bother to have a Democratic congress when they vote like this, but all I know is my representative voted the right way, as did my Senator. Oh well, at least we have Shearwater!
By rahawa on Jul 9, 2008
Lucky you, Jeff. I wish I could say the same of my representatives. One of them has no clue what's going on, and the other has a “WE MUST DEFEND THIS COUNTRY” stick shoved so far up is rear I wonder how he sleeps at night.
To Shearwater!
By age of conan gold on Nov 26, 2008
Honestly though, do folks here really think that it is costing Clinton or Obama primary votes if they show up to support the filibuster? I guess that I am hard pressed to believe that there are more Democratic primary votes to be won by shaking hands than by being seen on the news trying to block a move that most democratic voters deplore.
By AIP on Feb 14, 2009
Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd are both guilty of aiding and abetting the disasters at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Dodd’s mtg with Countrywide and Frank’s dalliance with Moss at Freddie Mac were both glossed over when they should have been investigated for conflict of interest.
As long as the foxes guard the hen houses nothing is going to change. How can we have any hope for improvement when the same dirty producers direct the play? Transperancy? What’s that? A new word of which nobody in government knows the definition.