Well, well, well; "wrapped in an American Flag and carrying a cross" seems to be appropriate here.

Cantor is one of the biggest jackasses they have. Is his seat safely (R)?

He and that idiot Kingston need to head back to the private sector.

If Pelosi and the floor managers don't have the stones to tell GOP legislative saboteurs to go and play in Patrick McHenry's sandpit, they should resign their positions.

Why is it that the GOP gets to dick about with legislation now that the Dems are in control, but DeLay ruled the House like his own fiefdom?

pseudonymous in nc

It's because Pelosi is only a figurehead, and the house is being run by Steny Hoyer and his clique of DINOs. (Not that Nancy seems to have a clue on how to do more than just look good in front of the cameras.)

They could hold off and bring the bill to the floor under a closed rule (the type of procedure that the GOP used on virtually everything to silence Dems when GOP controlled). Then the GOP would whine that the Democratic majority was being heavy-handed ...

Why is this so hard? Have a Dem propose the following amendment:

nothing in the bill "shall be construed to prohibit the intelligence community from conducting surveillance THAT HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY A COURT OF THE UNITED TO STATES TO BE needed to prevent Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, or any other foreign terrorist organization…from attacking the United States or any United States person."

Then the dems all vote for it. How can it be demagogued then? That the dems like courts and repubs hate them? How will that go over?

The alleged amendment would render the rest of the bill meaningless. Tell Cantor he is a drooling idiot and move on.

Maybe we let Cantor know that we will be glad to keep on listening to Israeli and all phone calls. Maybe he would like to suggest a time frame for the duration of the datamining?

Maybe he would like to volunteer his phone/internet lines as a guinea pigs for surveillence (nothing to hide if you've done nothing wrong, and as a congressman you certainly are a terror target, right)?
/snark

Actually, let the House Dems vote for it if their poliltical hearts deem it necessary, and then strip it out when reconciling with the Senate version.

If a Republican is holding up passage of this bill, why not put the spotlight on him? Instead of scrambling, Dems should emphasize Cantor's obstruction - Another Rubber Stamp Republican propping up a failed president and a failed foreign policy. Dems stand with the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, Republicans stand with Bush and Cheney.

I see Bloix beat me to it with an even better idea.

This seems fairly easy to me: Tell the Republican Facists to "go to hell" and add a statement of their own to the bill that nullifys Cantor's meaningless nonsense!!

Can anybody tell me what that add-on statement means?

I didn't think so.

nothing ... shall be construed to prohibit the intelligence community from conducting surveillance

This means that any effort to attach court supervision is prohibited. Goodbye 4th Amendment. This blanket could also be thrown over any testimony to Congress regarding operational aspects of the program, freedom of information requests.

Why would anybody have a problem with voting against this provision? It negates all of the other provisions in the bill. No wonder they call them poison pills.

What the Democrats need to do is ammend this by adding this language at the end: "other than the formulations set forth in this legislation". This would only negate prior legislation.

The Dems need to trust that America is on their side. Vote no. Pass the Bill and move on!

The kinds of Republican smears this bill is meant to support are expected and will be rejected. They have so overplayed their hand on this one. Who is going to believe that their congress voted to stop the CIA and the FBI from keeping America safe. It's just absurd. Anyone with half a brain cell still function will automatically assume it's bullshit. Republican smear tactics are like resumes - you expect them to be exaggerated.

Hold up. This entire story is from Cantor's point of view. His framing. He says Democrats are in dissaray, and Greg dutifully passes it on, with a "more soon".

Hmm...

Perhaps we can avoid adding our echo to the chamber?

Could there possibly be a way to report on this kind of thing without amping it up?

Cantor always claims that the Dems are dazed and confused. No one should be silly enough to take his word for it.

easy way to respond to this:

add to the ammendment:

"Nothing in this bill shall be construed to give the government authority to violate the US constitution, specifically : conducting surveillance on US citizens without a warrant is illegal."

Release a similar statement to the Repubs like:

Which do they care more about the American people and our Bill of Rights or giving a our president even more power to do whatever he wants in secret?

Allsburg: Who's running against him in 2008? I'll make out a check today.

I have a better idea: He's been mentioned as a possibility to run against Mark Warner for the Senate seat that John Warner is retiring from. Send a contribution for him to run in that race. Mark Warner will beat him handily, and he'll have given up his Congressional seat in the bargain.

I agree with the language. However, I would go further to bring it in balance by inserting the following language:

"Provided further that for each instance in which such surveillance failed to meet the requirements of the 4th Amendment or was authorized without sufficient supporting information indicating that there was a palpable, real and imminent threat of terrorist attack, then a member of Congress or Senate that had sponsored the foregoing language and voted to amend the bill to include such language shll be imprisoned for a period of not less than five years without possibility of parole. This provision being necessary to indicate that said members realize the importance of such God given and inalienable rights under the Consitution."

I must say, with all the stuntsmanship the republicans pull (this amendment being a prime example) it's amazing no Democrats have cooked up some rather simple counter offensives.

The whole FISA debate could be turned on it's head if a few Democratic congress members simply stated that they absolutely don't believe that Bush has not used his self asserted warrantless wiretapping authority for political purposes.

Libby is a convicted liar and the President still holds him in high esteem.

Giving Bush more authority to secretly listen to private conversations without a warrant is extending a trust to the administration that they are promising not to violate.

What's beyond brazen is they are demanding this trust while simultaneously refusing to disclose any evidence that shows whether they've already violated the trust.

Trust us, we haven't abused our power, but you can't check whether we actually have, and yeah we've had sme people caught lying around here recently -- they were good guys though.

It seems like a position that's just begging to be mocked with official feigned indignance.

Those democrats are so funny!!!!

It really is amazing to me how the minority party in the House has as much power as it does. That's based on how little power the Democrats had or demonstrated in the decade before 2006. Geez, Democrats couldn't even get a working microphone without OK from the Republican leadership, and that only as long as what was said didn't upset them. I can see problems in the Senate where the majority is a mathematical fluke. But the House? These Democrats just aren't fighting for Americans. They're looking for an excuse to cave.

Here's an idea--do the right thing! Forget what "looks good." Do the right thing! Lead or get out of the way!

dhs,

Bad news. Apparently the August FISA fix is worse than most people realize. If the bill sunsets, the president still has the power to "temporarily" re-authorize the program for another year. The only way to deprive George W. Bush of this power is to pass a different law. And even then, I'm not sure what happens if he vetoes.

". . . the law doesn't really sunset after six months: The provision is artfully drafted to allow the NSA to continue wielding its new surveillance powers for up to a year afterward."
- Aziz Huq, on Alternet (click on my screen name for link)

As legalize said, if they yank this bill for good, the one that passed in March will expire and we can go back to the old FISA bill. I'd rather see that than see them cave in once again to these juvenile tricks. Why is there no Dem in Congress that can stand up loud and clear and tell exactly what is going on? Clinton? Obama? Dodd? Can we have a little help here?

Actually the amendment doesn't seem to really do anything, since the point of this bill is to legalize something that was previously illegal.