Ug, WTF?

Jul. 9th, 2008 03:33 pm
hhatcher: (cycle of violence)
[personal profile] hhatcher
Seriously.

What.
The.
Fuck.

Retroactive immunity for the telephone companies who illegally participated in warrantless wiretapping. And a blank check for further warrantless wiretapping until 2012.

It passed in the Senate 69-28 - not even close. How does this even happen? Don't you at least have to read the Constitution once before you're sworn into office? Words can scarcely convey my profound and bitter disappointment in the fucking clowns in our government.

*sigh*

(no subject)

Date: 2008-07-10 04:10 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2008-07-10 05:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] turtletoes.livejournal.com
Wanted to comment with an article I read recently....it was too long....so I posted it.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-07-10 07:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] turtletoes.livejournal.com
Oh and Hillary voted nay.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-07-10 08:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tranceboy.livejournal.com
Voting against this bill is a point in Hillary's favor. In general, I don't have a real problem with Hillary Clinton, but her tactics and behavior during the Democratic primaries were simply unacceptable to me.

I'm disappointed by Obama's yea vote, since it's essentially an act of cowardice and political maneuvering on his part. I can't imagine that he actually believed that it was a good bill to pass, but he is attempting to portray the image of being tough on national security since that's one of the few places where McCain has any reasonable footing to attack him from. I think that it's a mistake that will alienate and dishearten his strongest supporters, but I can't say that I don't understand the reasons for it. It is my hope that he will be elected and attempt to undo the damage done by this bill and by the PATRIOT act, but I'm much less excited about him as a candidate after some of his recent actions.

Overall, I'm disappointed in every Senator who voted yes, though. No one who has sworn an oath to uphold the constitution could vote for this in good conscience. It is a bill which is in clear violation of the 4th amendment, and it is (primarily) a bill which served to protect the administration from the consequences of illegally wiretapping US citizens. Any claims about improving the security of our nation are misdirection from the real issue, since the FISA court was essentially a rubber-stamp to begin with.

Profile

hhatcher: (Default)
Hank

December 2008

S M T W T F S
 1 23456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28 293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags