Democrats Roll Over on Surveillance Program, Civil Liberties
Thursday, February 14th, 2008
My disdain for Senator Harry Reid was confirmed once again when I heard that the Senate passed legislation to widen President Bush’s surveillance program. I am proud to say that one of my senators (Russ Feingold) spoke out vociferously against this legislation due to civil rights concerns. It is too bad that other Democrats were uncomfortable with opposing the president over something as fundamental as the privacy of our conversations.
I want to say that I have no problem with eavesdropping and surveillance when there is overwhelming evidence (i.e. a combination of a criminal history with activities that would suggest illegal activity in the future) that makes these activities necessary for public safety. I have a problem with blanket surveillance over foreign phone calls, emails and other communications. I also have a problem with a nameless, faceless intelligence court acting in the shadows to approve these activities after phone taps are used.
Harry Reid and his Republican friends in Democratic clothing can put lipstick on this pig as much as they want. They will never appeal to people like me who are skeptical about the Democrats as an agent of change after the big clunker put up following the 2006 election. I am pretty sure we are still in Iraq, I don’t think that Congress is working harder and it seems that earmarks and pork barrel spending are still keywords for access to power in Washington.
We are no closer to a progressive nation than we were before 2006 except that we have another group of leaders who failed to achieve what they promised. I am voting in primaries at the local, state and national level for progressive candidates of ANY party who have little connection with the hacks we currently have in power. I hope that the secret police don’t take offense at this post but I don’t recognize their authority. The only people who have legitimate power are those who expose their ideas (and their weaknesses) to the light of public scrutiny.
