Tape up those mitts and put on your thinking caps kids, it's time for an intellectual rumble. Today's subject: the Senate's overwhelming reauthorization of Gee Dubs domestic spying powers with a new measure giving phone companies retroactive immunity from lawsuits. Good thing too (for them) since our AT&T, VZW, and Sprint collaborators have racked up about 40 lawsuits accusing them of violating USitizen's privacy rights. The bill now goes to the House. If they reject it or fail to pass the measure this week, then the temporary surveillance powers activated after 11 September, 2001 will expire on the House floor. So what's it going to be, live free or die or give up some civil liberties in good faith to your government? Your state representatives would like to know.
P.S. For those following the election: McCain voted for telco immunity, Obama against, and Clinton didn't vote at all even though she was in the area for Tuesday's primaries.
Voter Roll-call (a "Yea" is a vote to strike the immunity provision)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
matt @ Feb 13th 2008 8:39AM
a vote for hussein obama is a vote for terrorism
soul7963 @ Feb 13th 2008 8:43AM
Which facts are that racist comment based on then?
matt @ Feb 13th 2008 8:48AM
simple logic, duh.
Timmy @ Feb 13th 2008 8:51AM
I bet this AssClown Matt owns an Ipod and keeps his macbook air in a manila envelop ands have neve met a Zune owner.
soul7963 @ Feb 13th 2008 8:51AM
Simple is definitely the right word!
matt @ Feb 13th 2008 8:53AM
glad to know that the obama camp is so quick to resort to personal attacks. way to prove that you're part of the party of politics of personal destruction!
shanoboy @ Feb 13th 2008 8:55AM
Yeah, I love that train of thought!
"If you aren't willing to give up your civil liberties you must be a terrorist!"
Well, the UK has gave up tons of theirs and don't appear to be immune to terrorist attacks either, as seen from the London train bombings a while back. See what good those cameras did them.
Mark @ Feb 13th 2008 8:57AM
A vote for any Republican, is a vote for more of the quaking in our boots cowardice that we've seen for the last seven years. OOh, some bad guy might do something to me, sometime, somewhere. Oh, please take my rights and keep itty-bitty me all nice and safe.
Go on, find yourself a rock and hide. I live in America.
matt @ Feb 13th 2008 8:57AM
right. as we all know, terrorists plan their terroristic activities outside, in broad daylight, in full view of CCTV cameras.
Dave @ Feb 13th 2008 8:59AM
last time I checked, public cameras are a lot different then concentrated wiretaps on foreign nationals and those suspected to be terrorists...
Liam @ Feb 13th 2008 9:11AM
I hate how some Americans say "If you don't agree with my point of view, then you're unpatriotic/for the terrorists". Bush has often described how the entire Democratic party is somehow un-American. I'm glad that, with the exception of Romney's 'pulling out' speech, these kinds of tactics have been absent from the presidential race. It cheapens the political dialogue; where can you go, exactly, from saying someone is in league with terrorists?
Walter @ Feb 13th 2008 9:25AM
Quite simply, he is not a Terrorist, but a Socialist/Communist. I think he's a decent person, but he is what he is. But thankfully this is a not a vote for high school president, right, or the most popular person would win..........which would be scary, because we could end up with a Communist as President. Not that I like the alternative, but McCain is what a Democrat used to be. So this coming election we have a Democrat (if it's McCain) or a Communist (both Hillary and Barak are Communists, so does it matter which one makes it?).
I am glad someone brought up the UK.. They are socialists trying to appease the criminals and Terrorists (they are JUST LIKE the Democratic Party in what they want to do to this Country). The Brits have banned KNIVES for heaven sake! They had a knife amnesty...people turning in the last weapon of defense they were allowed to have. That Country is in Great trouble. Now, we have some socialist states right here in the USA, like NJ. But we should see NJ as an example of how bad it will get.
And addressing the core argument here on this article: Correct me if I am wrong, but while reading the Constitution, I just cannot seem to find the Right to Privacy anywhere (and yes, I have read the Amendments too). Can someone help me find that? Thanks!
insertAlias @ Feb 13th 2008 9:26AM
"glad to know that the obama camp is so quick to resort to personal attacks. way to prove that you're part of the party of politics of personal destruction!"
................
(a few posts earlier by the same gentleman)
"a vote for hussein obama is a vote for terrorism"
O_o
I'm no supporter of Obama at all. In fact, I'm a conservative. But you're making people like me look like jackasses. People read your crap and think that's how we all think. Some of us have real reasons to not vote for him, not your stupid hate-filled bullshit.
Jon @ Feb 13th 2008 9:49AM
Wow Matt, you make a horrendous mis-characterization and then you seem to overreact and are surprised when others respond in kind. You are a douche-bag. As for your comment, some of us are living in America where privacy is a right. This bill violates my rights and my ability to DEFEND them. Feel free to stick your head back in the sand and buy into the fear mongering that has convinced you to give up your rights in the name of freedom.
Rob @ Feb 13th 2008 9:58AM
Matt, I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt that you meant "a vote for a Democrat candidate is a vote for the terrorists." I'd respect your opinion. Now, if you're emphasizing that people should not vote for Mr Obama because of his name, then you're an idiot. We're fortunate to live in a country that can look over the bs and nonsense. A name doesn't make you a better or worse individual. Yes, there are people that are running for office and are riding on a family name; Clinton, Kennedy, and Bush. But, to condemn Mr Obama because of his Middle-East rooted name is simply nonsense. Wake up sir.
patsy @ Feb 13th 2008 9:58AM
Well, by your loose and vague from-the-hip definition I guess Hillary and Barack may possibly be viewed as communist, although there's a huge difference between a communist and a socialist which I'm sure you're not interested in.
However tenuous their labeling as communists may be, there is frighteningly more correlation between our current (and mostly likely future McCain-led) administration and the ideology defined on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism. In fact, there is virtually no characteristic listed that doesn't apply to some degree to the state of our nation over the last seven years. I say give me national health care and the evils of a "classless" society over anything listed on that page.
Jeff @ Feb 13th 2008 10:07AM
Where are we from Matt? Ah never mind it's obvious.
Jon @ Feb 13th 2008 10:17AM
@Walter-
I think the 3rd, 4th and 5th amendments make it pretty clear. There is also this little thing about Liberty in the Constitution, which I believe refers to individual sovereignty, which I would imagine includes being able to keep things private. Is it explicitly said? No, but it seems clear to me given the reason this country was founded that your ability to keep things to those you deem need to know was a significant part of the plan.
Beyond that your view of America, and the world for that matter, is twisted. Since when was social consciousness equal to socialism? The UK are socialists? You would have had a little more weight in your argument if you had pointed to MA instead of NJ as a socialist state, at least they have universal healthcare which I'm sure scares you. I don't think it's socialism to think everyone should get paid a fair wage, or that it is wrong for someone to loose their home because they get sick, or their job gets outsourced or cut, I'd call that being a decent human being. There was a time the American motto was United We Stand Divided We Fall, I guess now it's Me, Myself and I.
Rawsome @ Feb 13th 2008 10:34AM
Hey, guys. If the Republicans (or Clintons) win again, I hear the immigration process for Americans moving to Canada is relatively painless. There's plenty of room up here for people who still believe in liberty over safety, in the true north strong and free. (emphasis on "free")
Nick @ Feb 13th 2008 10:41AM
Liam...isnt it sad and scary. Patriotism has a better ring to it than "blind nationalism", don't you think? I think it was Robin Williams that made the joke about the American government getting the idea for "Homeland" from the 3rd Reich's "Fatherland".
patsy @ Feb 13th 2008 11:18AM
@Nick:
Actually, "Homeland" is an almost verbatim translation of "Heimatland", which--while not Nazi per se--was certainly in rigorous use during that period. In a non-political context it's still OK to use in German, but politically it definitely has uncomfortable "Fatherland" connotations, and thus I find the choice of "Homeland" very strange and somewhat disturbing.
Scott @ Feb 13th 2008 11:27AM
Walter:
It's the Fourth Amendment, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." that IS the right to privacy. That's what privacy MEANS. By "secure," that means private. By "searches," that means monitoring. What part of this is so difficult to understand?
The REAL question is, why the heck are you so much in a hurry for the American government to take away YOUR right to having private conversations with your friends and families, and business dealings?
-Scott
Sean O @ Feb 13th 2008 12:00PM
How did this dipshit get first comment. Disgusting. And in case there are still people stupid enough out there not realize this by now, Barrack Obama is a Christian.
matt @ Feb 13th 2008 12:07PM
a "christian" who attends a church that loves louis farrakhan
jroc @ Feb 13th 2008 12:10PM
Because Obama voted to give up civil liberties via the patriot act!!!
Sean @ Feb 13th 2008 4:42PM
@mark " a vote for a republican is a vote to be a coward in your boots or whatever blablabla" last time i checked it was the democrats that want to cut and run in COWARDESS they dont like to fight cause they have vaginas where their penis is spose to go, half of them are even voting for a vagina for president! lol you dont have to wait for hillary to get into office to cut your penis off if thats what your into. Or obama lol even better they asked a focus group last night what accomplishments obama has and the first woman said uhhh he go into the senate the second woman said uhh skip! the 3rd guy said uhhh hes had a really good speach about then he got cut off by the interveiwer who reminded everyone a speech is NOT a acomplishment the 4th guy said uhhh hes black and last time i checked being black wasnt exactly an acomplishment HA! it might be an acomplishment for blacks to have a black get this far but its deffinatly not an acomplishment. I'm not a racist but I also like not wanting to cut my penis off by voting for a lesbian ok ill put it this way diffrent countries compete against eachother economically even goto war with eachother lets compare countries to teams you want your team to win you vote for your team just like RECORD numbers of blacks have been coming out to vote for obama in the primaries regardless of they agree or even know what his polictical views are it should be the same way for Whites your on the White team and you should not vote for the other team as they wouldnt vote for yours.
patsy @ Feb 13th 2008 8:36PM
@Sean:
> I'm not a racist but [...] your on the White team and you should not vote for the other team as they wouldnt vote for yours.
Wow, I must be out of my mind to even respond to this drivel, but yeah, you're a racist.
Dan @ Feb 14th 2008 1:13AM
@Mark, Huck and McCainiac belong to the neo-cons, I suggest you search Ron Paul cause he aint your average neo-con republican
Todd @ Feb 13th 2008 8:39AM
Main Entry: collusion
Function:noun
secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose
Flit @ Feb 13th 2008 9:27AM
Fascism: Where corporations control the state; where corporations' rights superscede citizen rights.
James @ Feb 13th 2008 6:39PM
telco immunity, though its not right to let the telco's off the hook, after all they were just complying with a government request - wrong or not. the real problem is the wire taping with out a court ordered warrant, isnt it?
aardvark sandwich @ Feb 13th 2008 8:43AM
Clinton is already showing why she'd make such a great leader for our country; leave the tough decisions to someone else.
Nick @ Feb 13th 2008 9:08AM
that comment just made my day, thank you.
Scott Culp @ Feb 13th 2008 8:45AM
Hillary just lost the nomination with that non-decision.
Jonathan @ Feb 13th 2008 8:48AM
Hillary was in Texas, Engadget. Please take your political bias elsewhere.
jodosh @ Feb 13th 2008 8:55AM
being in El Paso myself (the city where Hilary came first in TX) I can tell you that she didn't leave the DC area until sometime around 5pm. So unless her flight took like 8 hours she was in the area.
Liam @ Feb 13th 2008 8:55AM
I'm sure she has a plane.
Jonathan @ Feb 13th 2008 9:04AM
Oh, so you can somehow determine when exactly she was in D.C. by the time she arrived in TX? That makes sense. Tell me again how this is possible?
For anyone who supports Obama, count how many votes he's skipped on. His record is almost as bad as hers. I'd say that her being too busy working on her CAMPAIGN shows me that she cares more about being our next President.
Anyway, McCain, Obama, and Clinton have skipped out on most of the votes. *Notes that Engadget didn't point this out*
Nick @ Feb 13th 2008 9:17AM
you are right! skipping on a vote concerning an extension of these over reaching laws that allow the executive branch to invade US citizens' privacy is much less important than going and shaking hands and trying to win delegates.
What speaks louder: saying you are for civil liberties and not showing up? or showing up and voting proving that you are there for the fight and long haul on this topic?
Clinton isn't horrible if she wasn't such a lobbyist's wetdream. She takes the lobbyist's money and lets the issue be forgotten.
Jonathan @ Feb 13th 2008 9:32AM
Well ain't that funny! Obama decided not to vote on something else 5 hours earlier! He must be a terrible person and an awful president. /sarcasm
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00020
I'm absolutely fine with Obama and Clinton skipping votes to work on their campaign.
Anyway, don't see anyone hating Obama for skipping a vote 5 hours earlier.
Jonathan @ Feb 13th 2008 9:37AM
BTW.. What Obama skipped on 5 hrs earlier: "An original bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, to modernize and streamline the provisions of that Act, and for other purposes."
Sounds pretty important. What are your justifications for him passing on this vote? hmm?
I'm sure it will come attached with a good amount of positive spin.
michael @ Feb 13th 2008 10:03AM
What's wrong with Engadget having a bias? Blogs are editorial, right?
Anthony @ Feb 13th 2008 10:48AM
> Hillary was in Texas, Engadget. Please take your political bias elsewhere.
And Obama spoke from Wisconsin last night but he was still around during the day to vote against the law.
Now neither Clinton or Obama did much [if anything] to help Senator Dodd try and win this fight so they are both at fault but at least we know where Obama stands on the issue. Clinton does not like to go on record so that people can ask her about it later. She complains about Obama voting present in Illinois and yet does not have a problem doing basically the same thing.
Nick @ Feb 13th 2008 10:55AM
Patriot act sounds like its a good thing, right?
Clean Air Act sounds like its supposed to clean up the amount of pollution released into the air, right?
Don't judge a book by its cover.. or a legislative bill by the 1 sentence synopsis.
Justification for skipping on a vote wouuld be either:
A)you're ted kennedy off getting drunk with a hooker somewhere.
OR
B)you're vote is in the majority and not showing up for it wont be a deal breaker.
But if you are voting the way of the minority and the issue is something that you fight for.. then you show up and stand your ground..not go "ohh well we are gonna lose.. so i just wont show up".
Jake @ Feb 13th 2008 1:16PM
@ jodosh:
Actually, Hillary left the DC area yesterday morning around 9 AM. But feel free to talk out of your ass.
Jonathan is right: bias is one thing; blatant misrepresentation of the facts is another. It is not "bias" to misreport that she was in Washington at the time of the vote, which is what Engadget has done.
Thomas: you really should update the post.
Ian @ Feb 13th 2008 8:49AM
If I'd only known how the frontrunners had voted on this issue, I might not have voted for Dr. Strangelove.
EMoShunz @ Feb 13th 2008 8:52AM
i just need some clarification please.
the government can legally tap your stuff, but the company allowing them to do it can't?
if that is true, they should be sued for being stupid. but the gov't should pass the immunity, or cancel the whole wire tap thing all together, it puts companies in a bad position. and since the telcoms can't do like google and just have the data off shore, they can't just say no too easily can they?
Liam @ Feb 13th 2008 8:57AM
Is it smart to let commercial companies in on such things anyway? Probably not.
Anthony @ Feb 13th 2008 10:53AM
I think the problem for a lot of people [myself for sure] is that the govt is giving retro active immunity. That completely takes awat the ability to do anything about what has gone on and the Constitution clearly states no ex post facto laws can be passed. Yet this is exactly what was done :(
Jake @ Feb 13th 2008 1:14PM
Holy crap, this reply system is wigging out...
My comment above was actually directed at jodosh's comments above -- and then my first correction ended up appended to CosterMonger's comment on the next page...