FISA on the floor; nutroots in a frenzy; Update: FISA reform passes, 69-28
The Senate held three votes on telecom immunity amendments this afternoon and a final vote on the FISA reform bill will take place later today. After all is said and done, the 9/10 Democrats will go along with the White House in protecting telecom companies from civil lawsuits related to their anti-terrorism cooperation with the feds–and FISA reform will at last be passed. Here are the roll call votes. Here’s wire coverage of the action on the Senate floor and a rundown from First Read on Barack Obama’s flip-flop. The heartbroken nutroots are foaming at the mouth.
Hoist, meet petard.
The “moneybomb” goes off on August 8.
***
Update 2:44pm Eastern. The cloture motion on the FISA bill passes, 72-26.
Update 3:07pm Eastern. FISA reform passes, 69-28. Obama votes yes. Hillary votes no.
***
Jeff Goldstein: You can’t spell “hopeyness” and “changitude” without “capitulation.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Spinning the Bush wiretap ruling
July 3, 2008 01:47 PM by Michelle Malkin
55 CommentsFISA on the floor; housing boondoggle on hold; DeMint puts heat on Reid; Update: FISA moves forward, 80-15
June 25, 2008 04:40 PM by Michelle Malkin
54 Comments
FISA reform, finally: “The bill is passed,” 293-129
June 20, 2008 12:46 PM by Michelle Malkin
127 Comments
Mukasey: “Fatwas do not have an expiration date”
March 21, 2008 07:12 PM by Michelle Malkin
30 Comments
Secret session doesn’t persuade Dems on FISA
March 14, 2008 02:39 PM by Michelle Malkin
43 CommentsWho cares about FISA?
March 13, 2008 02:38 PM by Michelle Malkin
36 CommentsBush pushes FISA reform
February 28, 2008 09:46 AM by Michelle Malkin
116 CommentsAnother FISA failure
February 27, 2008 06:50 AM by Michelle Malkin
29 Comments
Categories: FISA
Riehl World View
» Whitney Houston: If I should stay I would only be in your wayPatterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksGateway Pundit
» Barack The BenevolentRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the Nonconformists
Hey, he grew up in Hawaii. Everyone here has Flip-flops. He’s making a career of his though.
That’s unfortunate.
Article I, Section 9:
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
The Democrats even surrender on their core beliefs. Is there anything a Democrat won’t surrender from?
Obamessiah – King of flip-flops.
Jack of all trades, master of none.
Apparently, this is not the Obamessiah I knew… or is it?
He’s voting? Well, knock me over with a feather.
It is amazing that Republican “leadership” doesn’t flog their obstructionist Democratic opponents on a daily basis. There are plenty of things the Dems could be flogged over. I bet that the typical, uninformed American thinks Congress=Boooosh and attributes all of Congress’ screw ups to Republicans.
The 9/10 obstructionist party here is Bush, who has let months go by without giving the NSA the surveillance powers it needs, to get his immunity from bad press.
#5:
What’s even more amazing is that the party supposedly in favor of limited government continues to expand federal government at the cost of our freedoms and liberty.
#5 meet #4…
So what happened to the Lord Moo-saih Obambi’s ability to persuade? Looks pretty limp to me.
All is not what it seems when it comes to the Lord Moo-saih.
Obama is a great supporter of FISA…after the telecoms have been nationalised.
#6 and #4, the reason the surveillance powers lapsed months ago was because Bush wasn’t going to sign a deal that didn’t keep his illegal NSA program from getting its day in court.
Bush’s legacy: 1
Safe Americans: 0
Red State, what are you going to do when Bush is gone? Where will you vent your anger?
#9, fix yourself.
“Red State Skeptic” . . . Do you have any solutions at all, other than trashing Bush?
Perhaps s/he could turn a critical eye at that Democrat majority at some point.
#14:
How about preserving and upholding the Constitution for a start? It’s a fantasy, I know, but…
The Kosacks are having head explosions as are the Huffs. It’s quite amuseing…just don’t forget to wear your hazmat suit if you decide to check out their sites.
Well, I guess those lawyers will have to go after another industry to fleece.
Safe Americans Says it all!
lol. Funny.
Why, yes, there is. BDS!
Actually, feel free to add me to the ‘safe’ list. I don’t mind. So, let’s see…at least 1 to 1…
Democrats got all the mileage out of the lies they could, before doing the right thing. Just despicable, but what do you expect from Democrats.
I just heard on CSpan2 that Obama voted for it.
Can you explain why you think the NSA has stopped doing what it has been doing under every Administration for 30 years or so?
John Ansell re:
“The Democrats even surrender on their core beliefs. Is there anything a Democrat won’t surrender from?”
I hear that it pretty darn hard to get one out of a tree…
Can anyone provide a well-reasoned argument for this immunity nonsense, while keeping in mind “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed“?
I do not expect anything from Dems>>>>
I still expect Republican office holders to stiffen their spines (there is another term I could use but won’t)>>>
I’ve been waiting for Republicans to show collective courage to stop the slippery slide to socialism for MAAANNNNYYYY years – still WAITING!
You are correct, the law just reverts to what was before, passed about 30 years ago — This is just an update. The existing FISA law far more cumbersome and slower than the new updated law. When communications speed moves at Internet speed, you can’t wait. Seems like everyone understands that technology changes, except Democrats.
I hear it’s darn hard to get a Democrat to drill for oil. Doesn’t fit the Democrats ‘there is no future for America’ template.
I love how people are more afraid of Bush that AL Qaeda.
If you can show me one person who was illegally wiretapped (not the Islamic charities with ties to Al Qaeda) then Im might believe there is a problem here.
There is no crime here
“These flip-flops were made for walking…”
My apologies to Nancy Sinatra for sampling her music and parodying her song with BO.
It passed so this is all moot
It is interesting to me that the Democrat Party, as a whole, find “legal” fault with anything that is proposed to fight crime or terrorism, and that “it” might “someday” be used against “law-abiding” citizens.
Well, I am a “law-abiding” citizen. I don’t walk any “fine line” legally. I obey laws, and I don’t try to find excuses or ways to circumvent said laws. I am not afraid of laws that are used to protect me, are you?
So, my question to Dems is this; if you are doing nothing wrong, what are you so afraid of?
Your “people” don’t seem to be prosecuted, regardless of what laws they break, nor their hatespeech, and rarely do they have to pay the price for those actions. I don’t need to name names, as we all know legions of names from the left who fit this category.
I love the smell of FISA in the
morningafternoon.It is too bad that Obama was the first black candidate. He is going to set them back a lot of years.
In the case of powerful countries, tyrannical government has always been a greater threat to it’s people than external dangers. In our case, that threat is medieval barbarians living in caves in the middle of a desert.
In the case of the many dissenters here, we simply want to take a step back and say, “Is the GWOT worth the price we’re paying out of the principles this country was built on.” From a conservative standpoint it fails the big government test. This is just a sample of why this year’s budget has ballooned to $3.2 trillion…
#2 and #27:
Why don’t you do a little research — maybe check out Calder v. Bull — before babbling that granting immunity violates Article I, Section 9? Ex post facto is forbidden in four specific instances, and none of these relate to immunity or pardons.
Exactly! I’m quite sure most people on this planet are supremely unaware of the capabilities of the NSA and the NRO.
furtim vigilans
I disapprove of the president, and I disapprove of the Democratic majority. I’m what you would call an average American.
I can’t believe anyone wants to hear my opinions, but since you asked, get the hell out of Iraq, put more troops in Afghanistan, cut defense spending unless we’re willing to pay for it now, cut Medicare benefits, let the recession take its course without bailing out everybody who took on bad loans, raise interest rates, lift sugar tarriffs, end farm subsidies, ban abortion everywhere, raise the Social Security retirement age, let the illegals stay AND bust unions so we can remain competitive, and give Rush Limbaugh and Tupac Shakur federal holidays — or for irony’s sake, give them the same holiday.
US Senator Christopher J. Dodd (D-Countrywide) was on C-Span ranting and raving about this bill. It is obvious that Dodd is trying to detract attention from the sweetheart loan that Dodd got from Countrywide as a friend of Angelo. It is typical of Dodd that he was ranting and raving about “sleazy lenders” and evil telecommunication companies at the same time he was getting a loan from Countrywide that epitomized the way a sleazy lender and a sleazy member of Congress would scratch each other’s bank. Interesting that the New York Times has taken a nosedive on the whole Dodd-Countrywide scandal.
Have you run across a roll call on it, yet? I’m curious to see who the 28 are.
Not as a whole, the elites of socialism are just as Pro-Big-Government as the elites of Authoritarianism (ie Jay Rockefeller being primary sponsor and major proponent of all aspects of this bill). Unfortunately history is pretty clear on what government does with newly acquired powers, and using this as a guide – “it”
might “someday”will be used against“law-abiding”all citizens.Yey!!
There is hope – yet!
This is what I am currently reading at Congresse’s site. The bill is up there but not the votes yet
BTW two Senators didnt vote at all. ITs Ted Kennedy and John McCain.
Ahh a Lion!, re: #42 “…“it”
might “someday”will be used against “law-abiding” all citizens.”Well said, but IMHO most law abiding citizens have nothing to hide & fear the enemy more than the government (for now anyway)…to me if abused, would be no more oppressive than random sobriety checkpoints. IMHO.
Please enlighten me…which “newly acquired powers” has the government used against “all” citizens? Do you mean the “legal” stealing of our individual wealth through oppressive taxation, or forcing the minority to swallow the will of the voting majority, or what? I’m curious where you are going with this.
Lion, right on the money with your comment 42.
Good one, Aloha! Now, if we can just get the local news from always saying “Hawaii-born Presidential Candidate Barack Obama.”
They called him Barry at Punahou, anyway, at his own insistence.
Strange, about half of all your points I would reiterate. Not that you asked for my opinion of your opinions, I just thought it would be fun since the majority of the time when I see your posts I tend to disagree with them. But anyhow, for example: Get out of Iraq (agreed, but when the commanders on the ground determine that is feasible and safe; not when some Democrat says so); more troops in Afghan (agreed)
Increase defense spending or maintain what we spend now (Free Willy and Carter decreased the spending and I can tell you from experience the wonders that did for the military)
Cut Medicare, Medicaid, SS and all other non-essential government wealth redistribution programs (aka socialism) and encourage people to actually work for a living and set aside money for their health and retirement and not on drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, 60 inch LCD HDTV’s, and other non-essentials while complaining about not having enough for food. It’s called prioritizing, you’re not entitled to live like the Jones’s on the taxpayers dime.
Agreed.
Couldn’t disagree more.
Agreed.
I have to admit I did get a good laugh out of that one.
Very confused. RedStateSkeptic wants to ban abortion everywhere BUT vote for liberals who will place liberal judges on the bench. Hello?!
He wants to stimulate the economy by tax hikes. Evidently Econ 101 wasn’t a class that RedStateSkeptic took.
He wants to get the “hell out of Iraq?” and give Al Qaeda a victory there.
Cut defense spending? Osama would love that! Why is it that the ONE thing that Democrats want to cut is always defense spending?
If we get these Dhimmicrats, like RedStateSkeptic is going to vote for, into the executive branch again, it’s Jimmy Carter all over again.
Roll Call vote
NAYs —28
Akaka (D-HI)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting – 3
Kennedy (D-MA)
McCain (R-AZ)
Sessions (R-AL)
As I have said before, you will NEVER get an Obamaniac to vote for McCain no matter how much he flip-flops. I just pulled this off the Daily Kos, I took out the “uc” from the profanity:
A great example of tyrannical government oppressing it’s citizens! In fact, sticking with the economic aspect of tyrannical government, quoting from the Article 1 Section 10 of our Constitution:
So many things to go over, but lets focus on the destruction of our currency. I would say it’s oppressive to outsource creation of our money to a private central bank. I would say it’s oppressive to back our money with nothing of true value. I would say that inflation of our money supply by an unelected “nobility” is the height of tyranny. We can get into all kinds of civil liberty issues as well, but I really liked where you are going with economic repression.
WOW!! With a single vote, the Senate just cost the civil lawyers untold tens of billions of dollars, saved American jobs, and will still allow us to intercept enemy communications from overseas.
I can hear the anguished cries of the left from here!
Gabe, reading comprehension brah. Balancing a budget is a conservative notion. If you want to increase DOD spending, then pay for it with actual revenue rather than via borrowed (read Chinese) funds. Time for you to revisit Econ and conservative principals 101.
Obama knows that, hence his phony switch to the right. Right now it is jihad of the tongue time in order to trick the gullible “middle.”
This has been a very successful strategy for Dems in the past two years, especially in the South and West. Run as a conservative (the Left knows this strategy and will forgive it), then when elected as a “moderate” conservative, suddenly switch to the far Left and pretend that America has gone to the Left and given you a mandate and will support Leftist positions.
It might again work this election but 2010 it won’t after our country goes to hell in 2009. America will wake up just as America woke up in 1994.
OMG, it’s George W. all over. You pegged it my friend.
Love how Dems always want to “balance the budget” by SOLELY cutting the defense, making us vulnerable. No wonder Osama wants Obama to win.
Democrats are like a fly stuck in the house, trying to get out of a half-opened door by constantly ramming against the pane in the same place over and over again.
Dems, like Dakine, NEVER learn. It is 9/10 over and over again. Cut defense spending, don’t ever spy on Muslim terrorists, slash the defense budget.
Barack Hussein Obama’s HOPE and CHANGE: Hope terrorists don’t attack despite slashing the defense budget, and change the nation to make it more terrorist-friendly.
The idea isnt to convince Obama backers to vote mccain but rather to have them hesistate and not vote for Obama.
We want them to sit at home on election day.
No, he ran as a “compassionate” conservative, and we all knew it. He was still better on defense issues, national security, and Supreme Court justices than Al Gore or John Kerry, just as McCain is far better than Obama.
Your analogy doesn’t hit the mark because Dems run as conservatives just to get elected, then slash defense spending and appoint commis to the bench.
William Amos.. did you read what the Obamaniac wrote? You think he is going to hesitate?
Focus Gabe, focus. I’m not a Democrat. I agree that national security is an absolute priority, and I have no problem increasing DOD spending in an efficient way. However, conservative thinking requires any increases in DOD spending to be funded out of current revenue rather than debt financing. You want it, pay for it. What’s not to get?
Lion-
Sorry, but I was being facetious. I understand your point. However, the USA has flourished, for the most part, with the current monetary system we now utilize.
US currency is not only in use worldwide, but it is in demand. Can you imagine an “in need” country demanding payment in Euros, or gold, or silver? (Okay, so Gisele Bunchen (sp) can demand Euros for payment and get away with it, but she is a narcissistic super model.)
So, I guess what I am asking you, is what exactly, is the government power that is being abused, that affects us all negatively, with all political spin aside?
I never thought of it that way. Just kidding, I have EXTREME reservations about both parties, but in the end I agree with Democrats more. In the primaries, it’s always a choice of who I hate the least. No one ever wins me over, but they can get lucky by having their opponent piss me off even more.
He wants to stimulate the economy by tax hikes. Evidently Econ 101 wasn’t a class that RedStateSkeptic took.
Who said I want to stimulate the economy? I think of myself as a fiscal conservative who would rather trim the social safety net than tax the hell out of people, but I’m also a dad and I don’t want my kids’ economy be crippled by paying interest on our debt from today because we were afraid of 39% tax rates for our wealthiest citizens. (Please don’t try to say that low taxes means high revenue.)
AQI is on life support, thanks to the surge and thanks to the Sunnis who decided (before the surge) to stand up to Al Qaeda. Let’s be proud, declare victory on them, and let the Iraqis sort out their own differences instead of nannying them. And then go fight the real Al Qaeda in Pakistafghanistan.
So we can have more money to fund the perverted arts. Don’t you listen to us?
No guts,no glory.BHO made a profound promise to his adorers.The old days are gone.It’s all out there for all to see.Videos are everywhere.Politics and flip/flops are one thing,making a stand is another.He folded,no guts,no priciples.That is what I have liked about President Bush.There are times he makes a stand and will not back down.People in the military know this and they fight hard for their commander.Lord help us if we get a gutless wonder.
Obama could only throw scraps to the Daily Kos kids and Leftist litigation lawyers by first voting for a doomed to fail amendment to drop immunity and then say, “as President, I will carefully monitor the program,” after voting ‘yea’ for final passage. He was not safe to vote against it.
Yet is stunning to know while Obama’s feint to the right continues, Clinton, Schumer, Menendez, Lautenberg, and Dodd from the three states that between them lost over 2,000 on 9/11 could safely vote against final passage.
What is GWOT?
Global War on Terror(ism)
Ah, thank you much !! Now I need to go back and read again with my new education. Sometimes I get lost with the alphabet soup. LOL
Re: right_on
I sensed a bit of sarcasm, but decided to play off it – the IRS is a testament to overbearing government. As for flourishing due to fiat money, our dollar is worth .04 of 1913 dollars (the year the Fed was born). Also, just 40 years ago (still on the gold standard), a man could support his family of 1 stay-at-home wife, 3 kids, 1 house, 2 cars on one salary while keeping up a 20% savings rate. If the “prosperity” of today is the ability to buy a Plasma TV on your 30% APR credit card when you’re already $50k in debt, I choose 40 years ago.
Anyway to your point, which I answer with the phrase ‘incrementalism’. As a far right conservative, a deep distrust of government is inherent in laws passed. I understand where you are going though: “Even though the government now has the power to declare me an illegal enemy combatant and incarcerate me indefinitely, have they abused said power in a way that affect everyone negatively?” The answer of course is no. “Even though the government can intercept all my communications simply because they secretly suspect that I’m doing something unlawful, has that power been abused and/or negatively affected me?” the answer is no. This same answer right now applies to many other civil liberty violations: warrantless searches, DUI checkpoints, free speech zones, gun control, abortion, political correctness, etc. The inherent problem however, is that government shouldn’t have this power, simply because it can be abused, in a manner that will affect us all negatively. It hasn’t affected me personally, but it could, and if history tells us anything, soon it will.
dakine said:
You clerked at the ninth jerkit court and you’re not a Democrat? Simply amazing and a line of sh*t. You’ve been reading too many Hawaiian gay magazines dude.
Make sure to consult your partners before your ego gets shattered kid.
For those purveyors of BDS. President Bush is still the best choice we were given in 2000 and 2004. Hasn’t anyone else noticed that Algore is crazy as bed bug? I shudder every time I remember how close he came to being our President.
Lion-
That’s where I thought you were going. I agree that it could be a scary senario, and as a conservative, I am able to see (I hope) most sides of an issue. I don’t see a conservatively run government morphing the laws to combat terror, in to laws that persecute vocal opponents. I do see that happening with the liberal leaders, who have a history of abusing the authority given to them by the voters.
The idea of our government singling out you or any other law-abiding citizen, is, in my opinion, illogical, and borders on paranoia. The vast majority of Americans go about their daily lives, earning, learning, playing, wishing, and living simply. A miniscule number of our fellow citizens partake of the fruit of anarchy, and these are the ones that need to be watched.
I would hope, given the intelligence of most Americans, and their common sense, that we would never get to the point that our opponents in the Democrat Party, hoodwink enough people, including those in the military, to turn this country in to a fire pit. That will happen before the scenario you imagine…I hope!
right_on,
I’m not hopeful that we will ever see a conservatively run government again.
Re: right_on
That was a nice series of post between us, thank you. It looks like our differences boil down to optimism vs. pessimism. I still reject the idea of a left-right divide here as I believe the republicans and democrats are the same party now, and any laws granting government more power is a step in the wrong direction. Even if we believe that a conservatively run government wont abuse any new powers, a liberally-run government will still have access to those same powers when they get elected. Best to oppose any governmental power-grab no matter who is in office simply for future insurance against abuse.
Red State Skeptic, just out of curiousity on your statement:
“Please don’t try to say that low taxes means high revenue”
What do you attribute the growth in treasury tax receipts the last 5 years to? It is honestly out of genuine curiosity.
According to the US Treasury, individual income tax receipts have gone from $794b to $1,164b, or growth of 47%. Corporate tax receipts have gone from $131b to $370b, or growth of 182%. That’s overall growth in 5 years of 66% in tax receipts including both individual and corporate receipts.
Do you really believe that if it wasn’t for GWB’s tax cuts there would have been even more receipts?
Please explain why there was a larger increase in tax receipts under Carter and Clinton than under the GWB presidency thus far.
Yep…the nutroots are going crazy. Did anyone catch the headline on abcnews.com????
Spy Bill Passes: Gov’t Free to Spy on You
Please.
I decided to watch one of the MSM evening news sessions today. It was some of the most bias reporting I have seen n a while. They ignored what the bill was about and went with their “feelings.”
tyromac said:
Forget it, liberals don’t even know what a Laffer curve is.
The nutroots reaction to Obama’s vote reminds me of the movie “Rustler’s Rhapsody”. At the end, good guy Rex O’Herlihan finds himself facing off in a gunfight against another good guy, Bob Barber. They draw guns and while in the world of “Rustler’s Rhapsody” the good guy always shoots his opponent in the hand, Barber shoots Rex in the shoulder. This prompts Rex to realize that Barber isn’t a good guy after all to which Barber responds, “I’m a lawyer, you idiot!” Well, Obama is a lawyer and a politician. It’s a pity that the nutroots are only just now figuring it out. It’s an even bigger pity that ultimately it won’t make any difference to them.
Of course, right wing authoritarians “don’t even know” that Laffer himself has said on numerous occasions that his theory has been exaggerated and twisted for political purposes. Tax cuts do not in fact “pay for themselves”. Intellectual honesty is a beautiful thing. Try it on for size.
According to Wikipedia, regarding the Laffer Curve (I know…this source is looked upon with much scepticism.);
Go Hillary!
Denver Denver Denver!
Oh dear, oh my. Now the liberals warn me that Bush can listen in to my fascinating phone calls. Oh course, I don’t call Islamic terror states often, don’t discuss and support murdering our people, don’t leak our military secrets to our enemies. If these savages are the ones the few liberal bloggers here support, then the libs should sell their homes and other property,drain their bank and retirement funds, and give every nickel they own to the lawyers for those on trial for plotting to murder them and their families to save themselves and their families from Bush. Perhaps they might try a real die-in and jump out of skyscrapers like so many of our people did to escape the flames of the World trade Center massacre. Or perhaps they could “Honor Killing” themselves like we see Muslims do to “their” women world wide.To you liberals who would endanger my family with your sick and distorted views of life and the world, you are my enemy and the friend of my country’s enemies. Whether it is freeing child rapists, repeat drunk drivers, murderers, terrorists, or other threats to all of us by tying the hands of the police and weakening the Courts, or trying to take away our own means of self defense (anti-gun laws – see 2nd Amendment), the liberals are obsessed with filling our lives with real threats while demanding we focus only on their imaginary fears.
dental plan dakine said:
I base my statements on empirical data.
You know tax receipts from the Reagan era. Stupidity. Try less of it.
Empirical evidence
Laffer, in article published at the Heritage Foundation, has pointed to Russia and the Baltic states who have recently instituted a flat tax with rates lower than 35%, and whose economies started growing soon after implementation. He has also referred to the economic success following the Kemp-Roth tax act, the Kennedy tax cuts, the 1920s tax cuts, and the changes in US capital gains tax structure in 1997 as examples of how tax cuts can cause the economy to grow and thus increase tax revenue.[4] Others have noted that federal revenues, as a percentage of GDP, have remained stable at approximately 19.5% over the period 1950 to 2007 despite significant changes in margin tax rates over the same period. They argue that since federal revenue is proportional to GDP, the most key to increasing revenue is to increase GDP.[5]
At least one empirical study, looking at actual historical data on tax rates, GDP, and revenue, placed the revenue-maximizing tax rate (the point at which another marginal tax rate increase would decrease tax revenue) as high as 80%. Paul Samuelson argues in his popular economic textbook that Reagan was correct in a very limited sense to view the intuition underlying the Laffer curve as accurate, because as a successful actor, Reagan was subject to marginal tax rates as high as 90% during World War II. The point is that in a progressive tax system, any given person’s perspective on the validity of the Laffer curve will be influenced by the marginal tax rate to which that person’s income is subject.
Here’s more you can eat with your morning avocado
Oh, I should mention that yes… I favor smaller Federal Government. However, protecting its citizens from foreign attacks IS a Constitutional power granted our Federal Government.
While I agree with the general sentiment, that any powers we cede to our government we must fight to regain, I don’t think it applies to this situation. It’s like was said on the floor: unless you have a terrorist group on speed dial, you’ve nothing to worry about.
huffpo isn’t even willing to put the issue on its page.
Although I personally do not agree with the immunity portion of the bill, there is something that opposer’s of the bill must realize. In issues of national security, there is a great deal of information that is not publicly available regarding the uses and means of protection that these efforts have succeeded in the prevention of terror attacks here on our soil and also against our allies.
I would have liked a provision in the bill that states that these rights can only be used for issues and crimes of national security and any information gathered on any non-violent crimes by these methods would be excluded
Posted by a lame liberal at a lame liberal blog:
(In other words – “He coulda been a contender!”)
No liberals…. ‘bitter end’ is the place where you are now and, YES …. we ARE laughing at you!
I agree with Lion’s comment in #42. This bill has way too many loopholes that go beyond “telecommunications immunity”. I don’t like the fact that any of my communications outside of the country could be monitored, especially with the lack of judicial oversight.
Arstechnica provided a decent analysis on this awhile back. Just think, this website is “communicating” outside the country any time a non-American connects, no? So couldn’t MM.com be monitored under FISA, given some type of blanket authority that says, “monitor all outgoing communication between AT&T points in Washington DC and foreign country”?
The article is here