Posted by
Cary Wesberry on Thursday, March 13, 2008 3:40:56 PM
In August of 2007, the Protect America Act (PAA) was signed into law after passing high majority votes in both the House and Senate. What exactly did the PAA do? It allowed the government to monitor phone calls and e-mails originating overseas to (or from) a person suspected of having ties to terror organizations and/or al Qaeda for up to one year without a warrant. The PAA included a 180 day sunset provision.
Then, in January of this year, President Bush signed a 15-day extension of the PAA as requested by Congress – presumably so that Congress could get its act together and vote to make the PAA provisions permanent. After all, why wouldn’t we want to know what potential terrorists are planning and plotting against us? Forewarned is forearmed and all that stuff.
The Senate was up to the task, as they voted to pass the FISA Amendments Act of 2007, which covered most of the provisions of the PAA indefinitely, as well as providing immunity for telecommunications companies that complied with government requests to assist the National Security Agency in monitoring calls and e-mail communications as per an executive order from President Bush after 9/11.
Unfortunately, the House – led by Supergrandma Nancy Pelosi – was not up to the challenge. Pelosi, in her infinite wisdom, decided to call a 12-day vacation for her minions without bothering to vote on the FISA Amendments Act passed by the Senate just two days earlier. And two days after the House adjourned, the PAA expired.
According to Jed Babbin of Human Events, Pelosi did all of this “despite a letter she received from most of the ‘Blue Dog’ Democrats telling her they’d vote for the Senate bill. Added to Republican numbers, the Blue Dogs’ votes would have enabled Pelosi to pass the bill on a simple majority vote.”
Nice going, Granny.
No matter which poll you look at, the job approval rating of Congress in general is in the toilet. (It’s lower than the president’s, but we won’t talk about that.) And a large percentage of Americans are annoyed with Pelosi’s decision to call a recess without dealing with FISA and, by extension, the PAA. According to a new survey by American Solutions, 71% of those Americans surveyed “find it unacceptable that the U.S. House went on a 12 day recess without renewing the Protect America Act -- legislation that permits the government to monitor the communications of suspected terrorists overseas.
The survey also shows that 74% of Americans believe that telecommunications companies who help the government track down terrorists should be granted immunity from lawsuits relating to their assistance.”
When you look at the breakdown of the survey, even a majority of Democrats polled disapprove of the vacation gambit. When your own party members aren’t backing you, perhaps it’s time to sit back and evaluate your strategy.
Back when she was installed as the first woman Speaker, Nancy Pelosi could do no wrong. Just over a year later, buyer’s remorse seems to be setting in. Specific criticism of Madame Speaker seems muted, however, perhaps because one wouldn’t want to sound sexist by talking smack about the first female House Speaker in American history. Such an image must be constantly buffed to keep that nasty tarnish away.
But that’s okay; since I’m also a woman, I’m not going to worry about being labeled as a sexist. Just think of me as one of the gals at the kaffee klatsch, not some mean ol’ guy who wants to beat up on a woman in charge.
When she accepted her gavel in January of 2007, Pelosi said:
"I accept this gavel in the spirit of partnership not partisanship, and look forward to working ... with you on behalf of the American people.
"In this House, we may belong to different parties, but we serve one country. We stand united in our pride and prayers for our men and women in uniform. They are working together to protect the American people, and we, in this Congress we must work together to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.”
What a difference a year makes. Instead of working together to build a future worthy of the sacrifice of our military men and women, she is, in effect, treating that sacrifice like a pesky fly that buzzes near the fruit salad at a summer picnic. But why? For those of you who are baffled as to why Pelosi would refuse this bill a chance to be voted on in the House, Jed Babbin has a good idea:
The best explanation for Pelosi’s refusal to pass the Senate bill through the House is the Democrats’ craving for political donations from the trial lawyers. As Sen. McConnell told me, “It’s more important to [the Democrats] for these companies to be in court, thereby enriching their plaintiff lawyer buddies, than for these terrorists to be in jail.”
I thought only the Republicans were slaves to lobby interests. Now I find that Democrats may be vulnerable to the same temptations? My world has stopped spinning.
Great work from Pam Meister writing at Family Security Matters. As I say so very often; Family Security Matters should be required reading. In actuality, it's not that Granny Nancy did nothing on her vacation; it's that she whored out herself and her party to lawyers like an expensive Spitzer hooker instead of protecting American citizens. Democrats for America? No, Democrats for Themselves! In their twisted minds, America is only helped if Democrats are in control of the government. Therefore the most important thing they can do is retain their power instead of defending the country because they can't defend the country if they aren't in power. The only problem is, they never get to the "defending their country" part due to the fact the Democrats are always focused on retaining their power. Granny Nancy and the rest of her party find themselves caught in this circular nonsense way too often for my taste.