Despite how liberals are characterized by Fox News and Talk Radio broadcasters, we are not radical in any sense of the word. Neither are we far-out, or far-left for that matter. Those who are radical and far-left have long been marginalized and absent from influencing politics, for at least three decades. On the other hand, the far-right and the right (Conservatives), while comprising a fraction of the American population overall and representing less than one-third of American voters, exert an iron-grip on American policy. And they haven’t compromised an inch in the nearly thirty years since they came to power.

What began as the loosening of regulations thirty years ago (that was supposed to lead to increased business growth and profit which would benefit all classes of Americans) has led to the elimination of most regulations, worsening standards (that is hurting our safety, health and well-being), and the selling off of our shared collective resources (water, lumber, oil, minerals, etc.) to private corporations.

The center line in American politics is so far to the right now (much farther to the right than is actually the center of where the American people are) because liberals are excluded entirely from the process. We are regularly dismissed by both our elected representatives and the mainstream media, denounced as “socialists,” “commies,” “radical anarchists” who are “just one protest away from being sent to camps as traitors.”

If centrist Democrats merge with moderate Republicans to form the dominant political influence in U.S. politics, what changes can we expect to see?

As the only people that centrist Democrats have stood up to and said no to are those to their left, we should expect more of the same: Corporate protections, rights and interests superceding the rights of the citizen. But at a faster pace. Even with Christian fundamentalists’ influence diminished, their ideological positions will continue to gain momentum because they satisfy the Corporatists’ interests, too, albeit for different reasons.

We’re approaching another crossroads, what could be the tipping point. Will centrist Democrats take a step back, recognize how vital it is that they listen to their better angels, and not trade away Constitutional rights and protections because they’re afraid of looking like obstructionists?

Maeven @ 65

With all due respect, Christy, FireDogLake is once again resembling Marshal Petain and the Vichy regime. We got into this mess because of compromises such as that which you are suggesting. To quote Mel Brooks’s Hitler (The Producers), “A little piece of Poland, a little piece of France…” This is NOT the way to deal with these people who are holding our country (and all of the other nations of the world) hostage.

The FISA court, a secret star chamber, is, in itself, unConstitutional. I, an authentic liberal, isn’t alone in that belief – It’s shared by many legal and Constitutional scholars on both ends of the ideological spectrum.

Any legislation that cedes authority to FISA court (as this legislation would do), legitimizes it. The longer that it exists without its Constitutionality being challenged, the harder it becomes to get rid of it. Unfortunately, we’re coming up to FISA’s 30th birthday, and its creation was a bad response to criminal activities by the same group of people in power in our government today.

There really is no reason, none, to have a clandestine judicial institution operating in the shadows, out of the view and oversight of anybody, unless it is to hijack the American government and use it for the express wishes of an elite few (the Corporate class).

We need to address the root causes that are creating people who commit the kinds of crimes that the FISA Court was created to deal with. Once sunlight shines on what the FISA Court (and the Bush administration) keep secret, the American people can see how their money and military have been misused around the world: To make very few filthy rich and powerful, and millions of others sick, dead and enslaved.

There should be no compromising, which is what this bill is. The Patriot Act needs to be overturned, the FISA Court needs to be shut down, Congress needs to find the Bush administration in inherent contempt, and Democrats need to rediscover America by sticking to the instruments for democracy and individual rights that the founders left for us.

All due respect, Maeven, it’s time to come home to the world that the rest of us live in.

Those are wonderful aspirations you’ve expressed in your comment. Not a single one of them has a snowball’s chance in hell of being realized any time soon.

We all know that the RESTORE Act is not good enough, just as the SCHIP re-authorization bill is not good enough and the non-inclusive ENDA is not good enough. But what is attainable is better than the status quo, and we refuse to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

If you can’t live with that, then kindly step out of the way. There’s work to be done.

Not by you, burnspeq. I’m not Sistah Soldjah, and you’re not Bill or Hillary Clinton.

We, real democrats, have been living with the results of what you DINOs (DLC, DSCC, DCCC, Clintonian-triangulators) could live with, what you have thought was attainable ever since Ronald Reagan said “Liberal, liberal, liberal” (Republican-speak for “BOO!”). You didn’t know what to say back to Republicans then and you don’t know what to say now.

The DINOs didn’t know how to defend liberalism then because they were opportunistic professional politicians, not true champions of the people. The result of that failure has been a dramatic slide into fascism. If this was Nazi Germany, we’d be having this conversation on the train to Auschwitz.

It’s long past the time for real democrats, liberals, the true base of the Democratic party, to realize that a thorough housecleaning has to happen at “home” before it can happen in Congress and the White House. Since moderate Republicans haven’t been successful in wresting control of the Republican party away from the Christian fundamentalists, the DLC (et al) have been making the Democratic party over into a place where moderate Republicans will feel comfortable. That means driving us liberals out into third parties where our power would be diluted. This has been the plan for a long time.

Moderate Republicans have been trying to reclaim the Republican party for several election cycles. With Dobson’s threat last week, this just may be that pivotal election for them. The race by both parties is on for the center, and with this latest disappointment by Reid and Pelosi on the Democratic side (just one more in a long list of failures and broken promises), they may just succeed in driving the Democratic base out first. If the DLC (et al) succeeds, don’t expect a party of centrist Democrats and moderate Republicans to restore any individual rights or privacy. Nor will they end the threat of terrorist attacks. They will just perfect what Bush and Cheney have begun: Fascist authoritarian government. However, privatization and the wholesale sell-off of America’s resources will resume at breakneck speed. And perpetual war is guaranteed. Expect ‘All fear, an attack at any time’.

I was just about to hit ’send’ when I looked up and saw CNN’s chiron cross the bottom of the television screen: Al Qaeda issues new threat warning.” It’s deja vu all over again. It’s a repeat of the threats circulated in August to pressure Congress into supporting the “Protect America Act”. Of what Jane Harman admitted a couple of weeks ago were hyped exaggerations, fear-mongering by an administration that appears to not be above false-flag operations in order to install an authoritarian dictatorship.

No, burnspeq, it’s time for you and other DINOs to move out of the way since you can’t defend, explain or fight for democratic policies and platforms, and leave the restoration of Americans’ rights and advancement of democratic principles and legislation to those of us who actually live them.

What about non-citizens living inside the U.S.?

A focus on “US Citizens” only leaves the millions of legal immigrants in the US without protection, even though our Bill of Rights talks about “persons” not “citizens” as having the rights within it.

Here in California, non-citizens that I know are everyone from children to college students to co-workers to family members of citizens.

My doctor isn’t a citizen- should she receive no constitutional protections unless she’s talking to me on the phone?

To deny rights to alien residents or legal alien visitors is ridiculously bad as it would isolate us from the world. It’s a Pat Buchanan dream come true.

When Eleanor Roosevelt wrote about the Declaration of Human Rights for the United Nations she didn’t add any exceptions for individuals away from their home country.

Maeven — What part of the post asking to call legislators and ask them to stand up for Constitutional rights and the rule of law did you misunderstand to be a call for surrender? Jeebus, reading comprehension rather than ranting is inherently useful.

I said rule of law — not caving. Vast difference.

Are these your words?:

” No bypassing the FISA court where jurisdiction is appropriate for US citizen surveillance.”

When you write those words along with, “ask them [members of Congress] to stand up for Constitutional rights and the rule of law”, am I mistaken in my understanding that you think that the FISA court is Constitutional?

With all due respect, Christy, FireDogLake is once again resembling Marshal Petain and the Vichy regime. We got into this mess because of compromises such as that which you are suggesting. To quote Mel Brooks’s Hitler (The Producers), “A little piece of Poland, a little piece of France…” This is NOT the way to deal with these people who are holding our country (and all of the other nations of the world) hostage.

The FISA court, a secret star chamber, is, in itself, unConstitutional. I, an authentic liberal, isn’t alone in that belief – It’s shared by many legal and Constitutional scholars on both ends of the ideological spectrum.

Any legislation that cedes authority to FISA court (as this legislation would do), legitimizes it. The longer that it exists without its Constitutionality being challenged, the harder it becomes to get rid of it. Unfortunately, we’re coming up to FISA’s 30th birthday, and its creation was a bad response to criminal activities by the same group of people in power in our government today.

There really is no reason, none, to have a clandestine judicial institution operating in the shadows, out of the view and oversight of anybody, unless it is to hijack the American government and use it for the express wishes of an elite few (the Corporate class).

We need to address the root causes that are creating people who commit the kinds of crimes that the FISA Court was created to deal with. Once sunlight shines on what the FISA Court (and the Bush administration) keep secret, the American people can see how their money and military have been misused around the world: To make very few filthy rich and powerful, and millions of others sick, dead and enslaved.

There should be no compromising, which is what this bill is. The Patriot Act needs to be overturned, the FISA Court needs to be shut down, Congress needs to find the Bush administration in inherent contempt, and Democrats need to rediscover America by sticking to the instruments for democracy and individual rights that the founders left for us.

All due respect, Maeven, it’s time to come home to the world that the rest of us live in.

Those are wonderful aspirations you’ve expressed in your comment. Not a single one of them has a snowball’s chance in hell of being realized any time soon.

We all know that the RESTORE Act is not good enough, just as the SCHIP re-authorization bill is not good enough and the non-inclusive ENDA is not good enough. But what is attainable is better than the status quo, and we refuse to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

If you can’t live with that, then kindly step out of the way. There’s work to be done.

I said rule of law — not caving. Vast difference.

The FISA court, a secret star chamber, is, in itself, unConstitutional. I, an authentic liberal, isn’t alone in that belief – It’s shared by many legal and Constitutional scholars on both ends of the ideological spectrum.

Any legislation that cedes authority to FISA court (as this legislation would do), legitimizes it. The longer that it exists without its Constitutionality being challenged, the harder it becomes to get rid of it. Unfortunately, we’re coming up to FISA’s 30th birthday, and its creation was a bad response to criminal activities by the same group of people in power in our government today.

There really is no reason, none, to have a clandestine judicial institution operating in the shadows, out of the view and oversight of anybody, unless it is to hijack the American government and use it for the express wishes of an elite few (the Corporate class).

We need to address the root causes that are creating people who commit the kinds of crimes that the FISA Court was created to deal with. Once sunlight shines on what the FISA Court (and the Bush administration) keep secret, the American people can see how their money and military have been misused around the world: To make very few filthy rich and powerful, and millions of others sick, dead and enslaved.

There should be no compromising, which is what this bill is. The Patriot Act needs to be overturned, the FISA Court needs to be shut down, Congress needs to find the Bush administration in inherent contempt, and Democrats need to rediscover America by sticking to the instruments for democracy and individual rights that the founders left for us.

A focus on “US Citizens” only leaves the millions of legal immigrants in the US without protection, even though our Bill of Rights talks about “persons” not “citizens” as having the rights within it.

Here in California, non-citizens that I know are everyone from children to college students to co-workers to family members of citizens.

My doctor isn’t a citizen- should she receive no constitutional protections unless she’s talking to me on the phone?

Taking away our civil liberties is a form of Domestic Terrorism.
As your constituent, I am urging you to vote YES to the RESTORE Act.
You will NOT be considered SOFT on terrorism by voting for the following:

* Restores court oversight of intelligence by requiring that electronic surveillance programs be approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court.
* Mandates that FISA warrants be obtained when the administration wants to undertake surveillance of persons in the US.
* No retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated with the administration’s warrantless surveillance.
* Does not require individual warrants when targets are reasonably believed to be abroad.
* Ensures FISA is the exclusive means of electronic surveillance and that no modifications can be made without express legal authorization.

PLEASE HELP restore the Rule of Law.
You help fight terrorism by making us a stronger nation who respects our Constitution than by taking our liberties away.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Please vote to restore, not to destroy.

It’s not much, but it’s the least I can do.

To the Editor:

The RESTORE Act of 2007 will be introduced by the Chairmen of the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees as a response to the awful but thankfully temporary FISA legislation (The Protect America Act)that was railroaded through Congress before the August break on what Congresswoman Jane Harmon, chairwoman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Terrorism Risk Assessment, subsequently described as bogus intelligence from the Bush administration about an imminent threat of an attack upon the Capitol.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has promised to fix the FISA legilation and RESTORE, which stands for Responsible Surveillance That is Overseen, Reviewed and Effective, goes a long way toward restoring the confidence that security needs can be balanced against privacy rights. The bill provides the Intelligence Community with effective tools to conduct surveillance of foreign targets outside the United States while at the same time reaffirming constitutionally mandated checks and balances.

A front page article in the New York Times by Eric Lichtblau and Carl Hulse suggests that Democrats remain nervous that they will be called soft on terrorism if they insist on strict curbs on intelligence gathering and that they may cave to pressure from the administration on the bill.

The democrats should realize by now that they will not loose elections, or the respect of the American people, if they stand up for what is right.