Debate has resumed on S. 2248, revising the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, after Senate leadership worked out a compromise and schedule on the economic stimulus bill, which allows the world to rotate peacefully on its axis again. (The Hill has the story.)
Well, that’s process. The underlying issue remains, that of immunity for telecom companies now being sued for assisting in legal surveillance of foreign terrorists. The heat, anger and unreasoned debate lies almost entirely on the side of those who oppose immunity.
Here’s the first four headlines from bloggers (searched via Google Blog Search at 8:30 p.m.) writing on the issue from the left:
Lovely people. Fine priorities.
UPDATE (11:40 p.m.) Quin Hillyer had a fine column on telecom immunity in The Examiner today. Includes an applicable quote:
As Judge Benjamin Cardozo (later a Supreme Court justice) wrote in the New York case Babbington v. Yellow Taxi Corp., “the citizenry may be called upon to enforce the justice of the State, not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities are convenient and at hand.”
Latest posts by NAM (see all)
- Manufacturers Win Several Website Design Awards - June 15, 2011
- China Makes Commitments on Trade, Intellectual Property - December 16, 2010
- ITC Details Widespread Theft of Intellectual Property in China - December 14, 2010