The Nation magazine has a petition that should be signed by all supporters of his candidacy. 

Why? 

Because he must be held accountable for his actions that must match his words.  If the actions do not match the words then what can we do? 

From the Daily Times, journalist Khalid Hasan writes:

WASHINGTON: Nayyar Zaidi, the well-known US-based Pakistani-American journalist, who has been a citizen of the United States for more than 30 years has been in US custody for the last four months on what are said to be terrorism-related charges...

The Homeland Security Department or the FBI have made no announcement about his arrest or incarceration. His family, when asked for his whereabouts, has continued to claim that “he is in Pakistan”. The Pakistan embassy, like Zaidi’s journalist colleagues, who have repeatedly phoned the family, has also been given the same answer. When asked why he is in Pakistan and what has taken him there or how long he is to be away, the callers have been told, “We cannot say” or “We do not know.” The news of Zaidi’s arrest – he is believed to be in an Ohio prison – was broken by the New Jersey-based website Des Prades at the weekend.

The current war in Iraq by Mr. Bush has shown to the world, if not to the blinded American citizens by a corporate dominated media, that the journalistic enterprise is to be threatened, intimidated, and killed.  As many have noted that the war and occupation of Iraq is the deadliest war for journalists.

I still have not forgotten the fact that the U.S. military fired on a hotel containing correspondents, during the initial phase of the war, which resulted in the death of one journalist.

Nor do news organizations forget that journalists and videographers have been incarcerated at Abu Ghraib and other jails throughout Iraq without access to lawyers.

Remember that Mr. Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jezeera's Iraq news operation, and that there has been pressure by his administration to shut down the entire operation that is based in Qatar.

Freedom for journalists is crucial to a free society.  Mr. Bush, as the world knows, is actively against the journalistic enterprise because he does not tolerate a free society, which makes him comrades with the governments of North Korea, Burma, and other totalitarian regime,

This should be executed at every place that Karl Rove makes an appearence at.  He is one of the "architects" of why this nation is so bitterly divided.  His "endless" campaign in the pursuit of Republican political hegemony has damaged this nation and its national security.  This is why Karl Rove should be arrested and tried for crimes against the Constitution.

From the Cedar Rapids Gazette (h/t to HuffingtonPost.com): 

Police here arrested four Iowans Friday after they attempted a citizen's arrest of former White House adviser Karl Rove, who was in Des Moines to speak at a fundraiser.

If Karl Rove appears in Colorado then he should be arrested for treason. 

Has there been an analysis as to the composition of the military crowds when McCain and Obama are televised?  This is a video on YouTube.com on Obama's visit to Afghanistan.  This is a video on YouTube.com on McCain's visit.

Is there a difference in the audiences that both respective candidates have when the cameras are rolling?  If so, why?

While McCain hobnobs with "senior" military commanders as AP reports and you can see the stars on the commanders collars.  The video that has been shown of Obama paints a slightly different portrait of the Senator visiting with the "boots on the ground" soldiers.

It seems to me that there is message of Obama= Afro-American soldiers and McCain= White- Anglo-Saxon commanders and soldiers. 

Am I misreading the video-image message? 

BTW- While I was watching the Channel 4 newscast at 5 p.m. today.  I noticed that there was mention made of Obama's "16 month withdrawal" from Iraq, but there was no mention that the Prime Minister of Iraq, al-Maliki, endorsed the Obama Plan.

Perhaps we could send an email to Channel 4 for there oversight? 

See entire article at http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/hearingday

Impeachment Begins! Preliminary Hearing Friday July 25th

By David Swanson www.afterdowningstreet.org

At 10 a.m. on Friday July 25th, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a preliminary hearing in Rayburn Building Room 2141 on the topic of impeachment, with a presentation by Congressman Dennis Kucinich. This is not yet a true impeachment hearing, but it is our opportunity to push for one, and it represents a tremendous victory after years of effort by millions of Americans who want to keep the Constitution alive. This never would have happened without your hard work. And we can't let up now! The National Impeachment Network is organizing a rally and asking everyone who can to take a day off for justice and meet at 9 a.m. on Friday July 25th in front of the Rayburn House Office Building on the Independence Avenue side. Bring impeachment shirts and posters! For more information contact ningroup@gmail.com.

David Swanson reports that Veterans for Peace had a meeting on impeachment already scheduled with Conyers for the 25th. He notes that they'll be in town and could perhaps take a lead in organizing people.

 He also suggests contacting CodePink for organizing assistance.

WHAT WE CAN DO HERE IN COLORADO: 

1.  Join our weekly impeachment protest this Saturday 7/19 at noon:

http://www.progressnowaction.org/page/event/detail/visibilitysignwaving/4jrxd 

Want to get involved?  Contact: protestinthestreet@yahoo.com 

2.  Contact your Congressional Representative to cosponsor H Res 1258 (35 Articles of Impeachment George W. Bush http://afterdowningstreet.org/bush)

Call at 202-224-3121 and email http://www.democrats.com/35-articles-of-impeachment 

3.  Contact the media to cover the hearing, like independent media does:

Denver Post newsroom: newsroom@denverpost.com 303-954-1201

Rocky Mountain News newsroom: 303-954-5201

4.  Contact the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and urge them to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney:

5.  Sign the petition at Congressman Kucinich's website:

http://impeachment.kucinich.us/petition/

Support Dennis Kucinich's resolution! From DailyKos.com's front page:

The House will have to dispense with Rep. Dennis Kucinich's latest move to impeach President Bush, which he gave notice of his intention to raise as a question of the privileges of the House on Thursday. Under clause 2 of Rule IX, when a Member other than the Majority or Minority Leader raises a question of the privileges of the House from the floor, the chair may designate a time for its consideration within two legislative days. The expectation is that the resolution will be referred to the Judiciary committee as were Kucinich's previous three impeachment resolutions (two for Cheney, one for Bush). Those resolutions have received no consideration in the committee, so Kucinich vowed to continue bringing such resolutions every 30 days until there was some action.

Perhaps because the rules permit Kucinich to continue to bring impeachment resolutions and receive privilege for them each time (no matter how often he brings them, as I've mentioned from time to time), the Judiciary committee is expected for the first time to try to find a way to accommodate some sort of action on the question.

I would like to point out that there are people who believe that George W. Bush deserves criminal investigation into whether or not his actions as President are criminal.  There has been a book, which has been uttterly ignored by corporate media, by the former prosecuter of Charles Manson, Vincent Bugliosi "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder".  Andy Ostroy, The Ostroy Report, writes:

Bugliosi, most famous for prosecuting Charles Manson for the 1969 Tate-LaBianca murders, appeared Friday morning on MSNBC's Morning Joe program with host Joe Scarborough, NBC's Andrea Mitchell and the Boston Globe's Mike Barnicle. Citing reams of documentary evidence to support his contention that Bush should be tried for murder, Bugliosi bases his case not on Bush's false claims of WMD, but rather that the president lied that the WMD posed a grave and imminent threat to the security of the United States, which in turn became the justification for the war.

There is not a question of "if" but "when" for the prosecution of crimes by Mr. Bush and his cohort.   

July 7, 2008

Governor Bill Ritter

136 State Capitol Building Denver, CO. 80203

Certified Mail No. 7002 2030 0000 0388 5347

Dear Governor Ritter,

     On May 22, 2008, I sent you a certified letter regarding the criminal conduct within our judicial and legal system. I detailed how my rights, water, and land was stolen from me through corrupt judges and attorneys. I also detailed that I have been unlawfully subjected to the Summit County Court for more than ten years, and that the criminal conduct is allowed and protected by Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey, and all the Colorado Supreme Court Justices. Instead of answering my letter with concern over the criminal state of the people’s judiciary, and helping to put a stop to it, you answered my petition for an investigation and accountability through an unsigned letter from a Citizen Advocate dated June 18, 2008. I herein answer your letter:

1. You said, “the Governor has no jurisdiction over the Judicial Branch.” Yes you do. When corruption is involved as it is in this case, you, Governor Ritter, have the authority and duty to ask that the CBI and/or FBI investigate and bring charges. You also have the authority to convene the Legislature in order to impeach the corrupt Judges, Justices, and other public officials. Every day they are allowed to remain in office, is another day that all Coloradans are in jeopardy of losing their rights and freedom.

2. You said, “the Governor’s office cannot intervene in court cases, overturn decisions made by judges, or offer legal advice.” I never asked for that. Nowhere did I ask that you intervene, overturn a decision, nor did I ask for legal advice. I asked you to do your job as Governor and call for an investigation and accountability. Again, you not only have the authority, you also have the duty.

3. You recommended that I my petition the Colorado Legal Services, and the Colorado Judicial Department instead. A. Colorado Legal Services does not handle corruption cases, nor do they have investigative authority. B. The Colorado Judicial Department is the State Court Administrator. The State Court Administrator does not have investigative authority.

4. A Citizen Advocate, also does not have authority to demand an investigation, only you do.

     Governor Ritter, do not dismiss my worth of your time, nor dismiss my grievances as insignificant. The corruption is real, and our offices of public trust have been turned into a network of organized crime for the super wealthy and connected. The information I sent you on May 22, 2008 evidences that I am not a disgruntled litigant, but rather a victim of the lawless corruption within our Judiciary and legal system.

     On June 20, 2008, Judge David R. Lass announced his retirement. He will be allowed to leave public office unaccounted, and allowed to resurface somewhere else. Isn’t this the same as the pedophile priests were allowed to do? Once there were complaints, they were moved and allowed to continue the abuse. By not holding Judge Lass to account for his criminal conduct, he also is a threat to the unsuspecting public everywhere. The criminal conduct will continue, because if he allowed such criminal behavior at work, he’s allowing the same in private life. He has shown his true character, and just as any other criminal, must be brought to justice. It will also be found that Judge Lass did not act alone. There are many more elected officials involved in this criminal network.

     Just as Judge Lass has shown his true character, so too have all the other corrupt public officials who today are allowed to interact with the unsuspecting public. How many more victims will there be? In my case, my mortgage company is also being defrauded. How much longer will you allow the corruption to go on? Eventually, all will be brought to light. When it is exposed, what will you tell the people when they find out you knew about the corruption and criminal conduct within our Colorado Government, and did nothing to stop it? What will you tell God? Our Laws are rooted in the Ten Commandments, so this corruption is not only against man, it is also against God. Is He not worth your time either?

     On its face, the amount of the corruption is eighty million dollars, crosses State lines, has cost the taxpayers millions, and is being allowed to continue. Imagine what an investigation will uncover. Governor Ritter, I will be expecting that you will use your authority to call for an investigation into the corruption and abuse of power. If there is more information you need, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address and phone number. Thank you for your time, and I will be expecting to hear from you soon.

Respectfully, Halena Lewis

Note: This letter and all future replies will be shared with the public.

Action Item One:

With the capitulation to Mr. Bush's demand for unlimited spying on Americans by Pelosi and Reid it is time for we, the grassroots, to support the American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Freedom Foundation in their lawsuits against  the passage of the FISA amendments act (HR 6304).  Glenn Greenwald interviews Jameel Jaffer, the Director of the ACLU's National Security Project on the reasons why the ACLU is filing two actions.  

You can help the ACLU now. 

The constitutionality of this new law will be challenged by the EFF which needs your financial help now.

Action Item Two:

I have been following the Don Siegelman story on Bradblog.com for the last year or so.  Briefly the former Alabama governor was a political prisoner in America based solely on his being a Democratic Party elected official.  Now that he has been released from jail he is demanding that justice be done.

Guest blogger Steve Heller, Bradblog.com, writes: 

Siegelman wants you to let Congress know that Rove must face the consequences of his actions. So do we.

Rove has been subpoenaed to testify before Congress tomorrow, July 10th, regarding the politicization of the Justice Department. The House Judiciary Committee wants to question Rove about his knowledge of the persecution prosecution of former Alabama Democratic Gov. Don Siegelman and the U.S. Attorney firing scandal.

Call House Judiciary Committee at 202-225-3951 and call House Rep. at 202-224-3121 to let them know that Don Siegelman deserves a fair hearing about what happened to him at the hands of a politicized Department of Justice under the Bush administration.

Did the people of America forget about the Anthrax Killer which targeted only Democrats in Congress?

Blogger Emptywheel, Firedoglake.com, writes:

Call me crazy. But after viewing this very creepy exchange between Patrick Leahy and Michael Mukasey regarding the anthrax killer, I got the feeling that both of them know exactly who sent those anthrax-laden letters almost seven years ago.

Leahy uses the recent settlement between Hatfill and DOJ to raise the issue. As he raises it, he notes that he is privy to classified information about the anthrax killer, and because of that he has refrained from even discussing the case.

Leahy: We won't go any further. As I say, I feel somewhat reluctant because I was one of the targets. But I gotta say, what families of the people who died went through, what families of the people who were crippled went throug, even what my family went through. A lot of people are concerned and I won't say more because we are in open session but I think you and I probably should have a private talk about this sometime.

Mukasey: That's fine...

Leahy: You're the one person, the one person, who has the final say the laws are going to apply to everybody in this nation.

But I can't help but wonder whether Leahy suspects the government doesn't think the laws against terrorism ought to apply to "guy who committed" the anthrax attacks.

I would read some of the comments, too.  Especially this one, by Emptywheel:

Here’s what I suspect Leahy is pointing to–the reasons he might think DOJ would be reluctant to pursue charges should be obvious:

In December 2001, Dr. Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, a noted bioweapons expert, delivered a paper contending that the perpetrator of the anthrax crimes was an American microbiologist whose training and possession of Ames-strain powder pointed to a government insider with experience in a U.S. military lab. In March 2002, she told the BBC that the anthrax deaths may have resulted from a secret project to examine the practicability of sending real anthrax through the mail — an experiment that misfired despite such precautions as taped envelope seals. That surprising hypothesis made Rosenberg a target for knee-jerk criticism, but competent sources within the biowarfare establishment thought she might well be right.

[snip]

Her patience exhausted, Dr. Rosenberg met with the Senate Judiciary Committee staff on June 18, 2002, and laid out the evidence, such as it was, hers and mine. Van Harp, head of the Amerithrax Task Force, sat in on the briefing. The senators were attentive. So, too, evidently, was Harp: exactly one week after Rosenberg’s meeting with the Judiciary Committee staff, the F.B.I. searched Hatfill’s residence.

So, from what Mukasey said at the committee hearing was that there is an ongoing investigation.  What both men said seems to point to the fact that there is a huge amount of information that is being withheld from the public due to...what?  

Your guess is as good as mine as to why the biological terrorist has never been caught...because I think that it has to do with a person who had access to USAMRID weaponized anthrax spores, which leaves a pretty small number of people to investigate.

Democratic Party where is the spine?  Or will?  Or brain to understand our Constitution and Bill of Rights?  If the Democratic Party is paying for high dollar "consultants and pollsters" then it is our contributions that they are wasting or else why would Congressional approval ratings be this low?  This is from the Rasmussen Report released on July 8, 2008:

The percentage of voters who give Congress good or excellent ratings has fallen to single digits for the first time in Rasmussen Reports tracking history. This month, just 9% say Congress is doing a good or excellent job. Most voters (52%) say Congress is doing a poor job, which ties the record high in that dubious category.

After capitulating to Mr. Bush's demands for unlimited power to spy on Americans merely on his word.  I have read that Democrats on the Hill are ready to "negotiate" on opening up the coastal waters of America to oil and gas drilling.

This is not the "third way" or "triangulation" but out right betrayal of the Democratic party base.

My partner is fed up with Obama and his FISA capitulation and his "nuanced" position on abortion (his words give no comfort for the reproductive health of women).

As far as I can tell there is no Democratic Party leadership on the key issues that face this country.

Passage of another 160 billion dollar fake "emergency" spending bill for the illegal wars in Iraq/Afghanistan without any fight to put in place a "timetable" for withdrawl.

Passage of HR 6304- The FISA Amendments- which allows for a president to spy on Americans with the active and complete legal protections from citizens who feel that their fourth amendment right has been violated due to the drift net method of electronic surveillence that the CIA, FBI and NSA prefer.  (Over 21,000 MyOb members strongly urged him not to capitulate.)

And now...talking about negotiating with the Republicans on opening up our coastal areas for oil and gas drilling?

It is enough to make one move to a country that is progressive and has national health care like...Germany or Switzerland! 

Last month, Kucinich introduced 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush in the form of a privileged resolution. 

Kucinich, a former 2008 Democratic presidential candidate, spent four-hours reading the impeachment articles into the Congressional Record last month. He accused the commander-in-chief of a wide range of high crimes and misdemeanors, such as lying to Congress and the public to win support for the Iraq war.

The impeachment articles introduced by Kucinich last month took place a few days after the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence released a long-awaited report on prewar Iraq intelligence that concluded President Bush and Vice President Cheney knowingly lied to the public and to Congress about Iraq's links to al-Qaeda and the threat the country posed to the U.S. in the aftermath of 9/11. 

“These articles of impeachment are about accountability,” Kucinich said. “I think our country is at risk. We’re setting a terrible precedent for future administrations if we choose to turn a blind eye to the crimes committed by this administration."

The House of Representatives referred the Bush articles of impeachment to the Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI).

Conyers has yet to release a public statement on the motion, but has in the past not been supportive of impeachment efforts. The resolution to impeach Cheney, which Kucinich presented in April 2007, remains stalled in the committee he chairs.

(To read the original news article, click here:

http://www.pubrecord.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=189:kucinich-to-introduce-new-article-of-impeachment-against-bush-thursday&catid=12:politics&Itemid=16)

OUTRAGED ABOUT THE OIL WAR LIES AND DEATHS, DOMESTIC SPYING, IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS, AND TORTURE?  HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO:

Tell our Colorado U.S. Senators and Representatives to remember the oath of office they took, promising to uphold the Constitution.  Tell them to support impeachment hearings: 

http://www.democrats.com/impeach 

Contact the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and urge them to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/judiciarycommittee  

Join our local Impeach Colorado Coalition's weekly honk-to-impeach protests:

http://www.progressnowaction.org/page/event/detail/visibilitysignwaving/4jrxy

Read more:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/bushaction

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/cheneyaction

The time is always right to do what is right. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Isn't the 4th of July about fireworks, BBQ, and relaxing with family and friends in celebration of...something like the flag?  I mean that is what I did when I went back to Lincoln, Nebraska to visit relatives.  We didn't talk much politics because my nephew is going to Iraq.  He spent the last year training as an Air Cavalry helicopter pilot.

However I wish that I had read this column by Chris Satullo (h/t to Digby):

...

Our silence is complicit. In our name, innocents were jailed, humans tortured, our Constitution mangled. And we said so little.

We can't claim not to have known. The best among us raised the alarm. Heroes in uniform, judges in robes, they opposed the perverse logic of an administration drenched in fear, drunk on power.

But did we heed them? Hardly. Barely . . .

We were so busy. Soccer practice at 6. A credit card balance to fret. The final vote on Idol.

We left it to those in power to keep our precious selves from harm. Whatever it took.

We took the coward's way.

The world sees this, even if we are too dim to grasp it. We've lost respect. We've shamed the memory of Jefferson, Adams and Franklin.

And all for a scam. The waterboarding, the snarling dogs, the theft of sleep - all the diabolical tricks haven't made us safer. They may have averted this plot or that. But they've spawned new enemies by the thousands, made the jihadist rants ring true to so many ears.

So put out no flags.

Sing no patriotic hymns.

We deserve no Fourth this year.

Let us atone, in quiet and humility. Let us spend the day truly studying the example of our Founders. May we earn a new birth of courage before our nation's birthday next rolls around.

The 4th of July is dishonored by our silence on the great downfall that we, as a people, towards the shield against dictators and tyrants- the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  People laughed at Mr. Bush's casual references to address himself as yearning to be a dictator.  However what is there to laugh at when he has done all the actions of a dictator without the American people rising up in righteous anger to dispose of this petty tyrant?  A tyrant that grasps at any argument to state that he, alone, will decide the fate of any citizen.  A tyrant that can declare, just on his word, that you will no longer be a citizen.

We have utterly failed.

To this I hang my head in shame. 

I just got back from visiting relatives in Nebraska.  So, what do I find out on the FISA front?  The lying by Democrats is astonishing with regard to HR6304.  I cannot disagree with anything that Glenn Greenwald says on this issue and the lack of understanding with HR 6304 will impact on the Constitution and in particular the Fourth Amendement, how will it impact the understanding of Mr. Bush's view of Article II powers, and how will judicial and legislative branches be affected by the passage of such a  bill.

There is no majority support from polls conducted that show people want an executive branch to have such power to spy on citizens just on the word of the President.

This is why it is craven and dictatorial in nature that Democratic leaders have folded on this crucial issue.

This is the reality as Glenn Greenwald sees it:

What all of this is really about -- the reason why political elites like Nancy Soderberg are so eager to defend it -- is because they really do believe that lawbreaking isn't wrong, that it doesn't deserve punishment, when engaged in by them rather than by commoners. People who defend telecom immunity or who say that it's not a big deal are, by logical necessity, adopting this view: "Our highest political officials and largest corporations shouldn't face consequences when they break our laws as long as they claim it was for our own good." That's the destructive premise that lies at the heart of this deeply corrupt measure, the reason it matters so much. Just like the pardon of Nixon, the protection of Iran-contra criminals, and the commutation of Lewis Libby's sentence, this bill is yet another step in cementing a two-tiered system of justice in America where our highest political officials and connected elite can break our laws with impunity.

Obama has caved on an issue that damages him.  What "change" if he, himself, cannot divorce himself from "advisors" who want to direct him to engage in acts and words that are contrary to what he said just a few short months ago. Again I defer to Glenn Greenwald as he tears up Obama's deceit:

This is the most misleading part of Obama's statement. The "certain surveillance orders [which] will begin to expire later this summer" -- that Obama claims we must maintain -- are warrantless eavesdropping orders that were authorized by the PAA, which Obama voted against last August. As I asked the other day:

Had Obama had his way, there never would have been any PAA in the first place, and therefore, there never would have been any PAA orders possible. Having voted against the PAA last August, how can Obama now claim that he considers it important that the PAA orders not expire? How can he be eager to avoid the expiration of surveillance orders which he opposed authorizing in the first place?

Moreover, the Government already has "the ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States" under the current FISA law. Citing the need for such monitoring in order to justify this new FISA bill is just pure fear-mongering ("you better let us eliminate FISA protections if you want us to keep you safe from the Terrorists"). Obama has always said in the past that "the FISA court works." When did he change his mind and why?

I do so with the firm intention -- once I'm sworn in as president -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

This expression of Obama's "intention" has so many equivocations and vague claims as to be worthless. In a society that lives under the rule of law, government officials and corporations which break our laws are held accountable by courts of law, not by vague promises from politicians of some future "review" and "recommendation" process grounded in claims that we can trust the Leader to do the right thing, whatever he decides in his sole discretion and infinite wisdom that might be. That is no consolation for blocking courts from adjudicating whether laws were broken here, which is what the bill that Obama supports will do.

This I read, via Kargo X of DailyKos.com, about Mark Udall's attempt to bamboozle with people who are asking him about HR6304 and his stand on retroactive telecom immunity:

This bill is designed to update FISA while putting an end to abusive domestic spying, and I voted for it in order to prevent a future program of warrantless surveillance by the executive branch. The bill is explicit that complying with FISA is the only way for the government to conduct surveillance. At the same time, it updates FISA, which was originally passed in 1978, to give us important capabilities to discover and stop terrorist activities. I fully understand why there is confusion and even anger that the legislation does not do more to require some telecommunications companies to respond to lawsuits for alleged privacy abuses in their actions to implement the Bush Administration's warrantless surveillance after 9-11. But it does require a comprehensive review of that surveillance program by the Inspectors General of the Justice Department, the Directorate of National Intelligence, the National Security Agency, and the Defense Department, including a report to the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees of Congress. This will mean that past abuses by the Bush Administration will not go uninvestigated. Also, the bill does not provide absolute or criminal immunity for these companies, and no government official will receive civil or criminal immunity for past abuses.

So Udall's statement is the same as Obama's.  But we are watching and have been acting, especially with regard to MyBo networking site.

It is time for Senator Salazar and candidate Udall to hear from the people that we are fed up with illegal spying upon ourselves. 

The fight to halt H.R. 6304 and Obama's change of heart are an important test of whether or not netroots has real political power on issues.  This issue of revising FISA to comply with the wishes of Mr. Bush and the long struggle to force a Democratic Congress to halt such legislative bills that would grant blanket retroactive immunity to telecom companies, toss out the Fourth Amendment, and the rule of law will be replaced by the rule of men which the internet powered grassroots outcry forced the hand of the Democrats.

As we now know that Speaker Pelosi's realpolitik which forced through a humilating defeat to all Americans and to the Constitution was based on the political calculus of elections.  In Pelosi and other House Democratic leaders own sentiments:

Stonewalling the Administration and letting the surveillance powers expire could have cost the Democrats swing seats they won in 2006 as well as new ones they have a chance to steal from Republicans this November. "For any Republican-leaning district this would have been a huge issue," says a top Pelosi aide, who estimates that as many as 10 competitive races could have been affected by it. . . .

Pelosi's centrist compromise doesn't just help House Democrats in the fall. It also gives the party's presumptive nominee for President, Barack Obama, a chance to move to the center on national security. "Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay," Obama said in a statement Friday. "So I support the compromise."

Glenn Greenwald states succinctly:

The only objective of Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer is to have a 50-seat majority rather than a 35-seat majority, and if enabling the Bush administration's lawbreaking and demolishing core constitutional protections can assist somewhat with that goal, then that it what they will do. That's what they are saying all but explicitly here.

Now is the time to take action when your Representatives and Senators are home.  John Amato, Crooksandliars.com, writes:

You spoke and we listened. You donated intensely and we are taking action. We’ve run ads and now we’re hitting the phones. Blue America has just launched an interactive tool that will allow you to call your Senator and demand accountability on FISA.

Blue America Whip Count Call Tool.

Christy Hardin Smith, Firedoglake.com, writes: 

This first tool allows you to directly contact Senators to tell them to stand up for the rule of law and vote in favor of the Dodd-Feingold-Leahy amendment.  (That's S.A.5064 to H.R. 6304 which will come up for a vote on July 8th, 2008.)  Not only will this tool help you phone your Senators -- including connecting your call -- but it also gives us the ability to track positions on FISA given your input on what you ascertain during your conversations.

We do not have the luxury of time.  The vote will come up on July 8th. 

Now I've written about Obama's run to the center on HR6304.  As many netizens know that Obama's reasoning is deeply flawed on why he would support such a bill that was, in part, written by the telecom companies themselves. 

What is heartening is that the Obama group, "Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity – Get FISA Right," is now the largest Obama network group with over 10,000 members.

mcjoan, Dailykos.com, writes:

This effort shows two things: the always-expanding power of the Internet for organizing. We knew at the outset what a powerful tool the tubes were going to present, but the new iterations that people create on a daily basis is fantastic (and another reason for the Net Neutrality fight to be rejoined full force when we have our new president and Congress).

It also shows that you can fully support Barack Obama and still disagree with him on issues. That being a supporter, particularly a netroots supporter, doesn't mean setting aside your own beliefs and principles. We're not supposed to just shut up when we disagree--if we do, we're setting a very bad precedent for our role in a potential Obama presidency. I keep going back to the Louis Brandeis quote:

The most important political office is that of private citizen.
-Louis D. Brandeis

You can support a candidate and fulfill your political office of a private citizen at the same time. A huge number of Barack Obama's supporters on his site are doing just that.

The wiki-hub for more action items.

On the local front there will be an action at Obama's Denver HQ early next week.  Check back for further information.  If you want to join send me an email (therebis@yahoo.com).

For Second Amendment advocates there are no limits to where you can carry a concealed weapon.  Thus, you have these organizations and individuals who are scared to death of "the terrorist threat" yet argue that Mr. Bush has the right to take away their Fourth Amendment right but simultaneously argue that they have their Second Amendment right to carry a gun anywhere they want to.  To wit, from AP (via MSNBC.com):

ATLANTA - The nation's busiest airport dueled with gun rights advocates Tuesday over whether a new Georgia state law allows visitors to carry firearms at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

This is legal absurdity:

John Monroe, an attorney for the gun rights backers who filed the lawsuit, argued the Atlanta airport qualifies as public transportation. There are also restaurants in the terminal, which Monroe said should be accessible to gun-toting visitors under the new law.

I would say that with the recent Supreme Court ruling to overturn the D.C. law that requires trigger locks on guns to have a subtle effect on subsequent rulings.  These kinds of safe guards on hand guns that will not be allowed because it infringes on the Second Amendment could be extended to the lawsuit filed by hand gun rights advocates in the Atlanta case just filed.

When will this fatal fetish with guns and America?  This delusion with guns, freedom, and feeling that you are "independent" of government interference is deadly and laughable since the most vociferous advocates are firmly embedded in the conservative movement.  So there is a suspension of disbelief with respect to how much government can intrude on your privacy (meaning that they support the Bush administration's "War on Terror"'s surveillence programs on Americans) and on having a hand gun to "protect" yourself.

What will it be...freedom to carry hand guns or letting big government into your private life in the name of "fighting terror"?