What E.J. Dionne Failed to Mention About FISA
Another Liberal Smear of DNI Michael McConnell
By Bluey Posted in Congress — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne today recounts the Democrats' capitulation on a Republican-drafted terrorist surveillance law that Congress passed before leaving town last week. Dionne accuses the GOP of politicizing national security -- a claim that's almost laughable. (Hat tip to Ed Morrissey at Heading Right.)
The facts tell another story. It was the Democrats who turned the debate over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) into a political issue. By waiting until the 11th hour to act on these critical changes to FISA, the Democrats boxed themselves into a corner. With fresh evidence suggesting a terrorist strike could be imminent, some Democrats had the sense to do something before leaving town for August recess. In all, 57 Democrats in the House and Senate voted for the modifications.
Those who didn't are now smearing Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, a man who has spent 40 years in the intelligence community and worked for President Clinton as director of the National Security Agency. As Robert Novak reported yesterday, liberals view him as a partisan hack in the Republican machine.
Such a suggestion is ludicrous. Dionne's complaint that the issue was "debated in a political pressure cooker" wasn't McConnell's fault. He first raised the issue with Congress back in April when he offered a proposal for modernizing FISA. He testified on May 1 and conducted briefings open to any member of Congress. (McConnell laid out all these facts in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.)
Read on ...
Dionne fails to mention any of this activity, but his most glaring omission is that fact that McConnell was scheduled to testify on Capitol Hill before the House Intelligence Committee on July 31. In one of the most outrageous acts of politics, Democrats canceled the meeting just 14 hours before it was scheduled to start. Hours of staff time and preparation went for naught, and the American public was denied an opportunity to hear from McConnell about the proposed changes to FISA.
Instead, Democrats chose to work behind closed doors, failing to consult McConnell until after they drafted their own legislation and never sharing any information with Republicans. Again, these facts are missing from Dionne's piece.
I suspect this column is the latest attempt by the left to attack the law and distort the changes made to it. Unfortunately for them, the facts are on the side of Michael McConnell. No matter what E.J. Dionne might try to tell you, it's clear who was politicizing national security. It most certainly wasn't Republicans.
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | A Second Serving of Pork — Comments (0) »
What E.J. Dionne Failed to Mention About FISA 11 Comments (0 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I completely agree with you on every point except 1.
Dionne does get it. The Dem leadership is a failure. They have the upper hand against the "most unpopular President in history," and cannot beat him at any important issue. Funding Iraq? They lost big time. FISA? They lost big time. Their party is in disarray because the Blue Dogs don't want to face the voters after destroying the military and what little intelligence gathering capability we have left.
So Dionne does what he can. He blames the Republicans. That's a lot better for him than admitting that his party is a bunch of losers.
They lost. To the "most unpopular President in history." That's gotta hurt.
and to most Democrats everything is political. Every issue is about painting the other side with devious, if not outright bad, motives. Never stay consistent on the content of an issue... it's about moving the argument in whatever direction favors (gets more power) "our side". That appears to be the only real "right or good" to these people.
It is getting to be exhausting trying to respond to these people, and E.J. is one of the more mild practitioners of this mindset.
Jack
The World's Ruined
The only thing I don't understand about EJ Dione is why many conservative bloggers treat him with respect instead of like the partisan political hack that he consistently reveals himself to be. Maybe I'm missing something but I've read about 15 of his columns in the past couple of years and have yet to find one that offered anything much besides liberal pablum with a side order of twittery.
something GWB did NOT do with GEN Peter Pace
"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)
We have the left trying to hamstring FISA, get rid of the Patriot Act, maintain the Gorelick 'wall', limit NSA/CIA/FBI/etc. as much as possible, eliminate any sort of racial/ethnic profiling, call coincidences the incidents such as the guys from Florida with the explosives, the flying imams, Muslims taking pictures and mapping out buildings and bridges, the attack at LAX, etc. etc.
And then as soon as there's another terrorist attack they'll want to have oversight hearings so they can criticize Bush because he "failed to connect the dots".
almost so but a little short. A good list but I'd like to add the aborted Ft Dix bombing and the London airliner plot designed to kill thousands of Brits and Americans. The latter especially almost certainly broken up in part by NSA surveillance.
Your last sentence,"connect the dots", takes a second place to my choice of Bush smears and liberal mental disease. Try "what did he know and when did he know it" with the sinister and suggestive hints of compliance.
It does seem possible that the left almost wants death, and if you're going to have it, why not on a massive scale.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
It does seem possible that the left almost wants death, and if you're going to have it, why not on a massive scale.
The Dems give me the creepy feeling that they already have mapped out the talking points to be used in such an event, and even have some preferences as to what the best timing would be relative to the election. So I humbly suggest amending your sentence to:
It does seem possible that the left almost wants death, and if you're going to have it, why not on a massive scale and with the best possible timing.
lying on behalf of democrats?
and started drawing pay from the DNC (directly, that is) years ago.
Yet another non-serious pinko hack who stopped being relevant years ago spewing into the pages of a once great newspaper - yawn.
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
this is about as big a political loser for Democrats as there is in the entire political landscape (followed a close second by the Fairness Doctrine). If the Democrats want to remind the country over and over that they think judges should have the final say when we spy on Al Qaeda that is a position I welcome they take and I hope to hear it coming out of their candidate for President's mouth a lot during the General Election.
Here is what E.J. Dionne doesn't get. No one cares about his particular point of view on the subject. He changes absolutely zero minds with his piece, however he does help to keep it in the public consciousness and that helps our side. Both Hillary and Obama voted against the FISA law and that will be a huge problem for them come general election time. As will their votes agains funding the troops, several votes in the immigration debate, and frankly the entire bru ha ha with Fox News. This is yet another problem for any Democratic candidate come general election time.
"The nine most dangerous words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'"
Ronald Reagan
www.proprietornation.blogspot.com