Obama's failure to oppose the warrantless wiretapping bill, critiqued in great detail by Glenn Greenwald (see his most recent post here) has given me some pause and made me think perhaps I should send my political contributions elsewhere. The immunity for lawbreaking telecoms is one of the events of the Bush years that has most angered me. The current FISA is perfectly capable of dealing with surveillance, and empowering the president to monitor my phone calls and e-mails is plainly a violation of the 4th Amendment:Don Pedro is right. When companies willfully aid the government in violating the American people's Fourth Amendment rights, those companies should be held liable.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.Why, after voting against the Protect American Act and saying he would support any filibuster of immunity for lawbreaking telecoms, is Obama now saying he will vote for the new law? I don't understand.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Economists for Obama not so happy with Barack Obama
Don Pedro, the blogger at Economists for Obama, justifiably expresses his displeasure with Barack Obama regarding the proposed FISA legislation currently before Congress.