Representation and Excuses
Ashley Stover finally called me back, and while not explicitly defending Casey’s vote on the FISA amendments act, expressed the sentiment that the program is under review and that actions were being taken to fix the problem.
Ms. stover hates hearing from me, because I say things like “Senator Casey doesn’t inspire confidence. I mean, we wouldn’t be having these problems if he hadn’t voted for the FISA Amendments Act. If i went in for surgery for tonsillitis, and my kidneys were removed instead of my tonsils, i wouldn’t go back to that surgeon (although I might sue him). So how can i trust Senator Casey to get it right, when he’s one of the people who screwed it up?”
What followed was a lot of bullshit political talk about how I “feel” and what I “believe”. “I know you feel that your rights have been… uh..”
“The word is ‘violated’,” I added helpfully.
“…compromised,” she translated. “and i know you believe that the NSA overstepped…”
“I don’t believe or feel anything,” i replied. “It’s plain as day on the front page of the New York Times, and the NSA explicitly blames the FISA Amendments Act.”
“Sir, if it wasn’t for oversight of the Act, there wouldn’t even be this rev–”
“‘Oversight’? Oversight? there was no oversight: the only reason the DOJ and the NSA admitted any of this is because the New York Times approached them and told them they were going to expose what was going on, and the NSA decided it’d be best to get out ahead of the scandal, rather than have it come out in embarrassing drips and drops.” And here I’ll pause to cite Greenwald at length:
It’s true that the Times article claims that these abuses were uncovered as part of the DOJ’s preparation of the semi-annual report which the 2008 FISA law requires be submitted in secret to the FISA court. And, once they knew that the Times had learned of and was preparing to write about these abuses, Obama officials claimed in response that the abuses are being corrected and that eavesdropping activities are now in compliance with the safeguards of the law. The problem, however, is that “the law” — thanks to the Democratic Congress — now has exceedingly few safeguards in it. It allows massive domestic spying without meaningful oversight, and renders these eavesdropping abuses inevitable. That was true in June, 2008 when the FISA-gutting law was passed, and it is just as true now.
I continued, “It has nothing to do with what i feel or believe: it has to do with the facts of the matter. And the facts are clear: the FISA Amendments Act gutted the Fourth Amendment and eviscerated any oversight over FISA activities.”
Above ms. stover’s increasingly shrill touchy-feely talk, I asked her “How many scandals are associated with the last 30 years of FISA, up to the date your boss decided to change the law?” She didn’t know, so I’ve placed a call to the ACLU to see if i can find out, and i will post those results when I get them.
“Sir,” she fdinally sighed in exasperation, “what do you want the Senator to do?”
“What do i want him to do? I want him to issue a public apology to the people of Pennsylvania for violating our rights. I want him to consider and internalize the idea that maybe he shoudln’t just do what the republicans tell him to do. and most of all, I want some accountability.”
“Sir, we have accountability, it’s called elections.”
“Yes, and we have an incumbency rate in the US that rivals Brezhnev’s Soviet Union. So much for that.”
We said our insincere goodbyes (I doubt Ms. Stover EVER wants to hear from me again), and for a moment I reflected on why i could never go into politics. I can’t lie. I’m horrible at dishonesty. I can’t countenance wrongdoing, never mind excuse it.
In short, I have integrity and people like Bob Casey (and the people who work for him)… well, I don’t know how they sleep at night. I couldn’t do it.
April 17th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
[...] gets a phone call. [...]