http://arstechnica.com/…

Floor debate on the measure, which expands executive branch surveillance authority and provides retroactive amnesty for telecoms implicated in warrantless NSA wiretapping, consisted largely of mutual congratulation. Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) lauded the bill as a shining example of “what we can do when we come together,” a sentiment echoed by Rep James Langevin (D-RI), who said that the compromise “illustrates what this House can do when it deliberates with care, holds steady against fearmongering, and acts in the best interests of the country and its citizens.”

Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) interrupted the good vibes briefly to charge Democratic leaders, who had blocked a vote on a previous version of reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, with “playing potliics with national security.” But even he managed to close on a positive note, stressing that “when this House is allowed to vote, we can come together and accomplish things for the country.” Perhaps most effusive was Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the chief architect of the deal, who after being introduced as a man with the “wisdom of Solomon and the patience of Job” delivered an encomium to his colleagues and staff so fulsome that I found myself searching in vain for the golden statuette.

Some Democrats nevertheless felt obliged to assure skeptics that the compromise bill did not simply represent a capitulation to White House demands. Intelligence Committee Chair Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), for instance, distinguished the bill from legislation passed in the Senate by noting that “in this bill, Congress does not grant immunity. Congress isn’t deciding the question of immunity; the district court will.” Which is true: The Senate language granted immunity from lawsuits to any telecom that received a written directive from the attorney general, regardless of whether the company believed its actions to be lawful. The new, improved language instructs a federal court to grant immunity from lawsuits to any telecom that received a written directive from the attorney general, regardless of whether the company believed its actions to be lawful.

Lone When the votes were tallied, just under half of House Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the bill. A lone Republican,  Rep. Tim Johnson (R-IL), voted against it. A spokesman told Ars that Johnson “voted that way, consistent with all of his past votes on the FISA bill, because he’s worried about its impact on civil liberties, and he belives that the necessary authority for the intelligence agencies already exists. He’s talked to people on the front lines, and the system works very effectively now.”

Lone Republican voted Na and it wasn’t Ron Paul??? Well unfortunately he had the long planned speaking position at the Montana GOP convention. He didn’t get any of the delegates even though he came in 2nd in the Montana GOP caucus over McCain’s 3rd place showing. Tell me again how it’s unfair that Paul supporters were trying to get more delegates then their percentage of the vote?

Anyway, this capitulation by the Democrats while not surprising is no less disappointing. If they want to stop it they could have but they don’t. Just like they don’t want to stop the war in Iraq or impeach president or vice president for gross violations of the Constitution.

http://www.foxnews.com/…

House Democrats responded to President’s Bush’s call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.

Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.

They also reasserted that the reason the Appropriations Committee markup (where the vote on the amendment to lift the ban) was cancelled so they could focus on preparing the supplemental Iraq spending bill for tomorrow.

At an off-camera briefing, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the same. And a senior Republican House Appropriations Committee aide adds that “there were multiple reasons for the postponement” including discussion on the supplemental. But the aide said there was the thought that Democrats may wish to avoid a debate today on energy amendments.

Here are the highlights from briefing

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling

We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.

Oh boy. I don’t see this going anywhere but if people are pinched hard enough at the pump they may actually let it happen. Someone recently was telling me how they could see a New Deal part II coming from this current mess. I’m afraid to agree.