Sen. Dianne Feinstein just finished ensuring the success of a bill that expands the federal government definition of "terrorism" to mean an act of protest that reduces the profits of a corporation, its suppliers, or partners.Read it and weep -- or laugh, depending on how these things take you. There's a note of pathos in the piece, as the author, after dishing the dirt on Feinstein, nevertheless feels obliged to recite the Creed, perhaps by way of penance:Feinstein co-sponsored the just-passed Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, which claims to provide law enforcement tools needed to go after animal rights extremists who vandalize research facilities. But .... "The language of this legislation was too broad and vague, and could be interpreted to infringe upon lawful practices, such as protest, whistleblowing, or boycotts," said Michael Markarian, executive vice president of the Humane Society of the United States....
"Here is an assault on civil liberties that's upfront and blatant - labeling activists as terrorists. Yet this passed without hardly any scrutiny. It was stunning how easily this went through. And in my mind it's one of the most egregious civil liberties abuses America has seen," adds Will Potter, author of Greenisthenewred.com, a blog dedicated to examining how anti-terrorism has been used as a pretext for cracking down on activism.
I'm not asking readers to return to the year-2000-era of magical thinking, when it was fashionable to say Democrats and Republicans were indistinguishable, then to support Ralph Nader's spoiler campaign.
Comments (4)
That piece, I forgot to cite properly before sending it, came to me courtesy of Skookum.
Posted by J. Alva Scruggs | November 29, 2006 3:47 PM
Posted on November 29, 2006 15:47
i dated feinstein in college
oh no that was barbara boxer
Posted by royal paine | November 29, 2006 4:24 PM
Posted on November 29, 2006 16:24
3% of the vote = "fashionable." Oh, yeah. And I'm going to lose eighty pounds and appear in a swimsuit catalog next week. Whatever.
Posted by ms_xeno | November 29, 2006 6:42 PM
Posted on November 29, 2006 18:42
But, but, Feinstein HAD to do it. She only won by 24 points earlier this month. Think all of all the swing voters who could potentially be alienated if she didn't work for this bill. Besides, it's not as bad as the bill that a Republican WOULD have supported if he or she had Feinstein's seat.
Posted by VAGreen | November 30, 2006 10:17 PM
Posted on November 30, 2006 22:17