BY MIKE CETERA
So, the very first thing Bill Foster does as a congressman is applaud Denny Hastert for his years of service. And the Republican response? Bill Foster wastes no time compromising national security.
The ugliness continues.
From the The National Republican Congressional Committee:
"Bill Foster didn't waste any time in showing his true liberal colors. It only took Foster a matter of hours to prove to Illinois voters that he would be a lapdog for Speaker Nancy Pelosi's dangerous national security agenda," said NRCC spokesman Ken Spain. "Bill Foster's votes to strip our intelligence community of critical funding and tools are the first pieces of evidence that he is out of touch with the voters of his district and not serious about national security."
A lapdog? I suppose this means we shouldn't expect the campaigns to play nice over the next several months before the regular general election. Seriously, it's one thing to dislike the positions someone takes, but on the very day Foster offers a conciliatory message, isn't it a bit spiteful to call him names?
At least the sour grapes aren't reserved exclusively for the Republican Party. John Laesch did not make a good impression by saying he wouldn't support Foster in November. Does this mean he'll vote for Jim Oberweis?
Calling Foster a conservative "Blue Dog" Democrat, Laesch said he would not be lining up behind Foster for the November general election.Foster defeated Republican Jim Oberweis in Saturday's special election and was sworn in Tuesday as the 14th District's new congressman.
Foster and Oberweis are scheduled to face each other again in November, vying for the right to succeed retired Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert.
He'll have to do it without support from Laesch, though, who said Tuesday, "We have a 180-degree difference in looking at how to fix things."
Of course, maybe statements like that will make Foster look more appealing to Republican voters.
Let's see, according to recently released reports from the DoJ Inspector General, here are a few 'highlights' of the findings re: the FBI's recent track records
Nahh, nothing to see here folks...move along...show's over.
It's time there was far more oversight of activities undertaken by the FBI, NSA, and other agencies. I back and support Foster's vote, along with the other members of the Illinois delegation who also supported this bill.
It will be good to hear what comes out of the 'closed door session' of the House as they continue to investigae and hold accountable those responsible for any unconstitutional or unlawful actions.
Might also consider these recent articles:
NSA shifts to e-mail, Web, data-mining dragnet
http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9890761-38.html?tag=recentPosts
If you get the feeling that a lot of this depends on a set of legal definitions that the NSA would like to keep as fuzzy and ambiguous as possible, you're probably right.
~snip~
Add in FBI Director Robert Mueller's acknowledgment last week of additional surveillance abuses, and his admission that retroactive immunity may not be all that necessary, and retroactive immunity looks a lot less compelling a prospect than it did a week ago. Then again, the NSA didn't need it to create an electronic dragnet in the first place.
~~~
House's surveillance vote moved to Friday
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9894165-7.html?tag=nefd.top
Well at least the NRCC is smart enough to know that some press outlet will publish their press release for free. Their $1M+ spending on robo calls and advertising didn't do much...
And when will this pox on both your houses criticism end? The negative campaigning is mostly one-sided and I'd like to see some distinctions drawn for readers.