Comments are moderated. Please stay on topic.
I wrote my reps. Baron Hill, Evan Bayh, and Dick Lugar Yesterday. I don't expect much of a reply. I too am a bit stupefied by this. I truly fear for the Republic.
I did get this reply from Hoosiers for Hell tho. . .
I'm so sorry about this - I know you've been a pretty consistent supporter
of Baron's. Per your request I've removed you from our mailing list.
On the campaign end I'm not allowed to address questions on his Federal
activity, but if you'd like our district director John Zody is more than
willing to speak with you about your concerns. Let me know if you'd like me
to give him your email address or your phone number - he's been making
several calls after this week's votes and will contact you promptly if you
want.
Again, my apologies and I hope that we can regain your trust soon.
...I understood that in the early days there would be some activities that would have to be re-examined when the smoke cleared and our normal functions would have to be restored.
Yeah. Trouble was, we thought those activities were the means. Turns out they were really the end.
This debate is always framed as, how much of our liberty should we give up to remain safe? The real question is, how much of our liberty are we willing to give up to become even less safe? For this, indisputably, is what is happening.
What I can't believe is that Tom Delay would not bring up legislation unless pretty much every Republican was on board. This legislation fits that definition, it could have been brought up by Tom Delay himself. The fact that it fits his scummy agenda and his old rules is appalling and shows that this never should have came up for a vote.
The standard dualities are no longer operative. Republican/Democrat, conservative/liberal nee progressive, capitalist/socialist, free marketeer/pro-regulation are all effectively meaningless.
There are only authoritarians–those who seek unlimited power, along with those who accede in return for the illusion of security–and resisters–those who understand the corruptive force of power and attempt to limit its impact.
Since last week’s FISA sellout, I’ve been hearing Democratic apologists complaining that the party can’t be held responsible because it isn’t monolithic. So be it. Authoritarianism, by its very nature, is monolithic and the Democratics who voted to enable Bush’s unconstitutional surveillance activities self identified themselves as authoritarians. The party can throw these bums out if they want my sympathy, or my vote.
And please, no hand wringing over the lessership of two evils. I’d rather face the wolf than the wolf in sheep’s clothing. The Fourth Amendment may have been erased, but the Second is still going strong. I want to be able to recognize the bastards as soon as they come into range.
i still think dems are scared of getting blamed by a the harpy gop if something goes down in the near future. i also think that the dems believe a plurality of americans don't mind having their undies sniffed in the name of protecting the country, however wrong and misguided that may be...
essentially the dems are still playing the game by the rules of 2002 when we've all come very far since then...
Kos is listing the "cowards" among the dems who voted for this. I agree with Digby, the vote was a sham. Congressional majority leaders don't let things even come to a vote unless they want them to pass, or their very job is threated by their own people.
So either the Democratic leadership wanted this, or they were facing caucus revolts over it. Either way, it was allowed to happen when it did not have to.
I'm beginning to understand the point of Gravel's campaign actually. There is a lot of disingenuous showboating moves being made, to token oppose the Bush steamroller without actually risking stopping it.
It's certainly not that I cheerlead them for these police state votes, but it is true that I continue to support Democrats generally. I honestly don't know what else to do.
You don't know what to do? No wonder we're nicknamed "Defeatocrats." I would have thought it to be patently obvious what we do next. We punish the Democratic leadership for betraying our trust. I don't care that Senator Webb allowed himself to be convinced by partisan intelligence reports. I don't care if God Almighty declared that Osama bin Laden was coming to Washington in August. The Democrats have repeated and blatant proof that this administration will abuse any and all power granted to them, and they went and capitulated again.
So we stop supporting them. We find another party that will do more than give lip service to our demands. We know that isn't going to be the Republicans. So we turn to the Greens, the Libertarians or anyone else we can stomach and work to get them elected. Maybe then we can see a grudging return to democracy in this nation.
But so long as people continue to support failed leaders like Bush and Pelosi, I suppose that's nothing more than a pipe dream. Canada's looking better all the time.
Your question about what kind of risk are we willing to live with is the key. The problem is we are never told the truth about the level of risk and we do not look at this historically. Are we worse off than when 100s of missiles pointed at us when we were sleeping? Were we spying on America then?
And do we want to eliminate any probability of an attack? Trying for probability equal to zero for this event has an infinite cost. We are not doing even a very simple benefit cost analysis.
We only have fear mongers telling us to spend more and more of our tax dollars and civil liberties to rid our selves of bogeyman.
I take a step back and look at this overreach in the same way I look at terrorism. Capabilities please? I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU, but a police state and the magnitude of the fascism that many on our side see coming I can't see happening. Likewise, the "Islamist Takeover" that is seen by certain conservatives I don't see either. Where are the soldiers coming to get us or the soldiers that the U.S. has to enforce their every whim? I regularly speed over 10 miles an hour over the speed limit on my way home from work, and they can't manage to put a single police officer around to pull me over. Where is the CAPABILITY for them to actually pull off this fascism? I dribbled out a few words on this awhile back @ KOS, but I felt the need to respond to what I think is one of the most important progressive voices in the world, Digby, and tell her not to lose faith. A question I routinely ask a friend who routinely sends missives about the oncoming "fascist state" is - will there still be good Chinese food near my house when the revolution comes?
The pander wasn't to the red staters. It was those who voted against it who were pandering --- to us. If the Dems had wanted to stop Reid and Pelosi from putting this atrocity up for a vote they could have. They didn't.
I think that's the bottom line here. This could have been stopped, but nobody in the party was willing to go to the mattresses.
I wrote bothelosi and Reid to tell them that I thought they failed. I basically told them that they were more interested in getting to that vacation than protecting the 4th amendment.
We need leadership that will rise up and defend the constitution no matter what!
The only person I can put in that category is Russ Feingold. The Constitution is under assault and I look around and only see milquetoast DEMS passing even more egregious legislation than the rethugs.
I found out that not only did Barbara Boxer simply not vote on the FISA bill, she has not issued a statement on it at all. Her staff did not even know whether she plans to issue a statement on it.
California's Senators: Profiles in Courage
I've always had the impression that the Bush administration was expecting a domestic insurrection from day one.
I feel exactly the same way, and perhaps even stronger. The terrorists won when we started thinking about them in any significant way. The proper response to 9/11 was grief, improved airport security, and destroying the Taliban (which actively sheltered terrorists). After that, it's time to move the hell on. Screw terror color charts, duct tape and plastic sheeting, Patriot Acts, and just generally treating 9/11 as the date that represents a historical paradigm shift. We live in a post-9/11 world only insofar as we live after 9/11/01.
Great post Digby. It is sadly the only conclusion that you can come to. They spend months dicking around with the restoration of habeas, the various contempt avenues, and oh, heaven forbid, impeachment, but this rape the Constitution bill comes completely out of nowhere and hits the floor of both houses in about a week. That is no fucking accident.
This point is dead on:
"The pander wasn't to the red staters. It was those who voted against it who were pandering --- to us."
I think the Dem leadership was pretty pleased with how they handled the Iraq supplemental. Plenty of people (me included) were screaming about letting it come to a vote at all, but because enough Dems voted against it, and because the Dems could not pass a veto-proof bill that would really get the troops home, I think people by and large gave them a pass (ignoring the fact that Dems could have simply not passed a funding bill AT ALL). But they went to the well one too many times with the FISA amendment. The fig leaves that made the Iraqi supplemental seem not quite so bad are completely absent here. It makes not one fucking bit of difference that a bunch of Dems voted against this. All that matters is that it was allowed to reach the floor, and enough Dems were allowed to break ranks. To call Pelosi and Reid stupid, clueless, or scared is to give them far too much credit. This result was utterly by design. And the people who want to talk about the "bad" Dems who supported the bill are playing right into the Dem leadership's CYA strategy. They should not be allowed to get away with it.
With the Repugs, we've had a Culture of Criminality.
With the Democrats, we have a Culture of Cowardice.
Those are some great choices, ain't they voters?
Byrd the Stampede: you raise a good point about capabilities or the lack thereof.
But, I ask you, what level of responsiblity do you/we bear to future generations...to pass along the infrastructure of democratic governance to those that follow us?
If you don't give a shit, so be it, but those who care see the steady erosion of the constitution, the gradual slide into fascim--which is represented by the passage of the Patriot Act, the Military Commision Act and the sellout on FISA--as something to be actively resisted.
Byrd:
We don't know that half of what their digging though in our communications, trash etc. are. Look only back to NIxon (where Cheyney cut his teeth) to remember that he spied on his enemies. Will you tell me with a straight face that Rove et. al. are not using this? Why the FBI has reported itself its abuses with national security letters? It is the incompetence that bothers all of us. They will probably assign some 18 year old Young Republican robot dipshit the rights to decide if they should spy on you or me.
Be frightened, be very frightened.
Vacation beckoned, schedules were set. It was easier just to swipecard it and go their merry way. The minimal effort here of having an alternate that didn't fly can be spun to their constituents as effort. They. Just. Don't. Give. A. Shit.
This is from the introduction of Hillary Clinton at her YKos breakout session:
... [V]ery briefly, when the Senator found out about the [..?..] stuff with the scheduling, she immediately told her staff, "Rearrange my schedule because anyone who signed up to see me should see me, and I want to see them."
[roar of applause for the incalculable suffering and deep wounds sustained by the schedule therein] (Video from TPM)
TRANS: "If we can bring a little joy into your humdrum lives, our efforts ain't been in vain for nuthin." [/Lina Lamont, from Singin' in the Rain]
Too bad the opportunity for netroots and candidates to chart a new course for contemporary politics got swallowed up by a sea of self-congratulatory applause.
Yes, it has become clear to me that for Senator Salazar, loss of civil liberties is not a bug, but a feature.
But - the choice wasn't between Salazar and, say, Feingold. It was between Salazar and Pete Coors, who would have voted for this and for a Republican majority leader too.
I am on the side of changing the Dems for the better, rather than trying to make a third party viable. But to change we have to admit where we are, and that is what Digby has just done so eloquently.
The "cowards" all of the Dems / Progressive are vilifying are really just being thrown under the bus by the party leadership. You are entirely correct, the Dems have the votes to control what does and does not get voted on. This never should have seen the floor. And, if something so big is going to happen this August, before they could all come back from whoring with the corporate lobbyists, so that the nation's security depends on this, that is truly frightening. No, I don't think anyone got played by this, except the American people. The politicians simply decided they didn't want to be blamed for something that might just happen anyway. Pathetic.
You don't know what else to do but support Democrats? How about studying and publicizing the mechanisms by which both parties are controlled by the Plutocracy? That would provide much more benefit to your readers than public handwringing over your existential dilemma.
Eeek! Besides the NSA parsing your every email, don't forget that ChristoFascist lurking under your futon, recording...everything...
Digby, I rather assume that the Democratic leadership got punked. Having said that, I also agree with you that, if they were clear on Constitutional principles, they wouldn't be susceptible. Really believing in something means always being ready to fight for it. If you love the Constitution you simply don't listen to whatever arguments McConnell may make, when he asks you to sign away whole Amendments to the Bill of Rights.
As an aside, when I told some friends that I didn't like the Military Commissions Act, they expressed "hope" that I would not be killed because the CIA failed to find a terrorist if the MCA's torture authority were to be repealed. My feeling is: my grandparents fled the Russian gulag, and they didn't come here so that I too would grow up in a country that has a gulag. I'd rather be killed by terrorist bomb than live in fear.
The anti-abortion crowd never sleeps. Neither does the NRA -- if they don't win a battle (and they almost always seem to win), they do everything they can to make the other side pay. That is what believing in something (be it ever so misguided) looks like. If the Democrats don't learn what it means to have convictions and fight for them we are lost.
Emma Anne: Not being from Colorado, I don't know how Salazar got the nomination. Did he face a credible opponent in a primary? If so, who did the party appartus support and to what level.
To a significant degree the party is responsible for the actions of its elected members.
Until we hold the party responsible, we will be treated no better than as useful peons, to be curried every other year come campaign time and ignored when actual policy is set.
How about studying and publicizing the mechanisms by which both parties are controlled by the Plutocracy?
Noam Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, et. al. have already done heroic work in that field, and most here have probably at least heard of them if they don't actually own any of their books. There are plenty of bloggers (Silber, IOZ, Perrin) who will razz mainstream liberals and piss all over any attempts to salvage something of worth from the system. I say let them hold down that end, while people like Digby do their best to manuever within the confines of this wretched situation.
Byrd -
I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. What capabilities? How about the capability to seize hundreds of people in Afghanistan, fly them thousands of miles to a military base in Cuba, and keep them imprisoned without benefit of trial for five years? The capability to send inmates to secret prisons in foreign countries? The capability to launch politically-inspired criminal prosecutions? How about the capability to create your own definition of "torture?" What does your speeding by 10 miles per hour have to do with anything?
jm -
Excellent point - that's generally why I'm constantly lurking at this site - to be reminded of what's important.
To play devil's advocate though, the percentages of teenagers, etc. who are staunch libertarians and would be disgusted / annoyed by our government's actions would inherit such a legacy with a WTF? and an LOL? and then promptly fix things with their iphones (they'll probably have that capability by then). Just look at the numbers in favor of gay rights - the younglings make many of us liberals look like Robert Novak.
"If you love the Constitution you simply don't listen to whatever arguments McConnell may make, when he asks you to sign away whole Amendments to the Bill of Rights."
Amen sunlight! We need people who uphold the Constitution at all costs. What a lot of weak kneed simpletons.
To Byrd the Stampede who asks: Where is the CAPABILITY for them to actually pull off this fascism?
The capability does not come immediately. It builds momentum over time. First, it's just little bit, of course you don't mind do you. Then, it's, well, just a little more. Finally, everyone is boxed in a corner and there is no way out.
think about this, Less than 25% of the adult American population elected our current fearless leader. In 20 years, what will these same fools, and their children (who they likely will raise as fools) vote for. What will they give them? What would you give them, because the benefit of the doubt goes a long fucking way.
The only saving grace is that this "law" might still be found unconstitutional (in the off chance it is ever allowed to be challenged). Where is the capability, it's fashioned at the end of the gun. You keep carrying that card, though, ok?
Glenn Greenwald on CSPAN right not (EST 4:55) talking about FISA.
It's hard to know how to respond to congressional capitulation when it's the only branch of government that could hold out any hope for some minimal restoration of democracy and the rule of law. While I remain tongue-tied, you found a way to say it better than I could have anyway.
As for this: "They treat us like children." Right, and they intend to keep us like children by monopolizing power and information while they make sure that we are undereducated, environmentally and nutritionally poisoned, immobilized, impoverished, distracted by trivia, and very closely supervised.
Big Brother screws up everything he touches. Now that he hovers so close to me, I have to tell you, he has bad breath, too.
There were 5 non-votes (not counting Johnson) on the Dem side: Boxer, Harkin, Kerry, Dorgan, and Murray. I've been wondering what reasons there could have been for not voting on this one.
These measures were considered against the backdrop of heightened concerns from our nation's intelligence community abut the threat of international terrorism. The ramifications of the two amendments before us last night were not political.
*Everything this assministration does is political. The federal bureaucracy is stacked with political commissars to ensure that everything from NASA science policy, to stem cell research to global warming to the Surgeon-General's pronouncements conform to the ideological dictates of The Party.
You don't think an issue as powerful as unsupervised warrantless wiretapping would be politically exploited by these traitorous corrupt tools, you stupid fuck Jim Webb???? You don't think Chertoff's scaremongering about an impending attack wasn't designed to line up you stupid pigs for the slaughter?
I'm never voting for the Democratic party again. They've proven themselves to be no better than the Republicans on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE that really matters to our country and our democracy. This has happened way too often for it to be an accident, and if you believe that you're a willful idiot. There's just no way a logical person could come to the conclusion that this is anything other than what they want. Democracy is dead and the sooner some of you come to grips with that the sooner we can start doing what actually has to be done at this point.
The capability does not come immediately. It builds momentum over time. First, it's just little bit, of course you don't mind do you. Then, it's, well, just a little more. Finally, everyone is boxed in a corner and there is no way out.
There are also "plausible capabilities", which, while always an option, become so much more feasible when legalized or protected by law.
These include things like torture, secret trials with secret evidence, the denial of legal support, vote-rigging, etc.
These things are always feasible to an extent, but were hampered by legal and the general sense of morality among Americans. If the roadblocks are eliminated or reduced, such capabilities become much more attractive.
The class of capabilities that the NSA program falls under is more like "technological capabilities", which include things like: building social network profiles of online users, tracking RealIDs from gas station to grocery, clamping down on flagged digitally-capable passports, monitoring citizens from cameras on the street, new riot control methods, etc.
"Capability" is a fuzzy thing, and any one capability can make others more feasible and likely, they work synergetically.
Digby,
This is no time to get hopeless.
Silber is in a chronic state of hopelessness. I had to stop reading him because of the pure depression jumping off the pages. Some of what he says is true. But I think he represents the most pessimistic predictions, which rarely turn out to be true.
One of my biggest frustrations since joining the activist/blogging world is the sloooow pace with which the ship of state turns. It's slow to go to hell (but steady in Bush's case) and it's slow to right itself. But it will right itself. By definition. Because at the end of the day, the same spoiled public that wants daddy to protect them also wants daddy to leave them alone.
If there's one thing you can always count on from government, it's overreach. We will eventually have a/some mainstream stories of clear government abuse, not of some feerigner, but of a bona fide upstanding white male. Thus, the same level of whining to protect me will ultimately be manifest as get off my fucking back!
As far as the parties go, they are merely manifestations of a concensus of that same spoiled and whining public. For good and for bad. This dynamic is part of the mechanism that makes it all move so slowly. So ask youself, which concensus group do you want to align with?
I'm not so naive as to think that Dems will become the revolutionaries that I'd like to see, or certainly Arthur Silber would like to see. But they are the institutional vehicle to get closer to what I (emphasis on the singular "I") want. What more can I expect from a political party .... really? Anything else simply moves me closer in political philosophy to Cheney .... and I don't want to be close to that Mofo.
They've proven themselves to be no better than the Republicans on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE that really matters to our country and our democracy.
As a former Republican still sore about Clinton, I used to say this vise-versa.
The Democrats really let me down on this vote, I thought they were turning around.
Nevertheless, please remember that even if us Americans can't fix our country, we can at least try to stop bombs from falling on people who never did anything to us, and it's not Democrats who are bringing back the use of landmines and our modern napalm: white phosphorus.
Unless Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination, all my votes are going Democratic in spite of this (massive) screw-up.
"You don't know what else to do but support Democrats? How about studying and publicizing the mechanisms by which both parties are controlled by the Plutocracy?"
Back in the day, it used to be that understanding Marx really well would do the trick. Look how well that worked.
The "lying sack of garbage" on NPR was Bryan Cunningham, who, wouldn't you know, is a buddy of Alberto Gonzales. Their attitude toward the truth appears to be similar.
Treating us like children. I think that about sums it up. In the short run, things do look grim and in some ways irreversibly so. On the other hand, it would take a totalitarianism of unimaginable strength to do to Americans what the German and Soviet totalitarians did to their people.
We are headed for terrible military defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a fiscal crisis that is going to lower the living standards of most Americans. There is a good chance that the fiscal crisis will make it impossible for the government to honour its social security committment without setting off an unsustainable inflation. When the political institutions fail to do the corrective feedback work, the real world will do it for them.
Hi dig. Arthur Silber returned a few days ago after an illness and wrote a few unpleasant things about you and some other bloggers.
That you have linked to his writings proves what we all know about you -that you are a class act.
It is very unfortunate that it is (as you have said) very difficult to argue with him - especially since he has begged to be proved wrong.
He isn't.
If anything, my view is more dismal than his. The coup-d'etat has already happened. The disappearances are about to begin. If an election occurs in 2008, it will just be a show for the rubes - even if "our guys" win.
But we will all get to talk about these pleasanteries in between water boarding sessions in the camps.
Encore une fois: my attempts to be a raving lunatic have failed. Drat.
...I understood that in the early days there would be some activities that would have to be re-examined when the smoke cleared and our normal functions would have to be restored.
Like the *gag* Patriot Act? A supposedly temporary piece of legislation in response to the emergency of 9/11 with a limited duration of four years.
Problem was, when it came up for renewal, they added even more Orwellian features and it passed like shit through a goose.
Jim Webb: The ramifications of the two amendments before us last night were not political.
Yes, this is an astonishing statement from an otherwise sophisticated and combative Democratic politico. On what planet have these people been sojourning for the last 6 1/2 years? Apparently Democrats were (again) intimidated by the threat of ads saying things like: "Voted to give terrorists free rein to plan attacks on the homeland without fear of monitoring by our government."
I am not by philosophy or temperament a "bring down the state" kind of person
Don't worry Digby, took lots of us a while to get here.
Come into the light, grab a balaclava, and I'll see you at the barricades 
Webb's vote here should not be too surprising. He has a military background, he is from a different background than us civilians. They really do not have that much respect for such things as privacy and the rights of individuals. I have heard hear military people ridiculing the rights that civilians take for granted.
The only reason we backed him so enthusiastically was that he shared with us the view that the Iraq war was a disaster for the military. Webb was just being a military realist.
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) sent her kids to the elementary school I walk past regularly. But she it not my neighbor. Not any more. She voted to gut FISA and spit on the Fourth Amendment.
This is qualitatively different from the war funding charade, where she also betrayed me. This is where she crossed the line. No matter how bad the Republican opposition, I will not be fear-goaded into voting for her again. I will go third party.
She took my vote for granted one time too many. They all think they can get away with this - "where does the left have to go, anyway?" - so they take our votes and stomp on us. I agree with other commenters in this thread that this bill was orchestrated by the Democratic party leadership. They wanted this bill.
These folks had better consider me the new swing vote. If they put up an acceptable candidate, I will vote for that candidate. If they do not put up an acceptable candidate, I will vote third party. I figure that voting for the Democratic candidate about 50% of the time maximizes my impact on that party.
But I don't really care for Klobuchar on any terms, anymore. Trust is broken and does not get repaired so easily. She's a bad Dem, and no longer my neighbor.
I plan to write a post on this issue but I have to say now, that I agree, the Democrats who do this aren't being "fooled again".
Are they blackmailing Presidential voters? See, they'll change the bill in September. But Bush will veto it.
Just like they'll do something about Habeus Corpus, but Bush will veto that.
"The only way to restore the Constitution is with a Dem President and Congress".
I think it's a duplicitous, unspoken game of blackmail against the Democratic base.
They really are cowards. It pisses me off to see names on that disgusting list that drew heavily on support from the "netroots" to get elected. I'm embarrassed to have enabled them. "Hey kids! Let's fight this fascist culture of corruption! GIMME GIMME GIMME!"
Apparently, fear of Repugly Rove attacks whupped them in line.
if there is a terrorist attack, the vile republicans will still use every media outlet available to them to BLAME THE DEMS for the attack....
did these cowards really think that this will prevent them from being blamed? from attack ads? from fox propaganda?
The threat of terrorism becomes a kind of Pascal's wager when talked about politically, as others have pointed out.
The potential damage a terrorist incident could cause seems so huge that the renunciation of the 4th Amendment seems a small price to pay to avoid the danger. The problem is, the actual probability of the worst outcome and the losses of liberty are hard to weigh, and aren't as viscerally compelling as the huge cost of "what if you're wrong." This topic is really easy to sell from a right-wing perspective, unfortunately. When there's a really bad disease, people are more willing to buy false remedies.
Hey nutroots:
HAHA 
HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA
THAT IS WHY WE CANNOT SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATS. THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM NOT THE SOLUTION. WAKE UP!BOTH PARTIES ARE BRINGING US A FASCIST STATE. I WILL NOT HELP FASCISTS. I WILL FIGHT AGAINST BOTH OF THESE PARTIES THAT HAVE DESTROYED OUR DEMOCRACY.
What could possible have made the democratic leadership cave in so hard. Is it blackmail combined with humiliation? I think so. Bush likes nothing better than to rub his opponents noses in it. A lot of what these goons do that appears as incompetence is only the magician's distraction, the head fake. The real move was to build CYA for the rest of the actual players lives.
Dear God Bless the GOP:
Please suck my fat wrinkly American nuts. If you want to live like a slave, move to another country.
Jeffersonianly yours,
prunes
It's not that the Democrats are brown.
It's that the American public is lilly-pad green with fear.
Until that fear, and selfishness, and quite frankly, EXCEPTIONALISM, ends, then you'll never see any real change when it comes to that stuff.
I was considering the blackmail issue from another angle. Such as, do Cheney and Bush have information from some wiretaps that implicate Dems in corruption, etc? Thus, motivating Dems to pass legislation that destroys oversight capability and thus, covers their tracks as well as enabling BushCo?
Regardless, those that support the police state must be replaced by real progressives.
i agree somewhat with byrd the stampede, goerge bush et al and their paranoid asses reading my communications - i've got to say that while i find it disgusting that it was codified into law, i was under no illusion what so ever that it wasn't already being done in the first place. it was and most certainly will continue to be, always, no matter who is president or what they tell you they are or are not doing. the government spies on the people, it just does. did under clinton, did under reagan, did under nixon, did under FDR.
that said, no it is not a good thing that the political and legal infrastructure exist now to actually create a police state, it is a terrible thing. right now things are so f#cked in Iraq that we couldn't expand the military if we begged the country to sign up, without offering significant pay and benefit increases. but things won't always be that way. do take some comfort though, in the fact, that whatever person is spying on you probably has a much, much worse computer than the one you are using to read Digby on...not much comfort, i know.
i do have to say that the ad hominem against "the dems" as if they all voted as a monolith is getting pretty tired already. attack those who voted wrong. don't enter Nader territory. this is ENTIRELY a problem of Dem leadership - as in we have NONE. we have a spineless, clueless jackass leading the Senate. i've been practically screaming this to anyone who would listen since 2004. Reid is a terrible, terrible leader. i always get shouted down at DKos whenever i bring this up, but its really important. and i don't know what to say so far about Pelosi other than that she has done pretty much nothing but let us down since she was sworn in. again, no leadership, seems to have no pull within her own party. weak stances against Bush, at best, and refusal to push or consider impeachment. a non-starter for the party leadership. insane. we need to very vociferously kick Reid and Pelosi out of their positions. we need to vote in more and better Democrats. we knew some of the ones we invited in during this last round of elections were rats, and now we're dealing with the consequences. we thought it would be worth it to have that majority status, and that subpoena power. but it has gotten us NOTHING, repeat, NOTHING, because of the stunning lack of leadership within our party. i don't mean to let individuals off the hook by saying that, but when they've got nothing to lose by voting wrong, there is little to stop conservative-leaning Dems from doing so. ideally, when a candidate steps up and says "i'm a conservative Dem", we just say "no thank you, NEXT!" but that's not how things are here, yet. abandoning the party won't help jack crap. yes i do support greens in various circumstances at the local and state level, but they need to build there first before they can be nationally viable. libertarians are right out. we need to humiliate those who vote incorrectly, vote them out of office, and punish our current weak leadership. hand-wringing has its place, but it can't be our main strategy.
There simply is no greater issue. Not even Iraq. We must make the Dems understand the intensity of our anger at their capitulation. Reid bitches about how easy it is, under Senate rules, for a minority to obstruct legislation. Well, start obstructing, Harry: Let Bush know that either he accepts reasonable checks, or he leaves the country unprotected. If Reid and Pelosi can't keep their troops in line on this, they should step down.
Suppose a Republican president is elected, someone like Guiliani or Thompson, and they have a freshened Republican House and Senate. Can you say you really want that?
I know, I know, it's nice to hyperventilate, feel the juices of righteous wrath flowing through your veins, but . . .
What we have on our hands is the culmination of thirty years worth of relentless pushing by a group of people who are very wealthy, powerful, determined and organized. And they don't particularly care for the likes of you or me. Unsnarling this mess with the weak sisters passively abetting them is going to be like untangling a ball of live rattlesnakes with your bare hands. Iow, there is very little margin of error for a bad mistake.
That's what the Democrats have to work with, and Hillary running for the highest office in the land isn't helping matters any. If this version of FISA had not passed, what are the odds that a 'terrorist attack' of the most inflammatory kind would happen? An attack that could well determine the outcome of the '08 election cycle? An election which could well be _the_ election of the century, insofar as the American character, American ideals are concerned?
And if you think that this administration wouldn't nudge such a crisis into being (how about a containarized bomb exploding in New York harbor, taking out the Statue of Liberty?), if you think that the current House and Senate leaders can afford to dismiss this scenario . . . I say you aren't being cynical or paranoid enough. When people come here and screech about how this is the most criminal administration we've had, ever, and that they have their backs to the wall, and will do anything, literally anything to avoid being brought to trial, this is exactly the sort of thing they should be thinking of.
And so the race is on. The gamble our party heads are taking is that no rap can be pinned on them despite the drumming of the corporate media belting it out 24/7 if such an attack should occur vs the possibility of damaging leaks concerning the affairs of viable canditates that this sort of bill _will_ ensure.
It's not "the state" that must be brought down digby, - it's "this state" the fascist warmngers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government that must be "brought down." Until that day, nothing will change in the land of Oz.
The fascists in the Bush government have democrats trapped in an Hegelian dialect, wherein the Bush government pimps some fiction, they in fact have the power, cabability, and will to use without restraint to win or maintain the death grip on America's what's left of the government, and weatlh and resourses of the nation.
How can democratic leaders hearing about some socalled "hot" intel portending of some calammituos event in the near future, and these fascist policies and machinations allowing the NSA to spy on American with only McDonnell and Gonzales protecting the peoples rights, - but failure to support this mangling of the Constitution,- I mean legislation, would likely result in an attack of some terrible sort.
Democrats are forced once again the bow and tuck their tails under the ominous threat of evildoers that only the fiends and shaitans in the Bush government know about, and in my opinion probably concocted.
The only remedy, is for democrats and any American who can read to demand the immediate initiation of impeachment proceedings against ALL the fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government including the Andover Chearleader Bush, the satanic high priest Cheney, that sniveling fascist Gonzales, and a long festering list of profiteers and other freacks who just happend to commandeer the American government.
Unless and until we remove the fascists in the Bush government - America is doomed to a futue of neverendingwar, wild ever widening divisions between those who have, and those who have not, a radical mangling, dismembering, and reengineering of our government, the Constitution, and our socalled democracy, and a perversion and betrayal of the core principles that formally defined our once more perfect union.
"Deliver us from evil!"
Where is Billmon?
It's times like this I miss his voice. No one can express disgust at the idiocy of both Dems and Bushco, with such absolute clarity, and laugh out loud gallows humor, as he can.
No, it wouldn't HELP, but somehow, it would make me feel better...
The potential damage a terrorist incident could cause seems so huge that the renunciation of the 4th Amendment seems a small price to pay to avoid the danger.
Except even the loss of an entire city is not enough to bring the country down (three business building collapse with a tragic loss of life less than die every week in car accidents). Witness NOLA. An ENTIRE city went sploosh! and the country practically ignored it and went on about its business. A couple thou dead and the destruction of a few buildings is enough to end liberty? What a load of crap.
There is NOTHING that terrorists can do that is worse than what we do to ourselves (and here I mean primarily our politicians). They use what are tragic, law-enforcement issues and turn them into something they are not. There is no danger whatsoever that terrorists will ever destroy this country. Only the people and the politicians right here can destroy the country. While the rest of the nation is over 9/11 such that screaming "terrorists under the bed!" no longer works, the politicians are STILL playing that card for all its worth to get exactly what THEY want: authoritarianism with they the authorities.
The Dems were NOT tricked, railroaded, scairt, or anything else. Reid and Pelosi both had their private lunches with Bush and came out with The Plan and immediately set about getting THE bill passed. Reid and Pelosi are in on it and so is most of the Dem party. Complicity, top to bottom, was necessary to get this bill through. They are ALL criminals and traitors to the Constitution and, thus, the nation.
Scent of Violets,
Yours is the fear-thinking that has brought us to this pass. Always on your knees to the Lesser of Evils. Always choosing the "safer" path that spirals inexorably downward. Always excoriating those who won't follow you down the drain. I bet you still hate the Nader voters of 2000, don't you? Still playing "what if" games, aren't you? As if the election of 2000 had happened in a vacuum. As if it explained everything that has happened since.
Well, you're wrong. Completely and tragically wrong. The Nader voters didn't vote for Bush, they voted for Nader. The Bush voters, and the voting fraudsters, are the ones who voted for Bush. No one can compel another person's vote. You can't stop me from voting for candidates I find acceptable, and withholding my vote from candidates I find unacceptable. They may be Dems. They may not be Dems.
The only way out of this circling vortex our country is in is to vote for the people you ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE IN OFFICE. If you let yourself vote out of fear, you will remain preoccupied with that fear, and you will have nowhere to go but down, down, down. It is not the Nader voters who have taken this country down the drain, but the fear voters - you.
.
These members, Senators Feinstein, Mikulski, Bayh, and Bill Nelson, have extensive experience on intelligence matters and are respected champions of civil rights and liberties
¿Feinstein ees a champion of civil rights now?
Oh, si just like Negroponte ees a moderate centrista.
Wonders unceasing...
Also: Kos is listing the "cowards" among the dems who voted for this. I agree with Digby, the vote was a sham. Congressional majority leaders don't let things even come to a vote unless they want them to pass, or their very job is threated by their own people..
I agree that the party as a whole let their constituents down, here.
However, eef we can no punish the party as a whole, let us punish the "cowards" that they have staked out for us.
Eet seems to be the only fair theeng to do.
¿Do I smell primary?
(choplick)
Blame the Dems, blame Bush, or blame the gutless quivering Murkins who will gladly trade freedom for the illusion of security every single time?
#3, folks.
So now, both sides are heavily vested in another successful terrorist attack- the Thugs so that they can say, "See! We've been warning you, but you wouldn't listen!"
And the Dems, so that they can say, "Well, we've given you everything that you asked for, but you STILL can't protect us!"
With this treasonous vote, the Dems have guaranteed that I will be voting 3rd party. They cannot possibly fix this short of totally repealing the entire FISA shitpile, gutting the Patriot Act, and KILLING FOREVER the Military Commissions Act. But mark my words, the Dems will do NOTHING to reverse any of these. They will NOT restore Habeas Corpus. They will NOT get us out of Iraq (they don't WANT to, they want us there to protect the oil just like the GOP).
Digby - beautifully stated here. On the previous thread, you asked me to clarify my point (if indeed I really had one) on the Ykos. I attempted to do so and I hope you saw that. Please know I meant no personal attack on you specifically and absolutely find the same blame I was discussing (to the extent that any really exists) in myself. I intended nothing but constructive consideration and thought; for the fight to preserve, and reinstate, our constitution is far, far from over. Thank you again.
Here's my Senator Dianne "please don't investigate me or my husband for war profiteering" Feinstein and her laboring excuse for giving Dick "I wish Mary had gotten some" Cheney more cover to spy on American citizens.
Time for Di to say goodbye.
"Statement of Senator Feinstein on the Senate’s Vote On the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) voted tonight for legislation passed by the Senate to make interim changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to close gaps in the nation’s intelligence-gathering capability.
The following is Senator Feinstein’s statement:
“I spoke with Admiral Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, at length this evening. He believes the United States is vulnerable, and that we need to move quickly to change the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
The intelligence community is deeply concerned that chatter among suspected terrorist networks is up. I am concerned as well. We are living in a period of heightened vulnerability, and must give the intelligence community the tools they need to protect America.
This legislation is a temporary fix. It is not permanent and it expires in six months. It immediately addresses critical gaps in our intelligence-collection efforts – while preserving a role for FISA court review.
I voted for both bills because one needed 60 votes to pass. It is vital that we act now. We cannot leave the nation unprotected in this post-9/11 period.”
A post9-11 world. Sheesh, it was always going to be a post 9-11 world, whether attacked or not. So please Di, explain to me why we invaded Iraq.
I voted for both bills because one needed 60 votes to pass. It is vital that we act now. We cannot leave the nation unprotected in this post-9/11 period.
You stupid COW! It is STILL unprotected! This shitpile spying on Americans sans warrant protects NOTHING but the criminals (like you) in government.
I want a special prosecutor to investigate Feinstein and her husband for war profiteering and other corruption. She is dirty. Her husband is dirty. Reid is dirty. Pelosi is dirty.
I called Feinstein today and I was told that she voted to change FISA because after talking with McConnell assured her there were credible threats, and of course he assured her that the rights of Americans would not be infringed. This is the same Feinstein who wrote to me that Powell's speech at the UN in 2002 was "compelling". The same person who believes that judge Southwick is not a racist.
I don't believe Feinstein because she votes with the Republicans all the time. She is a Bush enabler, like Lieberman.
Below is what Feinstein has on her website:
yesterday asked for and received a letter from Admiral Mike McConnell, Director of National Intelligence, detailing assurances he made to Senators on Friday evening that temporary modifications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act will not infringe on the rights of Americans.
"...where [strike]Daddy say if[/strike] if Daddy says you are innocent you have nothing to worry about."
Fixed it for you.
You know I've wondered if this newest FiSa legislation which many have admitted goes far beyond what was actually needed to fix the gap in current fisa law, was exactly the sort of thing that Comey, Mueller, Ashcroft, and others threatened to resign over? Could this be the, ahem part of the program or "other intelligence activities" that Gonzo rushed to Ashcroft's hospital bed for a signature?
Wouldn't that be the ultimate sad and sick irony...but after watching how Dick treats his perceived enemies (the Wilson's) I certainly wouldn't put it past Cheney and Addington to push for it in this manner. Plus I've read Mike McConnell worked with Cheney in a previous administration so I wouldn't be surprised if he was in on it(not certain about that but I read it somewhere). I know it's just speculation but even so....it's one of those things that makes you go hmmmmm.
Great post, but for some reason it doesn't load on Hullabaloo for me. I only found out about it because someone posted a link somewhere else.
Does Judy Woodruff even bother to do ANY homework? She let this guy spew this blatantly untrue stuff. Rather than call him on it, she just bunted it back to the other person to refute. Classic 'he said/she said' uselessness.
Goodness knows I hate to claim prescience - I mean, on September 12, 2001 I was traumatized like everybody else - but my reaction, and I remember it well because I voiced it to my class that day at Georgetown University: "I'm not afraid of what these terrorists will do to America, I'm afraid of what Americans may do to each other . . . "
With their shocking surrender over President Bush's draconian new FISA law this weekend, Congressional Democrats snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. They not only had the votes to safeguard American civil liberties and prevent the legalization of past Bush White House criminality. On FISA as we knew it before August 5, 2007, Democrats had the law - and public opinion - on their side.
For the dismal story, see:
"Democrats Snatch Defeat from Jaw of Victory on FISA."
emal - Whether literally or de facto, that is EXACTLY what has occurred here. This is not really in doubt on a root level.
I am far more oppositional than Digby and Greenwald. I belong to the He-Man Left, which has always been more oppositional than any of you merely "kind of oppositional some of the time" libs. Why, Digby and Greenwald merely repelled and disgusted by the Dems' cave-in on FISA, whereas I am completely repelled and disgusted by everything any Democrat has ever done. And that's why I'm focusing on the real enemy here -- Digby and Greenwald.
Why isn't it considered unAmerican to ask, to consider for even a moment that the Constitution could ever be "a suicide pact?"
This remark is often made as the trump, the can't-argue-that-it-is STFU, hippie! retort. And yet only a fascist would think of it in the first place.
DelRPCV: Try clearing your cache or refreshing the page. Same thing happens to me all the time.
Byrd the Stampede wrote: "I regularly speed over 10 miles an hour over the speed limit on my way home from work, and they can't manage to put a single police officer around to pull me over. Where is the CAPABILITY for them to actually pull off this fascism?"
Byrd, You're forgetting that totalitarian, fascist societies don't have to enforce their rule through massive person power. They can rely on fear and self-correction. To use your example of cops pulling you over to give you a ticket. They don't need to have a cop to pull over every car. They just have to randomly pull over a few cars for speeding, beat the cr*p out of the driver, rape the passengers and leave everybody bloody on the side of the road. After that, most people wouldn't speed. Most people would be too scared sh*tless to even go out and drive.
All they have to do is target a few people. Pull a few people out of line at the airport and tell them they can't fly -- their name is on a list of making "suspect" calls. All they have to do is send the FBI to a few of your neighbor's doors (you know, the ones with the anti-bush sticker on their car bumper). All they have to do is target a few high-profile bloggers and divest them of their property for opposing (ie, "interfering" with) the war in Iraq. Trust me, everybody else will fall right into line.
We're closer to this than we realize. Think it's an accident that you can't get a new passport without a six month wait? Guess what. It's going to get worse. Soon it will become a year. Once that's normal, you'll need one just to fly. Once that's normal, you'll need one just to drive. Then one day, you'll need to be able to show your papers on demand. Just to buy groceries.
They will slowly scare us, then squeeze us, so slowly that we won't even notice until it's too late, and the jack boots are kicking in your door. To make your neighbors feel "safe".
To quote Digby: "I feel so fucking safe, I can hardly breathe."
"Does Judy Woodruff even bother to do ANY homework?"
The saddest part of that question is that Judy Woodruff used to be a news heroine of mine.
"It's coming from within, from a governing class of both parties who are creating a national security apparatus that is going to end up squeezing the lifeblood of liberty right out of this country --- all in the name of keeping us safe."
Keep us safe? Why should they? The more people die, the more scared and submissive the general public becomes. No, this is all in the name of keeping corporate profits up up UP!
Scent of Violets: what makes you think there will be meaningful elections in 2008?
What makes you think that the "terrist" attack won't be blamed on us anyway?
How many times does one have to be kicked in the mouth before one detects his lack of dentition?
Shouldn't one catch on after a while?
I'm only asking.
dcnataro...whether there is a theatrical display that is called an "election" in 2008 or not is irrelevant. The Dems and the GOP are the same. They are both traitors to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They are BOTH working for authoritarianism. They are BOTH criminal enterprises.
Vote, schmote. I'll not vote Dem for ANYTHING. I wouldn't vote a Dem in for Dog Catcher. They can suck my 4th and 5th Amendment-free DICK!
Berube: Cleverly put, as always, but who here is identifying Digby and Greenwald as enemies? The disappointment or disillusionment you appear to be alluding to might have been expressed on yesterday's thread (or was it the day before?) and if memory serves, you essentially made the same point there. Here, now, Democrats are receiving the brunt of the criticism and rightly so.
As Digby noted, Silber and others have been calling her out lately for an alleged failure to comprehend certain political realities. However, casting Arthur Silber as a He-Man, even if done unintentionally, is something I'll be laughing over for a long time.
Another question for you: When facing the emergence of tyranny, when does trading the flowers of one's wit for a more he-manly form of opposition become appropriate?
Byrd,
To advance what Is is Safe? said above, have you ever lived in a totalitarian country? I worked in Hong Kong after the handover and frequently visited mainland China.
The Asian adage, "life is cheap," is more than about short lives. A defining cultural trait, inculcated over centuries, but especially over the last 50 years, is to look down when speaking. It began with the caste system and became political under communism. A stray word could land you in prison.
It does not take overt brutality. The Argentinian government simply "disappeared" opponents.
Your freedom to eat pizza and drive 10 mph over the speed limit is happily left alone. It's all the stuff of the mind and what we say that are self censored over time. Hell, we self censor when in a crowd that is acting nuts. Who speaks up, for fear of ridicule?
My brother in law always asks my why I'm so angry about surveillance and snooping by the government, "if I haven't done anything wrong." He has no idea. We take it all terribly for granted.
I've learned one thing from all of this.
It's clear that complaining on blogs, sending letters, mmaking a stink is not going to work.
We have to take action.
They have marginalized us. We aren't civil. Most of them probably agree with O'Reilly's characterization of us.
We have to start a third party and abandon the Democrats.
It's the only way. A mass exodus.
If there's one thing we possess, it's the ability to pull something like that off.
I have no idea how it is done, but we should do it.
I'm pretty sure this is all Ralph Nader's fault. Everybody says so.
bmaz @ 6:56
But didn't the OLC person, Goldsmith, argue about the constitutionality of it so even if Congress did okay it it still violated the constitution? NO?
Because this is really pissing me off and if Bush's next step is to press further for immunity or any retroactivity of immunity and congress capitulates...I will be livid!
To those who asked why go ahead and support this bill even if the Democrats will be blamed for it anyway: yes, it's true, these scum will pull out every stop, finesse every little dirty trick they can. _Of_course_ the Democrats will be blamed for a terrorist attack, not matter what. Just as they will be blamed for high gas prices, lack of good jobs, poor healthcare, a 'morally corrupt' society, and on and on and on.
The question you've got to ask yourself is, will the American people (or enough of the American people) buy it?
If you think the American people wouldn't fall for this trick, then yes, this was an extremely bad move on the part of our side.
However, it is my opinion that if this bill had been taken for the opportunity many here seem to think it was to 'define' ourselves, and if, say, the Statue of Liberty was blown up, that the Republicans would win in 2008 in a walk on 'security'. Playing it the way the House and Senate leadership did, ie 'relunctantly' passing the bill the President wanted greatly lessens that risk - now both parties can play the weak on security card should such an attack occur (oh, and I really do believe that this administration really is just as unscrupulous and evil as many here say they are. So passing this legislation may actually have _cut down_ the chances of a 'terrorist' act - not a high enough rate of return vs the risk for the bad guys)
Like I said before, if it took thirty years to walk this far into the woods, it's probably going to take thirty years to walk back out again. Starting with dismantling the Right Wing noise machine, and moving on to more meaningful lobby reform, or at least reform that really sticks it to the Republicans, etc.
This is, unfortunately in addition to just doing a tolerably good job of governing: health care reform, a national energy plan, and so on and so forth. 'Taint going to be easy at all, and I can practically guarantee that it's going to be uphill all the way.
"Voting guarantees consentizenship.
Would you like to know more?"
Call 1-800-IVO-TENO
What if they gave an election and nobody came? If the government is illegitimate, treat it as such. If the government is illegitimate, its elections are illegitimate. Treat them as such.
I will be voting in my state-and-local
elections. But federal? Not likely.
It is better to recognize that the 2 Party System serves The Enemy. Whether the 2PartySystem is merely planning a Martial Law response to coming economic and ecological collapses, or is also working to speed
up and direct those very collapses in order to benefit the Master Class is something I am not really smart enough
to say. I suspect the latter. I suspect operation Drown NOLA, operation Delay-Repair-Till-It-Falls, etc. are a taste of many such operations planned for the future. Energy wasted on Federal Politics would be better invested on personal survivalism and regional-local separationist survivalism.
Adding to what "Is it safe?" said in reply to "Byrd the Stampede".
I am certainly no expert but when talking "capabilities" I don't think we have any idea what they are. When it comes to optics, we reign supreme. Think the Hubble Telescope is the biggest eye in the sky we have? Wrong, it's one of the smaller ones and they aren't pointed out towards the stars. Some can pierce through those pesky clouds too. There have also been advances in AI such that your car can be automatically tracked from orbit and no it won't be some shlub from Reagent U. The Big Iron AI that will be tracking you won't need to rely on the GPS chip in your car or the one in your cell phone. It can recognize your car visually, in real time.
Feel safer already?
Data Mining. people tend to think that there is safety in numbers and in not standing out. This is no longer true when it comes to data mining. The software is extremely powerful and can sift through billions of bytes. But it isn't just a glorified database -- it makes connections. Data mining software can deduce who your friends are, who your associates are, who you are working for and whom you are working against. It does this by detecting patterns of behaviors. They don't need for you to make the call directly, it gets pulled out from the raw data.
Still feel safe?
And the military has been turned into the armed wing of the foaming-at-the-mouth Dominionists. No, doesn't make me feel safe at all.
Oh, BTW, this FISA doesn't sunset the way people think is does.
Balkinization
Thus, "acquisitions" authorized by Attorney General Gonzales will be permissible for one year, even if that period extends beyond the ostensible February 1, 2008 sunset date. I think it's fair to assume that the Attorney General will authorize a system of such acquisitions on or close to February 1, 2008, which will mean that the warrantless surveillance can continue until . . . February 1, 2009, or twelve days after the next President is sworn in.
Which means that long hoped for Dem win in the fall of 08 may well just evaporate into thin air. When a political party repeatedly aims for their own head, loads the shotgun and then pulls the trigger themselves you really have to be denial about what the problem it.
Finally, I still support Digby. She is one of the best out there. Yeah, I had to stop reading Arthur too. There is only so much unrelenting drepression and paranoia I can take even when he is right (and he hasn't always been). But I would like to see a little less hand wringing and more solutions. kthxbye
Cleverly put, as always, but who here is identifying Digby and Greenwald as enemies?
No one here. People elsewhere -- people whose first response to a crisis like this one is to take potshots at so-called "liberal" bloggers (even, or rather especially, when those "liberals" are actually a few miles left of American liberals). When, of course, the obvious case to be made about Democrats who voted to shred the Fourth Amendment is not that they are "liberal," but that they are not liberal enough.
When facing the emergence of tyranny, when does trading the flowers of one's wit for a more he-manly form of opposition become appropriate?
I honestly wouldn't know. I've never associated wit with flowers, myself.
Oh, wait, jm, I just clicked a few more links, and found that the son-of-a-medical-CEO who calls himself "Ioz" has written, in re Digby, "lady, are you really this fucking dumb?" It's funny, but He-Men like Ioz never used to sling that sort of shit this way back when they thought Digby was a man.
emal
"Because this is really pissing me off and if Bush's next step is to press further for immunity or any retroactivity of immunity and congress capitulates...I will be livid!"
Balkinization
Bush to Democratic Congress: Your Complete Capitulation is Not Good Enough
and also this from another commentator in a different thread
"It seems that even more than in the original FISA, there is much within the PAA amendment that is hidden in plain sight. And much of what is there may be a distraction.
Most of the actual work of the new amendment is done by the new section 105A added to FISA, which declares flatly, "Nothing in the definition of electronic surveillance under section 101(f) shall be construed to encompass surveillance directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United States."
Once that declaration is in force, the bulk of the rest is about the "additional procedure" added to FISA, which the DNI and AG "may" employ to authorize certain surveillance under a set of procedures it devises. In turn, under that authorization, the DNI and AG "may direct" telecoms, ISPs and other service providers to facilitate it.
Note that this is entirely optional! The government is not required to invoke it at all, or to apply it to all cases. And the key, operative declaration in 105A is not tied to it. The only real reason to use this "additional procedure" is to compel cooperation from the service providers."
Your Democratic Party at work for you.
Michael Berube: I am far more oppositional than Digby and Greenwald. I belong to the He-Man Left, which has always been more oppositional than any of you merely "kind of oppositional some of the time" libs.
Once again, the professor blesses us with his snark. Would be nice, at least one of these times, to actually get something constructive out of the exchange. Perhaps Mr. Berube could explain to us the many positive accomplishments of the Dems and the whole netroots movement these last few years?
Fuck people, this shit is not fucking rocket science. Slow down and think about it. The Republic is not ending. Your basic rights are still intact - in serious danger, yes, absolutely, but intact nonetheless.
The Democratic leadership and caucus were done for on this issuee of FISA "reform" no matter what, from the very start. Bush/Cheney/Rove knew that, have set it up to play out this way for quite some time, and they held the cards close to their vest until it was time to play them. Fuck, it's not that hard to see it. Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, Kenny.
All of the fall out from FISA "reform" passing simply proves it, from the crowing of the GOP, to the way Kos is calling the Dems out as cowards to Digby's frustrated posting today...
Keep FISA "reform" from passing and then what? Face the wrath of the President using his bully pulpit to spit in your face every fucking day, every GOP Congressperson and Senator AND the god damned GOP whirlygig noise machine blowing it back in their faces for not just the next month or two, but for the next god damned year, not to mention the grave and "serious" editorials that would have resulted across the nation, calling out Democrats as weak on terror. You know it would have happened that way. Just admit it and move on.
Allow FISA "reform" to pass and then what? Face the wrath of the base/netroots (same difference these days) and just hope it all blows over quickly because the Democratic party, fucked up and sick as it is, is still a better option than the GOP - and of course face the "serious" editorials condeming their captiulation to the President - and meanwhile the base/netroots becomes even more alientaed from the Dem leadership and gets more pissed off and feels even more powerless.
Classic game of Catch 22 and perfectly played by the GOP and the Dem leadership knew they were fucked. No choice but to let it come to a vote. Us fuckwits out here keep misunderestimating the President and thinking he's an idiot, and for that he keep MAKING. US. PAY. Are you sick of it yet? What are you gonna do about it? I dunno, I'm with Digby. What can you do?
Just don't fucking GIVE UP. That's the death of you and me and our freedeoms - when we give up - not this stupid fucking vote.
ALL GOP members and only a small smattering of Dems vote "aye" and it's all the fault of the Democrats - you people have bought into it, too, you're sitting around bitching about the Democrats, just like Bush wants you to do - and that's how the White House planned this vote to turn out from the start. Fucking brilliant and sick. Grow up, get a spine, and move the fuck on.
Don't be too hard on yourself Digs, in the first place it is pretty well documented by the kossacks how the Democratic House leadership dropped the ball after being stabbed in the back by Vice Admiral Bullshit O'connell, spy extrodinaire, on the good bill. It's the Republican'ts bearing sandbags thing I observed months ago along with a few million other blog truckers.
On the other hand as I noted in my flash post, Silber doesn't offer any alternatives or solutions. I don't blame him for not doing so either, as killing the beast or giving it a brain and heart transplant are both extremly difficult if not impossible tasks to accomplish.
So long as we have freedom of speech we shall win back all the rights lost due to incompetence or cowardice in our own time by our own politicians. As noted in FDL, these people do not listen to us unless compelled to do so, and how we compell that is through years of repetitive advocacy of a position, such as has been accomplished over the last four years.
Mr. Silber, and the democratic left and right would do well to remember not to be putting their armor on before a battle as though they are removing it returning from the fight. We may very well have to abandone both parties at some future point.
Have you considered the possibility that the NSA has been building files on all elected officials and that these files are being used for blackmail?
if osama really wanted to destroy our freedom, he's already won.
proud defenders of freedom we have here in this country.
Amazing writing! It is nice to hear you make a clear statement.
What is most difficult though is to come up with a , what do we do from here?
I am leaning towards a draft Feingold move. Best chance of success to counter this move towards fascism.
A third party seems all but impossible until you find the right person. For example when you watch Bloomberg, a guy with money and credibililty, and consider he could actually win the thing, We just need to find the right person on our side.
All things are possible within reason. But we stand on very shaky ground today.
The average voter is doped up on sports, entertainment and celebrity to the extent that 60-second commercials can sway an election.
It seems we have handed the bad guys the keys to the country.
The he said/she said TV thing when dealing with a bill that is only a few pages long and written in fairly straight-forward English (especially for a legal document) is maddening. You can read the bill in a couple of minutes and see quite clearly that it is not limited to foreign-to-foreign communications, not limited to non-citizens, and is much more than a tech fix. I doubt very seriously, given its loosey goosey language-- "reasonably believed"???? Reasonable to whom, and reviewed by whom? Apart from the AG and DNI, who the fuck knows?-- that it will even be confined to calls from Americans to overseas correspondents or vice versa, as opposed to completely domestic communications between Americans. The fact that the supporters of the bill have to lie about what it explicitly says tells you they know no sane person would actually support it. But then it gets presented as a "difference of interpretation" by the talking heads who have not taken the two minutes necessary to actually read the bill and call bullshit on the people misrepresenting it. Infuriating.
"ALL GOP members and only a small smattering of Dems vote "aye" and it's all the fault of the Democrats - you people have bought into it, too, you're sitting around bitching about the Democrats, just like Bush wants you to do..."
First of all, we all know the Republicans are bought and paid for whores. It's not the question. The point is, the fucking Dems are in the majority. You remember what that means? It means, for example, if you are a Republican speaker of the house, and you have a very popular bill that people love so much that Republicans AND Democrats want to vote for it, YOU PULL THE FUCKING BILL FROM THE FLOOR AND REWRITE IT SO THE DEMOCRATS CANNOT VOTE FOR IT. I don't hold that kind of bullshit out as a model, but just an example of exactly what it means to be in the majority of one of the houses of Congress. It doesn't mean you can accomplish everything, but it means shit does not get to the floor unless you and your caucus WANT IT TO.
Yes, the Republicans are a bunch of demons. We've known that for years. But letting the Dems off the hook for passing laws a Republican Congress would have been proud to pass-- provided not too many Democrats voted for it, of course-- doesn't accomplish a damn thing. And complain about the specific "defecting" Dems all you want, but people like Webb and and other Dems who hold slots that a Republican would normally have are not there to vote against bills like this. They are there to give the Democratic leadership the numbers to get to the majority-- SO THEY CAN FUCKING STOP BILLS LIKE THIS BEFORE THEY START. This was a Democratic Party action, not a "betrayal" or a "Catch 22" or a "vise" that the Dems got put in by the Republicans. Quit making excuses for the party leadership. They are complicit in the legalizing the police state, and if you think Hillary or Obama will end it when they get in the White House you are crazy. After all, they will have a midterm election coming in 2010, and they will not want to look weak on terra, right????
Jeff, the problem is both parties are bought and paid for. Just one example beyond health care, military spending, the environment, insurance and banking, look at the ease with which the auto industry's lackeys waltzed in at the last minute and took CAFE standards out of the energy bill. That shows the power of those corporations! Watch, it won't be too long before the domestic auto industry is asking for government assistance and will get it.
Call it fascism call it corporate control of government but it is here and it ain't going away anytime soon.
Great post, Digby. I think you've nailed it. And what runs through my mind now is simply this:
There's something happening here.
What it is ain't exactly clear.
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I've got to beware.
It's time to stop --
Children, what's that sound?
Everybody look what's going down...
CathiefromCanada:
How true is this article and others
like it? Is there a quiet establishment plan to "merge" the 3 NAFTA-zone countries into a "North American Union"?
Article here:
http://thefilter.ca/articles/can...-north-america/
and...
http://thefilter.ca/articles/can...-canada-mexico/
I am at my wits' end trying to deal with this catastrophe. It looks hopeless. But seeing the anger of Digby and the commenters on this thread is some small consolation.
If I could add one thing, I would say everyone should pay heed to the posts above by noen and Jeff in Texas.
Despite what Webb, Feinstein, and the BushCo propaganda machine are telling you: (1) there are no meaningful checks on the surveillance authorized by this Act, and (2) the surveillance authorized by this Act will not expire in six months, regardless of whether congressional Dems grow a spine and block reauthorization.
The "six months" selling point so dishonestly being purveyed by Webb, Feinstein, Pelosi, and Reid is particularly despicable. As noen points out, the Act states very clearly that the legality of any surveillance authorized during the next six months will not be affected by the Act's sunset. The people implying anything different are flat out lying to you -- don't buy it.
Don't take my word for it: Lederman
.
Why isn't it considered unAmerican to ask, to consider for even a moment that the Constitution could ever be "a suicide pact?"
Indeed, anyone who spews that line pretty much admits they're not willing to put their ass on the line for the very concepts they parrot on a daily basis.
There are certain ideals and ethics that I, if necessary, would put my body on the line for. Pretty much anyone who has ever fought in a revolution, uprising, revolt, or even a piddly little political riot has chosen to put their physical well-being and safety aside in favour of standing up for what they view as a better future.
The Constitution, to be anything more than just words on a page, must be a suicide pact of sorts--if the people who are supposed to live out those ideals aren't willing to stand up and possibly die in the defence of them, what do those words matter? If people aren't willing to struggle for liberty, solidarity, peace, and other hallmarks of a mature sentient species, then we don't even deserve to speak of them, because they aren't really ideals and ethical guidelines; they're just pretty phrases spoken to make ourselves feel better when we screw up and fall short.
Put simply, actions speak louder than words.
If we're going to waste our energy and resources killing and subjugating each other, perhaps history will see fit to forget about us, or enshrine us as an example for the next intelligent lifeform to come along of what not to do. With that in mind, talking about freeance and peance means nothing if we're not willing to sacrifice our comfort for it when necessary. That applies to all people, and it goes beyond a constitution or The Constitution or whatever other words are printed on a page. Either we hold certain truths to be self-evident, or we don't and are lying to ourselves.
Continuing from the previous stream of consciousness... consider the current boogeymen. Say Osama/Bush tries to have me killed because I think theocracy/empire is a piss-poor form of governance and he really should keep his religious law/imbecilic worldview to himself. If I die, fine then--I'm out of the way and won't be around for the aftermath, which will provide more evidence (perhaps) that humans aren't fit to go on. If I live, then I can continue resisting whatever Osama--or Bush, or Harper, or Putin--wishes to impose upon me and my comrades, and perhaps prove to myself at least that we, as a whole, do deserve to go on, that we just might get better after all of these mistakes and screwups and malicious stunts.
That's all I can muster for tonight.
RU Reddy -- the go-to progressive Canadian blogger on all things North-American-Union-related is Alison at Creekside. She blogs at http://creekside1.blogspot.com/
The Canadian progressive bloggers are all somewhat concerned about "creeping continentalism" issues but it is Alison who follows it most closely. Some individuals in the Conservative party (who now lead our minority government) plus some corporate and business types are gung-ho for customs union, monetary union, etc but many of the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois are opposed so I don't think our Prime Minister Steven Harper or the Foreign Affairs minister Mackay could get this through parliament.
This spring the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc all stood firm against extending some of the worst of the new security provisions we adopted after 9/11, in spite of Harper's fearmongering and trying to paint everyone as cowards -- it was hard for Dion in particular to hold the Liberal caucus together, but for the most part he did. As a result the security provisions lapsed. So I have some hope that Harper would not be able to push any type of union through Parliament either.
It's officially over, the dream is dead. I used to love and respect this country, now I don't even know it.
Once one has bought into the idea that there is a war to "wage" on "terrorism", one has already lost the debate.
It should be worth repeating that in the end a "terrorist" bent on doing harm may be found by tapping into a conversation, but odds are a well trained "terrorist" will not even use language that would cause a software trigger to trigger.
Gadzooks, you can bet there are going to be row after row of mainframes and server farms combing through billions of haystacks looking for the right haystack to ponder, if we are take seriously the notion they are eally interested in phone calls...
It would be better to debate why are billions upon billions are still slated to let the NSA continue using a model of information gathering more suited to the cold war and a time when an opposing nation state sole purpose was to hide it's plans... would be even remotely useful in fighting "terrorism" - did the hijackers on 9/11 call anybody overseas ???
Should we not ask this simple question - I bet they didn't ever do it once...there was no need to.
Laws being debated like this seem to be more of a reason to justify the budget of the NSA and other things it may be doing and little to do with fighting "terrorism".
As to the folly of spending billions more on a black hole like the NSA it would seem to me more sobering questions should be asked.
It would be better to look back and see how a past democracy reacted and what it did to fight the "terrorists"
of that day and age:
Message to the UK from Edward R. Murrow
In 1946, Edward R. Murrow reminisced about his years spent reporting WW2 from Britain. At first he didn't care for the weather, the roads or cooking. He said, "I admired your history, doubted your future and suspected that the historians had merely agreed upon a myth. But always there was something that escaped me. Always there remained in the back of a youthful and undisciplined mind the suspicion that I might be wrong."
Murrow continued....
About nine years ago, being persuaded that war was inevitable, I came here to live. Now I am going home and the BBC have asked this reporter to remember. This might go on for a week, but I must try to speak of those things that are riveted upon my memory not because they are important or profound but because they represent things of great value which I shall be taking back with me.
I believe that I have learned the most important thing that has happened in Britain during the last six years. It was not, I think, the demonstration of physical courage, that has been a cheap commodity in this war. Many people of many nations were brave under the bombs.
I doubt that the most important thing was Dunkirk or the Battle of Britain, El Alamein or Stalingrad. Not even the landings in Normandy or the great blows struck by British and American bombers. Historians may decide that any one of those events was decisive, but I am persuaded that the most important thing that happened in Britain was that this nation chose to win or lose this war under the established rules of parliamentary procedure. It feared Naziism, but did not choose to imitate it. The government was given dictatorial power, but it was used with restraint, and the House of Commons was ever vigilant. Do you remember that while London was being bombed in the daylight, the House devoted two days to discussing conditions under which enemy aliens were detained on the Isle of Man? Though Britain fell, there were to be no concentration camps here.
Do you remember that two days after Italy declared war an Italian citizen convicted of murder in the lower court appealed successfully to the highest court in the land and the original verdict was set aside? There was still law in the land regardless of race, nationality or hatred. Representative government, equality before the law survived.
Future generations who bother to read the official record of proceedings in the House of Commons will discover that British armies retreated from many places, but that there was no retreat from the principles for which your ancestors fought. The record is massive evidence of the flexibility and toughness of the principles you profess.
It will, I think, inspire and lift men's hearts long after the names of most of the great sea and land engagements have been forgotten. It was your answer to the question that was asked all around the world in the decades before that Sunday in September of 1939. The question was, "What has happened to the soul of Britain?" Your answer was conclusive and I have been privileged to see an entire people give the reply to tyranny that their history demanded of them.
( Edward R. Murrow - Feb. 1946.)
Jeff in Texas is what's referred to as a useful idiot.
Jeff, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY controls the congress. NOTHING gets voted on unless they schedule a vote for it. If they ONLY wanted their own bill to be voted on, they could have blocked the white house bill from ever being debated. They didn't. That means they wanted it to pass, and all of this hand wringing is them attempting to cover their asses.
I'm sorry, but if any of you continue to vote for the Democratic party after this, you're part of the problem. You're just going into willful denial because you, like digby here, just don't know what to do. Or, to put it more honestly, you don't want to do what you know has to be done.
"respected champions of civil rights and liberties"?!
They are not, whatever their past record. They voted to violate our unalienable rights. They, like the Bush administration, are tyrants.
Read the Declaration of Independence. People form governments to protect their unalienable rights; and when a government becomes destructive of those rights, it is the duty of the people to abolish it.
soullite-- Have you read my posts here and elsewhere? My entire point is that the Democrats decide what comes to the floor, and therefore are now complicit in the worst of the Bush administration's crimes. I think you have me confused with someone making excuses for the Democrats.
What Michael says is true. You should see the things I said about Jonah Goldberg before I found out he was a man!
syvanen: I find it pretty idiotic that you've just tarred all service members with the same brush. I've served, and yet I consider myself to be a left-wing libertarian, pro-individual and anti-formal social institutions.
Way to think in simple terms like the authoritarians do, syvanen.
Well! I don't believe them... If the threat of attack was so imminent, so serious, then it would go without saying that they should have remained in session -- for such an extraordinary 'gutting' of the Constitution... Unbelievable gullibility.
What Michael says is true. You should see the things I said about Jonah Goldberg before I found out he was a man!
I'm sure they were very robust things, and concluded with the exceptionally intelligent observation that government is not your friend.
I wish I could still convey a sense of disgust regarding the interview I thankfully missed over at the Newshour. I had been advised by a professor to catch the show way back in the summer of 2001. I had enjoyed it for some time, however I suppose somewhere near the mid-point of this atrocious presidency I found I could no longer tolerate it. Not sure why exactly, perhaps it was all that pressure CPB was putting on PBS to be more “centrist” and “balanced”. Maybe its decline is simply linked to the addition of Judy Woodruff whom I thought reflected the professionalism of CNN rather well. In any event I’m rather curious to know how this “fascist gasbag” Bryan Cunningham finagled his way onto the set. I did a simple Ask.com search on this fellow and found this:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/c..._of_characters/
That’s quite a pantheon of veracity and integrity to be amongst.
...but it is true that I continue to support Democrats generally. I honestly don't know what else to do.
Don't support Democrats "generally". Support specific Democrats. Help get the Republican-lite Democrats out of the Democratic Party (or diminish their influence).
Statements like Webb's & Feinstein's are utter bullcrap on nearly every level.
Can these people not grasp that Bush makes up intelligence to suit the case he wants to make? What was especially suspicious was the timing of this push. Bush specifically waited for the recess to ram this through. That should have set off alarm bells in any sentient creature.
And what kind of intelligence was it? It couldn't have been anything specific. If it was specific, Bush wouldn't have needed Congress to amend anything, and Webb & Feinstein would know that. That means it must have been vague, general scare stories.
So the net of this story is that the worst and least popular president in American history, waves some vague and nebulous pimped out intelligence under their noses, and Webb & Feinstein suddenly get the vapors?
It seems incredible. Literally. I don't believe it. I think both Webb and Feinstein are lying through their teeth to cover their smarmy asses so their vote won't affect their fundraising.
Options:
1. Craven cowards and utter morons at the same time.
2. Crypto-fascists
3. Self-centered, greedy plutocrats who care only about keep their Senatorial entitlement so they can line their pockets at the public expense.
I tend to discount #1. I'm having a hard time coming up with any others.
I'm going to rerun my remarks I made over at Avedon's Sideshow here:
I can only stress that the Democrats are a US national party with a liberal wing, not a liberal party. The Republicans, unfortunately, no longer have a liberal wing. This makes the Democrats a better choice than the Republicans (usually), but it doesn't, alas, make them my party.
Work for electoral reform!
Mr. Donut | 08.07.07 - 10:51 pm | #
Yes, it's all the fault of the "Repugs." They MADE the Democrats comply. Those "Repugs" have so much POWER! They can force an entire Congress to kowtow to them!
Right.
Hey Donut, I suggest you put down your Krispy Kreme and get a clue. The Democrats ENJOY the "Rethugs", they agree with them, they have no problem giving Mr Bush what he wants.
It's probably a nice secure fantasy to believe your saintly noble Democrats have been bullied.
But it's still a fantasy.
Of course, if you have solid, convincing proof that (1) the "Rethugs" have such immense power that they can force the Democrats to do ANYTHING, and (2) the Democrats were so forced,
then I'd love to read about it.
I think a lot of people would love to read about it.
So far, all I hear from the whiners who call themselves "liberal" and/or "progressive" is EXCUSES for the complicity of the Democrats.
On what facts are those EXCUSES based?
Wet fingers in the wind?
Consulting a Ouija Board?
Going to a Palm Reader?
Asking the stars in the sky?
Reading tea leaves?
People eager to fix America WANT TO KNOW why the Democrats have been so complicit.
But some of us already know.
And we pity folks like you, because despite the glaring evidence that shines all around, you insist on giving free rein to a delusion.
Pity.
Shargash,
Your Number 3 solution is almost completely perfect. But you limit it to Senators. In truth your phrase should be "Congressman".
Where's the evidence that ANY member of Congress desires to stop the Bush-Cheney Crime Syndicate?
Ron Paul's and Dennis Kucinich's votes?
Dennis Kucinich's weak-sauce attempt at getting his impeachment bill onto the floor?
Or maybe the many excuses of Pelosi, Reid and Company on how they really want to help Americans but they need to focus on 2008's elections?
Jeff in Texas | 08.08.07 - 12:19 am | #
Not quite.
1) NOT ALL Republicans are bought & paid for. Didn't your mommy teach you to avoid using categoricals? In this case, you should remember that you do not know the facts about every Republican in America. But if you mean only in the Congress, then...
2) The Democrats are just as prostituted to money and power influence as are the Republicans. The only way you can believe that the Democrats are different is to entertain a fantasy, to ignore the truth, to simply deny reality.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't deny reality. I'm sure that makes it very easy for you to sit back and blame everything on "Rethugs" and "Repugs" while sighing and grieving over how those "Rethugs" FORCED your noble and heroic Democrats to do something against their will.
Denial -- arguably the most powerful human psychological construct.
And it's on display here in Digbyland!
I agree with you, Digby. It was no accident. The Dem leadership wanted this to happen. They didn't get punked. No one could possibly be that stupid. My senator (Feinstien) voted for it. I think she needs to be replaced with a democrat. My other senator(Boxer) didn't vote at all which is really, really weird and my rep (Lantos) also refrained from voting. He needs to go too. His staff are very secretive and he doesn't provide a telephone system that allows you to leave messages. He behaves more like the baron of San Mateo than the congressman.
Gosh, all these new names coming in with such wisdom to either scatter to new parties, start a revolution or ...something.
I am beginning to lose the ability to discern the difference between concern trolls, despair trolls and panic trolls.
Paid or not, it is coordinated and predictable. It is happening on several blogs and at DU. Fake lefty anarchists -with purest of motives- say to give it all up, or you're just naive complicit tools.
"BOO. Scatter lefties. It is hopeless!"
I smell something Rovian.
We are being played.
Call me naive - I don't give a shit.
That is just another play.
"Both parties are equal." Just another play.
College Republican playbook 101. feh.
Karl Rove and the Dick are laughing their asses off.
I smell something Rovian.
We are being played.
Call me naive - I don't give a shit.
No, I call you a paranoid whackjob. Idiots like you have been seeing Rove's pudgy shadow behind everything for years, as if he's a fucking deity. Anytime something seemed to be going badly for the Republicans - it's a trap! If we go for it and make hay over it, Rove's gonna spring the trap and make us look foolish! He always had a plan, always thought three or four steps ahead of us, always had a nasty surprise up his sleeve. Until, you know, last fall showed that he was just as human as anyone else.
People like you are so afraid of uncertainty and chaos that you'd rather imagine an evil genius controlling everything, because at least that way someone's in charge, and nothing happens by accident!
What do you think is more likely - that a bunch of people are tired of being told by Atrios and Kos to send money to elect people like Herseth and Webb only to see them turn around and enable the Bushies, thus setting the stage for the next group of savior Democrats who need your money and support, ad infinitum? Or that the Republicans, who have their hands full just trying to keep their alibis straight, have the time and coordination to send a bunch of paid trolls to infilitrate comment threads? Jesus Christ, lay off the wacky weed already and get real.
I'm just waiting for the day when the first interrogation question is: if you are innocent, how do you explain the fact of your arrest?
Welcome to the fold. Glad to see that you have come to see the Democrats for what they are - the NJ Generals to the Republicans Harlem Globetrotters.
I, like you, wonder where do we go from here? Knowing that the there is no opposition party, what our are options? Personally, I am tired of the lesser of two evils.
I've said it on other forums but I will reinterate that I feel that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid let this come up for a vote not only to defend against the charge weak on Defense thing I think that they wanted to show the Impeachment crowd that it isn't that simple, they are going to go after the 41 to get it in House. And that doesn't do anything about the Senate. They are going to have to convince what 16 or 20 Republicans in the Senate. I'm not saying it's impossible but it is going to take some hard work to get these bums to do their jobs. I wonder how many of the pro impeachment types have even writen a letter to their congressmen let alone their senators. How about a lawn sign, answer the phone with Impeach Bush... letters to editor... there is a lot we have to do to convince them that Impeachment on that last day of his term is important. We must in a rational way work our collective asses off if this is something important, otherwise shut up.
Did I mention even if you have republican representative or senator is important to tell them how important. They are likely in the neighborhood as are on recess. Press the flesh and tell them how you feel. Make em sweat and explain how they are going to vote. Right now they think all they have to do is nothing. Convince them it's real important. I've been telling Tom Reynolds(NY 26th) since 2003. I might be wasting my time but its important to me. If I hear one more sniveliing coward tell me their worried about blowback I'm going to puke.
Was Webb enjoying his LSD flashback, or am I?
"respected champions of civil rights and liberties"
Only the cleanest, hallucinatory substances could possibly lead that idiot to these words.
9 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
