Glenn is more than equal to responding himself to your supercilious Critical Parent clucking, and will probably have done so by the time I crank up this screed-- but I share Glenn's fury at lame rationalizations or speculations on why Obama may be weighlessing in on this vital issue at a critical moment-- perhaps the critical moment.

I appreciate that those who have become enthralled by Obama generally view him as a political phenomenon-- the Tiger Woods of the political playing field, to make a too-obvious comparison. Ostensibly one of his special abilities, or super-powers, is his predilection for fading in and out of sight, rather like the Cheshire Cat in "Alice in Wonderland".

Thus, supporters who are process-obsessed, self-styled rational political pragmatists assert that Obama's "present" votes, or no-shows, or other elusive actions that concern or disappoint non-zealots are actually virtuoso dance steps that further his plans, and thus ultimately redound to the good of all. (And besides, consider the alternatives!)

All that is as may be, but trying to make a silk purse out of a noncommittal Obama tongue by speculating that he's observing protocol, or preserving the comity necessary for progress between adversarial political blocs is outrageous and aggravating. As is "Change You Can Believe In-- When Not Crowded by Circumstances".

If Glenn "snapped out", as we used to put it, it's because of the cumulative comments disputing that Obama needs to stand up and make a special effort in this eleventh hour to boldly proclaim that legislation undermining the Constitution and the rule of law is impermissible, and must be forcefully opposed regardless of the inconvenience of the crisis occurring during campaign season.

In short, he is a captain or leader who ought to be in the breach, instead of drifting aloft like a parade float offering the lip-service of his stated positions against telecom amnesty and unfettered government surveillance. And the time is now.

So it's perfectly cromulent to ask aloud in this thread, "Shit, is there anything Obama can do-- or not-do-- to deserve criticism and negative consequences?"

What's particularly amazing about this whole process is that the House leadership unveiled this bill for the first time today -- and then scheduled the vote on it for tomorrow. No hearings. Nothing. They all have less than 24 hours to "read" the bill and decide whether to eviscerate the rule of law and the Fourth Amendment. -- [Update IV]

___________________________________________________

This circumstance depressingly recalls the scene in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11", when John Conyers admitted that Congressmen don't always have time to read what they vote on-- especially 1200-page omnibuses like The Patriot Act.

Though I haven't seen the film since I saw it during its first release, I well recall the way Conyers facetiously "educated" the interviewer (Moore, I guess) with a twinkle in his eye rising to the level of an incipient wink.

At the time, I still thought that Conyers was one of the Good Ones who would hit the ground running as soon as the Democrats got a leg up. So I found his droll, knowing style charming. But in the intervening years, it's become plain that he really is a rogue-- and a charlatan, and a scoundrel.

It seemed somehow cute then that Conyers would admit to the absurd and farcical circumstance of legislators not actually reading the legislation they were enacting into law. But it really wasn't very cute, in retrospect. It's an affirmation that the fix is in.

And we can't lay this off on the criminal maladministration and the corrupt and decadent Republic Party with which it is intertwined. This appalling and reprehensible circumstance arises from the transformation of Congress and the Executive Branch into a para-corporate symbiont, in which political power and financial power are hot-wired together without the insulation of principle to counter the serious hazard that results.

So not only have they obviously planned to take another dive, they don't even mind if it's transparently obvious that they're dogging it. The hubris of power! The dirty deal goes forward inexorably (so far), and the political leaders enabling it simply offer a few patently false, evasive, ambiguous, equivocal and flatly inane comments in the face of massive public opposition.

So now the memory of Conyers' whimsical cop-out is more disquieting than funny.