Yes all those reasons are valid for hating GWB and Co. and yes they surely are criminal in my book but I am not willing to sacrifice a hopeful future for a vengeful present.

-- magno68

I'm curious to know what kind of hopeful future you think we'll have if this precedent setting criminality is allowed to stand? No fear of being held to account will stop a future president from lying us into another preemtive war. No fear of being held to account will stop a future president from illegally spying on us. (and if Bush gets his way, this sort of spying will not only become legal, he'll be exempt from prosecution for the spying he's already engaged in) Perhaps you feel comfortable that the next occupant of the WH will overturn the abusive powers accumulated by the current criminal, but I'm not willing to put so much trust in politicians.

As for Nancy Pelosi, is she actively blocking efforts at impeaching members of the criminal organization known as "The Bush Administration" for the sake of non-existant legislative victories? If so, she should go down in history as the worst sort of collaborator.

*The best thing for the Dem base to do is to act as one, forgetting horserace driven, republican licking "reporting", and elect Dennis Kucinich as president, and rid ourselves once and for all of every spineless, whimpering, corrupt, base-attacking party member on the slate.

*that is, if we can actually achieve a fair election sans electronic voting machines, caging, and vote list purging.

As for the third-party advocates, or plague-on-both-their-houses, I-refuse-to-support-either-party folks, I have some sympathy for them, but I continue to think that they're paying an awfully high price to retain their moral purity.

-- William Timberman

I continue to think that the price for moral purity in this instance is far more worth it than the price eventually to be paid by those who enable the enablers.

Besides, what price are we paying, exactly, when we abandon the Democratic Party? Getting called "purists" by *serious* pundits and pragmatic-to-the-point-of-immorality finger waggers is akin to having your name on Nixons enemies list back in the day-a badge of honor.

This is not a criticism of you, dear Mr. Timberman, I'm just sayin'.

by all means, read it if you really must....

Ugh

Its pieces like these in the Times that make me want to cancel my subscription.

-- MrEdCT

...but I have no idea why people who have become accustomed to Glenn Greenwald and others in the blogosphere would continue to financially support the propaganda rag the NYT has become. After all, Glenn reads it so we don't have to.

Cancel all msm subscriptions and boycott all cable and broadcast "news" shows. That will teach them. Really.

exist for one reason-to provide cover for the murderous schemes dreamed of in the tiny little minds of right hawks. Every time the O'Hanlons of the world put pen to paper, war-mongers point and shout "See, even liberals think this is a good thing". I wonder if Mr. O'Hanlon et al are proud of the role they play in enabling the conscienceless cowards who love to send the children of poor and working people off to fight and die in their feverish war fantasies come to life?

Whatever. The Dems are all about toothless paper tigers that do not mean shit.

You better hide under your desks Democrats, your base is *this close* to exploding all over your asses.

Well, in all fairness...

...it's kinda tough to effectuate ideology in this country without getting elected.

-- DF of MN

...it's kinda tough to get elected if your base hates your goddamned guts because you're a bunch of spineless cowards who put your congressional seatS ahead of what's good for the country. Get a clue you effing idiots, YOU CAN'T GET ELECTED IF YOU DON'T GROW A SPINE AND DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE COUNTRY!

I don't give a flying f*&^ about Pelosi's political calculations or how she will look to the msm if she pushes impeachment. I don't give a flying f*&^ about all that legislation ("higher priorities") that gets vetoed anyway.

GO CINDY!!

..is that I believe almost without doubt that such judicial restraint from the 6th Circuit would not have been forthcoming had it been President Bill Clinton publicly admitting to spying on US citizens. Courts ruled his SS agents could testify to events and activities that had up to that time been off limits, while the courts have ruled recently that Dick Cheney could keep secret vital public business. The dichotomy is striking, and hardly the only example.

Thank you jayackroyd and Paul Rosenberg. I needed a good cry this morning.

the rest of the world has had their eyes opened by the naked aggressions of the Bush regime. When many folks here in the US began to learn about and understand what Bush was up to, it helped to put things in perspective with a more critical reading of history. In school, we get the rah-rah version of US history, and many countries who get monetary aid from us for things like education do as well. (Not to mention aggresive pro American propaganda efforts by the CIA in large parts of the world) While Bush was launching a brutal war of aggression, he and the US as a whole, through it's international media, were calling other countries "evil". This gulf between reality and the Official Version of reality might lead one to read A People's History of the United States(or blogs, or alternative newspapers,etc) to get the real scoop, and therefore form opinions quite at variance with long held perceptions.