Matt, it's nice to see you here. Welcome!

Ondolette, you're on a roll. Thanks for the information, action ideas, and the bumper stickers are truly outstanding.

RMP, I am reluctant to join you speculating about our withdrawal from Iraq and derail the thread. I would point to one post of Scott Horton's regarding the numbers of Contract Soldiers as a proportion of military troops in Iraq. It seems staggering to me. The two embedded graphs are worth a quick look. This would seem to complicate any discussion of what it means to withdraw.

http://harpers.org/archive/2008/01/hbc-90002153

This is one of those times when a link would be appreciated rather than the whole treatise. Really.

I can't help but note the number of letters on this post compared to the one just below it.

It's a good thing Glenn doesn't see it as a zero sum game. Personally, I think it's free riders. Or, folks could be lurking, and feeling helpless. I can come up with other scenarios, too. That's why I hope when people post action links, others cruising by (hoping that by putting their fingers in their ears and singing, la la la la) will be moved to at least sign a petition.

Anyone who thinks these issues of wiretapping, habeas, basket warrants, etc is going to go away by simply electing a Democratic President - don't care which one it is - is wishing for a diamond-studded pony.

I see nuffing !! (-Sgt. Shultz)

I hear nuffing!!

I noes nuffing

You talkin' to me?

And, Glenn's right. If the media cared to make this an issue, maybe things would be different. But, the media has categorized the issues related to FISA on the same shelf as John Edwards' campaign. Who's John Edwards, anyway?

DCLaw1: What I do find very funny (in an unintentional way) about this latest comment of yours is that if you knew the slightest thing about what I do for a living, day in and day out...

Letting my imagination run with that a bit, perhaps, you're entitled to some recreation. Maybe a lot of recreation. No offense taken here.

Arthurdecco, I respect, appreciate, and share your anxiety for the rest of the world. That is the one aspect of the current administration that threatens to take me over the edge. Some have pointed to our Constitution as the source of the deficiencies you allude to by saying we're only treating the symptoms. Some would call a Constitutional Convention right NOW. Others, like me, are a little more fearful given that we aren't fully aware of the parameters of the treachery that has been done within our own borders, or have a full knowledge of the treachery that has been wreaked on the rest of the world.

I won't plead for your patience since it would be reasonable for your patience to have been exhausted, as well as your good will. But, we won't get it fixed with a single election, either. I don't like the thought of an incremental approach advanced by some of our Democratic candidates. However, as much as I yearn for a huge step forward, we really can't afford a huge step in reverse; nor, can the rest of the world.

In order to prevail, the proponents of retroactive immunity still have to convince 60 or more senators to vote to end a filibuster of this bill. I will not be one of them.

Thanks for sharing that Paul Dirks. I read that critical sentence as, Obama supports the opposition to retroactive immunity. Someone will filibuster (Dodd, not sure who else). Obama will not be among those (the 60) who will have to vote affirmatively to end a filibuster. Although Obama will not be among those who vote in favor breaking the filibuster, he also suggests he will not participate in the filibuster itself.

Does someone else read it differently?

Jailed drug dealer gets a chance with the Supreme Court

By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Newspapers

Posted on Friday, January 18, 2008

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/24930.html

I left a message at all three of the campaign websites:

http://www.johnedwards.com/about (contact link is in the upper left corner)

http://www.hillaryclinton.com (contact link in the bottom right hand corner)

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/contact/ (use the blue button labeled "Other Thoughts and Questions")

requesting that they support Chris Dodd with their presence to defend against telecom immunity and basket warrants. I indicated that I will know who is worthy of the oath of the office of President by their efforts to directly support the Constitution. They could demonstrate their worthiness by their presence and participation in Dodd's filibuster. Everything else is just words.

I assumed as much. The links were for anyone who might lurk and be prompted to act if it were made fairly straightforward.

Just be patient, bethincary. If the nomination goes to someone other than Hillary - you ain't seen nothin' yet. They'll have to work up some new routines, but it won't be difficult for them. If Obama, the fun began sometime last week, didn't it? One locally prominent banker went so far as to say, "Well, if Obama gets the nomination we won't be able to call it the White House anymore." Heh. That with a former university president (who is African Ameican) in the audience. If Edwards, you know it'll be one lawyer joke after another.

"We should, I suppose, be thankful that the media haven't even decided which Republican candidate they're going to forcefeed us."

Er, Thadeus, they may have made their choice. I believe they are busy holding a coronation for John McCain.

See: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/12/king/index.html

as one example. Start watching and I think you'll detect the same from others in addition to John King.