I contributed $100 to Dodd today. It's not much but it is what a retired man on a modest pension can do--along with other contributions regularly to MoveOn and the ACLU.

I happen to live in Connecticut, which happens to be the home (today, at least) of the best and the worst United States Senators.

My belief is that the real significance of the Dodd "hold" will turn out to be it's effects on the Democratic primaries, and not on what happens in the Senate. For the hold to have an effect there, it would need some support from the so-called leadership.

If there is a real effect, it will happen only when (and if) Dodd persistently challenges the likes of Obama, Clinton, and Edwards to take a strong public stand.

Here's the letter I just sent to Senator Dodd. The letter I wish many people would send to their Senators and Congressmen is at http://mistahcharley.blogspot.com/2007/10/open-letter-to-every-congressman.html

=============================================

Senator Dodd -

Yes, most of the people who want freedom to be more than just a word are supportive of your action on this FISA atrocity.

I hope that there will be an American Reformation - and I mean that in a sense which is both spiritual and political, though NOT religious.

The corruption of our military-industrial-congressional-financial complex is so pervasive that it seems like business as usual to those who are swimming in it. Although the Republic - the "body politic" - is in a coma, there are many cells that remain alive (to continue the analogy) - citizens who long to take on the responsibilities of citizens, not just consumers and taxpayers and order-followers, and who "hunger and thirst after righteousness" - to borrow a phrase from a best-selling book of centuries ago, which retains its relevance today.

Senator Dodd, if you are willing to take on this task, go for it. But if you do it with the seriousness it both deserves and needs, you will find many of your "friends" will drop away. A comfortable cruise - and fear of what will happen if they rock the boat and bite the hand that feeds them - is what has made most of your colleagues in Congress reluctant to live up to their sworn oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC.

So you will lose "friends" if you continue on this path. On the other hand, you will know you have done the right thing - and in the words of Mark Twain, long a citizen of Connecticut -

"Always do right - this will gratify some people, and astonish the rest."

Obviously we cannot ALWAYS do right - but a serious effort to do so now, at this crucial time, while the Republic lies on its deathbed (or is it just a sickbed? - let's hope) will astonish many people, and gratify some of us.

That was informative Glenn. Thanks for posting it. A good basic explanation of how this works.

They're a derivative of the Senate's preference for operating under unanimous consent.

Apparently one of few items still left in the "Gentlemen's Agreement" that deliniated civil interactions in the Senate in the Pre-GaD (Gingrich and Delay) Era.

You get another Senator's back on something stupid, because one day you'll need him to get yours on something equally stupid.

New gang in the hood? Capitol Hill Crypts anyone?

Implied in that is the hint that I will make everyone sorry they brought it up if they don't just give me what I want, and they know by now that any Senator can do that, so they might as well just go ahead and hold it, for the sake of everyone's sanity.

The legislation, authored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tx.), overcame a hold placed by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Az) on behalf of Alberto Gonzales' Justice Department.

Freedom of Information Reform Bill Passes Senate

August 4, 2007

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20070804/index.htm

So that was Kyl running around waving his little arms and stamping his tiny feet then back in August? And, unless I'm remembering incorrectly, he kept his name secret too. For a while. Dodd is out there in their faces on this.

If you hold this bill, Russ, I will hold everything you introduce, filibuster everything you want to do, object to every unanimous consent request you make, and generally nuke you for as long as I'm here in the Senate. And I'll get my friends to do it, too, and there will be enough of us that you'll never be able to single us out for retribution.

So basically it comes down to what the current 'rules of engagement' are in the Senate. And those RoE have been severely eroded, warped or systematically destroyed during the course of the Gad Era. The Repubs dare the Dems, sometimes even slap them in the face, and the Dems always flinch. Almost like one of those scripted smackdowns you see on the WWF.

But someone with a vested interest in seeing the bill passed could, theoretically, decide to go nuclear, and start holding all of Dodd's bills. Which might in turn inspire a Dodd ally to retaliate and start holding that other Senator's bills. And so on, and so on, and so on.

In their world view, the only way to ensure nuclear detente is to convince the other side that your weapons are on a par with theirs. Dodd has decided to call them on their bully's bluff. I will support that in any way I can.

Great job, Glenn. You and Chris Dodd have replaced Howard Dean and Barbra Streisand as my political heroes.

One literally forgets what it's like to see elected officials responding to their constituents and standing up for their principles.

It's been so long since anything remotely like this has happened, that you quite literally forget that it's even possible. Every time a politician (or, really, any public figure) takes a stand for something, we automatically just think, "Great gesture, but someone will stop him/her. There is no way that 'they' will let this happen."

This kind of thinking is so poisonous and yet so insidious. Considering the ever-present Gore question, I am constantly thinking, "There's too much at stake for them to let him run, let alone 'letting' him win." Whenever a politician makes a speech about what should be done, I just instantly conclude, "great idea, but there's no way anyone will let him vote that way." (I've already caught myself anticipating a Howard-Dean-like flameout for Dodd, based on the poisonous mind-set that I'm describing, that we're all prone to.)

The Bush Era makes one literally forget that these people are elected representatives of the people who are free to vote and speak however they choose, based on their interpretation of their moral obligations and their constituents' wishes. (It's like that scene in The Untouchables when Costner and Connery have the temerity to actually go arrest the bootleggers whom everyone knows are operating in plain sight.) You can just hear all the Georgetown party buzz that has to be going on right now: "Who is this Dodd weasel? Who does he think he is? Somebody straighten him out.

My God, what have we come to? Is this the beginning of the way out, or just a respite from the storm?