this requires Democrats to grow a pair. divadab

When oh when are we going to see the Democrats enforce some accountability?

-- Caligula would have blushed

Democrats would have to hold themselves accountable for their own part in this.

For example, what is Biden doing - he who led those disgraceful Sen hearings on Iraq in 2002, then authorized the invasion - blathering about how he would move to impeach if Iran is attacked?

Why isn't he back in DC holding hearings on the latest outrage re- the NIE and all the lies about that, among other things? Wouldn't Iowa/NH voters and the rest of us respect him more if he did that?

Not to mention that under Bill Clinton, what Silenced just brilliantly described as the US "state religion",that single most freedom destroying policy in the US, the War On (some) Drugs, greatly expanded.

I never inhaled indeed.

Funny how when Sandy Berger was responsible for evidence going missing, the DoJ was onto it in moment. And needless to say, the rightwing hoardes were baying for blood.

For a sampling of slime:

http://michellemalkin.com/2004/07/19/sandy-bergler/

And helpfully she links to other occasions when Clintonites were linked to stuff going missing. No doubt we can look forward to exponentially more outrage that the gubmint "lost" evidence this time relevant to the prosecution of terrorists.

The fact that Bush hasn't been impeached says worlds about Democrats. Keystone Cops is about it for all of them.

Unfortunately not. The corruption in both parties is born of the actual parties themselves, as opposed to the individuals in them.

So long as the Democratic Party can do what it likes and not get voted out, term limits will make no different. They will just mean you have one guy in for ten years, to be replaced by pretty much the same guy in a different skin ten years later.

The same applies to the Republicans.

The hold your nose voter is the second greatest enemy of democracy in the world. The greatest is the guy who doesn't vote.

What you need is to get everyone voting for the party they actually want in power, not the party which they feel that they have to vote for otherwise the Republicans or Democrats will win.

During Senator Pat Roberts chairmanship of the U.S.Senate Intel Committee it was plainly evident Senator Jay Rockefeller was the willing and enabling "opposition party enabler and victim" who let Sen.Roberts run wide and long far too often in ways that could only have pleased the Bush/Cheney WH and GOPer party hacks in WashDC.

Now with the Senate Intel Committee under his chairmanship the "excuse" of not being chairman or having "real power" has been taken away. Results from this? Waiting. Still waiting. Umm...waiting some more.

So putting more DEMS in WashDC does matter? Or not?

Meanwhile how many times has G.W.Bush claimed in any number of places and forums that the U.S.A. does not torture? The answer to that question being more than once or twice. So when one reads now about videos being destroyed that evidently would clearly show Americans doing torture where does this lead to?

Americans do not torture?

Americans do not torture but video evidence exists(existed?) of Americans torturing?

Americans do indeed do torture but video of such conduct will be kept hidden or be destroyed to support the do not torture claims?

Americans do torture and do videos of this taking place for reasons that later do not protect or preserve these videos from being expunged or destroyed?

So what is being protected here?

American credibility?

American principles?

American international political integrity of stature?

Not likely.

So it must be more about who is being protected.

Which leads back to the common ongoing theme of WashDC rot and decay.

Republican Senator Pat Roberts endorsed that rot and decay.

Democrat Senator Jay Rockefeller endorses this rot and decay.

Meanwhile abuse/ignore of the rule of law,obstruction of justice,destruction of evidence and acquiescence to this taking place are all present. Continue to be present.

Senator Rockefeller...do the job you were elected to do.

Rule of Law is better than rule by a unfettered monarch or the likes of a Hitler,Mobutu or what passes for rulers in Myanmar these days but without clear lines of law abide enforcement and real,meaningful consequence and penalty for not being law abiding the above examples of Non-rule of Law practioners are where this goes too.

Clearly G.W.Bush has issues with telling the truth or perhaps finding truths and facts to begin with. A great American President G.W.Bush plainly is not. A great American? I do not think of him as being one.

Senator Rockefeller? How about you? A great American?

Or do you run with the Hitler,Mobutu and Myanmar Junta types?

Does anyone seriously think this sort of thing will cease if and when they win the Presidency? Aycharaych

The revolting practice of "rendition" was initiated by dear old Bill Clinton, was it not? His administration did that, while going around trying to sell "democracy, human rights" and other such lofty concepts in the very same countries that were torturing on behalf of the US.

It was the Clinton Adm, before Bush, that felt it was justified to try to bomb Iraq into submission, and his Sec of State (now vouching for his candidate wife) who thought it was "worth it" to let thousands of Iraqi kids suffer the cost of "sanctions".

As I keep saying, when it comes to foreign policy, when it comes to all those brown people out there in the rest of the world, the 2 major parties have been one continuum, quite disconnected from the lofty values we like to assign to ourselves domestically.

Do the folks that populate this comments section think that term limits would be a help here? I ask in all seriousness.

It seems to me that an incumbent has a great deal of inertia in the public's mind. This is why, even with a great deal of evidence that she is not really supporting her constituents in extremely scandalous situations, DiFi still gets a pass, and continues to serve. I don't know about Rockefeller or Harman, or how long they have been in their current positions, but it seems to me that perhaps something to make the Congressional "talent pool" more of a shark pit would go a long way toward offering the carrot necessary (piece of chum, to keep with the metaphor) to prod excellent service. Then, if your accomplishments are not so great, you will not move on up the ladder, and will be cycled out at the end of your available time.

On the other hand, maybe this would just reinforce the revolving door we have between industry and government positions.

All I am wondering is, would it be advisable to build this into the process? The big plus would be that the tendency to keep doing what has been done before (Joe Lieberman, anyone?) would be done away with, and the voting public would almost be forced to look into the positions of the candidates every so often. Familiarity breeds contempt, it is said. I think it also breeds indolence, and that is why we end up with crappy fixtures as our representatives. However, I am open to have my mind changed.