Stories like this one make me happy to donate money to Cindy Sheehan's campaign.

http://www.cindyforcongress.org/

Pelosi et al ought to be hanged as an undercard to Bush43 and Cheney's hangings, but I suppose I'll have to settle for helping to vote them out (or in the case of Feinstein, Cheney and Bush43, watching them ride into the sunset laden with loot and escaping with not even a whiff of tar or feathers).

It's getting to the point where the only reason I tend to vote for Democrats is because they are not Republicans.

What are the Dems trying to prove? How good they are at capitulating?

The "leaders" have lost the ability to make the distinction between what matters and what doesn't matter about being a nation living under the rule of law.

The Bush regime has done many criminal and impeachable offenses, such as spying on the citizens, torture, starting a war under false pretenses and trashing the separation of powers doctrine.

Glenn has chronicled the complicity of the Democrats in this process.

The only explanation left for me is that the Democrats have also been engaged in criminal behavior that they need to cover up.

Or else, they have never really been committed to the constution, that quaint document that they swore to protect against all enimies domestic and foreign.

The coup de etat gains strength.

Keeps saying Hillary is destroying the party. Why not?

What happened? I find myself concurring w/ W.E.S.

McCain in '08! Let's burn this sucker down and start again from scratch.

It seems we just voted in new scoundrels, the Dems are as craven and power hungry as the Repubs. Where are the polls showing what we want on this topic?

And please! can you put a Digg link on your stuff?

I am not going to cast a single ballot for a Democrap in November. No way, no how am I going to reward treason with my votes. I've already long since cut them off from my admittedly small (I'm not a corporate criminal) donation stream.

I despise the Democraps. They are every bit as traitorous (literally, in the full meaning of the word rather than in the idiot meaning of the word as the GOP uses it) as the GOP AND twice as cowardly and weak as they are stereotyped as.

We need to burn down the government, particularly the Democrap government, to save the Constitution. They do not deserve to win anything in the fall and, in fact, should be forced to continue living out in the wilderness for a generation or more.

There won't be anything left to 'start again' with. That geriatric warmonger will make sure we're all just radioactive cinders.

of why real life differs from the movies.

In real life, the villians often win in the end.

* It provides for an audit by the DOJ's Inspector General of the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" (the only change that I would describe as something other than worthless);

To me, this provision is worthless until January 21, 2009, but then has the potential to get better, depending on events in early November.

* It contains a provision stating that the bill is the "exclusive means" by which the President can conduct electronic surveillance

I continue to pull for exclusivity, both because it is correct and because Bush has said that he will veto any bill containing it. I think forcing him into a veto in which the message is that he just doesn't want to follow the law is a situation that possibly will get more people paying attention to the issue.

Retroactive immunity: Leaving it out of the initial House bill does raise some interesting possibilities, in that we again will have the opportunity to pressure Reid to force the Republicans to be the ones to carry out an actual filibuster to block a base bill without immunity. The only question is which side will wear out first. Can we wear him down or will our side eventually wander off with a mild whimper?

Personally, I don't whimper well.

In the end? Along the way, perhaps. It seems a trivial distinction, but it's not. It's that pesky moving finger screws us up, those of us who keep trying to nail the carpet down, once and for all.

That would make for some good theater.

Unfortunately since he's already declared himself not subject to the original FISA, I see a signing statement in his future, rather than a veto.

When it sunsets it can do so for the first and last time.

In the interim this issue can seep into the mainstream and be brought to the attention of every American. It is a cause for concern. It is a truly bipartisan issue. It always has been.

That's a theme song for Denver--Talking Heads--Burnin' Down The House

I was aware of the irony as I was typing.

The lack of "the end" is also why talk of winning or losing Iraq or the GWOT is rather nonsensical as well.

They should be forced to read these comments.

GOP smear merchants will still characterize Democrats as weak on defense.

Their behavior just helps reinforce it.

YEEEEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

I may be goin' to hell in a bucket, but at least I'm enjoyin' the ride...

Three cheers for Prez Bush waiting out the incompetent leadership of the House. With a little luck, this country won't have to deal with Pelosi next year!

Don't dismiss the "exclusivity" provision quite so easily. It's likely meant as a rebuke to the President's ridiculous "inherent power" theory (often incorrectly called the "unitary executive" theory).

Sadly, it's far too late to meaningfully constrain the current occupant, so it's primary effect will be to constrain President Clinton or President Obama. Of course, that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it, since the temptation to abuse power is of course non-partisan.

Good Democrat! Roll over! Good! Roll over again! Good! Roll over again! Good!

Now play dead, good! Now stay dead! That's a gooood dog.

Mea culpa, Paul. FWIW, I've never doubted your firm grasp of what's what. It just seemed such an obvious French horn intro, that I couldn't resist. Pesky instrument, though. Getting the first note right is much harder than it is with a snare drum.