you forgot to close a tag or something.

They're in danger of winning big in November.

(Psst, Glenn. Close your underscore tag.)

I would not have guessed that the Hillary campaign would be another demonstration of how far the right wing has taken over the government and the public dialogue. Hillary is playing the game of the republicans and we need to change that game if we are going to even have a chance of restoring our republic.

I just donated for the AD against democrats.

The surprisingly quick collapse of the earlier move to amend FISA made me suspicious. After almost 8 years of getting whatever they wanted, did anyone really suspect the Bush Administration would just drop it all the first time anyone stood up to them?

They'll try again, as far away from the prying eyes of the general public as possible.

I don't really think they are concerned about the Dems winning out and getting the warrantless power in the fall, although I did suspect that at one time. Telecom immunity is what matters here; that's where the big money to fund the PAA is coming from.

"Appearing more devoid of convictions than is typical."

Yikes!

Any ad campaign in his district?

And THIS, is key -

And there are few things that would infuriate their base and prompt the equivalent of all-out political war in an election year more than a act like this. Handing George Bush new warrantless eavesdropping powers and full-scale protection from having his illegal spying finally investigated and adjudicated (and that is what the effect of telecom amnesty would be), rather than just waiting six months for the next President to take office, would be unconscionable.

I think it's a leverage point, really. Because there is no uproar, these "people" haven't internalized what an absolute disaster this would be for their hold on power. Maybe if they understood how self-destructive they were acting, their staggering sense of self-importance might come into play.

Thank you.

As a result, House Democrats like Hoyer and Carney perceive that there is a cost only when they defy the President, but perceive that there is no prise to be paid from capitulating.

And shouldn't that be "for capitulating"?

What about Hoyer?

Any ad campaign in his district?

Unfortunately, he's not really vulnerable right now. There was some talk of trying to recruit a credible primary challenger for him -- and, ultimately, that too is a critical weapon -- but it didn't work out. For a lot of reasons, credible primary challengers are hard to find, especially when it comes to very well-funded power brokers like Hoyer.

So in the short-term, it's important to target the ones who are vulnerable. That's how it will have the greatest impact, really be heard.

Marcy Wheeler over at Firedoglake/emptywheel has said, and I agree, that the only explanation for this is that, given the fact that the telcos have spent zero dollars on lobbying for this legislation that it is in fact that there are some Democrats, such as Rockefeller, who was the minority chair of the SSCI at the time the Bush administration started this business and Jane Harman received some details on the "program" and either didn't bother to do anything or wrote a CYA letter to the file just in case.

That's price, not prise..

Early bird readers catch the not-yet-fully-edited worm. For some reason, I need to read what I've written in actually posted form before being able to correct most typos and the like; reading it in draft form just doesn't work (I think the pressure of knowing it's published is necessary in order sufficiently to focus to catch all small mistakes like that). So anyone who reads what I've written in the first five minutes after posting generally encounters lots of small typos and the like that are in the process of being expunged from the world.

Time to start ramping up the phone calls to Hoyer and the other weak knees.

Because there is no uproar, these "people" haven't internalized what an absolute disaster this would be for their hold on power.

These people are professional politicians, they wake up and go to bed making political calculations.

I would be very much surprised if the political calculations have not all been made already and the results have come down on the side of amnesty.

As you say, there is no uproar.

What's the average Democratic voter going to do? Vote Republican? Or Nader?

There are politicians wearing the veneer of Democrats who are essentially owned by the same people who own the Republican Party.

And it's not Bush, or the Bush Administration. It's the people who own them.

I think we also need to call Mr. Hoyer to let him know that if he continues along this line that he will pay a price.

(202) 225-4131

I called his office just a few moments ago and told the woman answering the phone that I was outraged by reports that Rep. Hoyer is involved in some backroom negotiations to give Bush the immunity for Telecoms that he's been seeking. I told her that if Hoyer proceeds along this path that I will donate every spare dime that I have to make sure that he is defeated even it requires me supporting a Republican.

Glenn,

Maybe the web wizzards at Salon.com could give you another place to post the blog first - one that simulates the actual post. Then you could read it exactly as it appears here.

After it is edited, you could then post it in the regular spot. That might reduce an error or two.

Keep up the excellent work. The errors in the early postings are no big deal.

a reversal and capitulation by Democrats now -- and that is what any so-called "compromise" would be

Absolutely. The Bush White House has never agreed to any "compromise" that wasn't a compromise between the right and the radical right, and the rest of us 60-80%, depending on the issue, be damned. There's no excuse whatsoever for a reversal.