Hoyer and his litter recognize this and have backed off in time for the election--a prudent political decision.

You seem to be making the same mistake Brooks, Kristol, and the rest of the Beltway/Village Pundits do: asserting (I paraphrase) 'the American people believe' X without providing evidence that "X" is anything more than your personal opinion.

How do you know the American public see lawsuits against the telecos as "futile" or that they don't worry their privacy is/will be violated by this out-of-control surveillance?

Please, elaborate and define your evidence for this.

During the campaign, Carney raised money with a wide-variety of supporters including Sen. Barack Obama, Sen Joe Biden[15], Rep. Jay Inslee[16], Rep. Jack Murtha[17]M, and Richard Perle, a leading Bush Administration advocate of war with Iraq who more recently has criticized the decision to go to war[18] Douglas Feith, another Pentagon hawk, congratulated Carney on Election Night.[19]

...who might also be worth targeting and calling about this issue.

Surely, Biden and Murtha might feel a bit of buyer's remorse in this case, if only because they dislike most of Bush's agenda, and may not have expected that Carney would be supporting it. And, if they helped Carney get elected, perhaps they also have some sway with him.

I don't know much about Inslee, but both Murtha and Biden are "neighbors," if nothing else.

Perle and Feith... a waste of time to contact either of them.

Karrsic, if you're going to mix metaphors, best to do it with food.

Buttered bread and carrot stix would make a nice snack right about now.

:~)

The overwhelming majority of the people in this country see no value in launching a futile lawsuit against telcos, -- nvizibl

The overwhelming majority of the people in this country see nothing about this topic -- therefore your unsupported assertion that they "come out in favor" of anything pertaining to it is ridiculous ......anonymoose.

"The overwhelming majority of the people in this country see no value in launching a futile lawsuit against telcos, are not terrorists or sympathizers and have no fear of their privacy rights being tread upon in the name of national security, and therefore tend to come out in favor of the Bushies on this issue."

I suppose there's a REMOTE possibility that's not simply an assertion you pulled out of your butt - if you ignore the actual evidence (polls) that Glenn has repeatedly cited to the contrary.

Politicians sometimes do things they’d rather not let the public know about and will bring all of the power at their disposal to keeping it hidden. They might even say it’s for your own good, too keep you safe. You know in your heart it's true. Search your feelings.

Touche'.
Sadly though, this GG post and the intifada declared on Rep Carney are all amazingly superficial. This isn't about freshmen BlueDogs, Steny Hoyer is the #2 Dem in the House and you may believe that he doesn't sneeze without permission of the HBIC Ms Pelosi. So why is the leadership of the House doing a deal? As the story goes even Dem staffers don't get it.

There are only two possibilities...
(1)either there is some financial or philosophical impetus being brought to bear just like the Generals salonistas have been bashing. Or,
(2) there really is some security issue, that is worth risking the wrath of the nutroots.

In both cases, there is something going on that we don't know about, and if it's (1) then the nutroots and associated media are falling down on the job of investigating the "hidden" sources of bias. In either event, it's obvious that Glenn isn't about to cross swords with the House leadership. Not a surprise when there are small fry to beat up on.

.....it's obvious that Glenn isn't about to cross swords with the House leadership. Not a surprise when there are small fry to beat up on. -- shooter242

AND!!!! Glenn won't take on the entire racist structure of American society!!!

How dare he focus on achievable goals. The gall of the man!

Exercising our free speech rights as Americans = an "Intifada" against Carney?

Get.Off.The.Lunch.

This may have been stated in an earlier post but when I see both Republicans and Democrats mindlessly working to give Bush what he wants regardless of what the American people want I have to wonder who Dick was listening in on all these years. He sure has not disrupted any major terrorist attacks but he has obtained mindless loyalty from both sides of the aisle. I wonder these things because the positions of so many of our congressmen make no sense what so ever and fly in the face of logic and public opinion. So what kind of dirt does our dear Vice President have on so many members of congress and maybe even the President himself?

Makes you wonder…..

There are only two possibilities...

Why only two? You may be right, but you didn't make your case - just saying "there are only two" is not especially persuasive. What does "impetus brought to bear" mean? Can you bring "impetus" to bear? Do you mean "pressure?" Why are you assuming that Hoyer and Carney are being "pressured" rather than the alternative possibility Glenn raises and has raised - that they actually support telecom immunity?

To continue: what does HBIC mean? Why must we assume the second most powerful member in the United States House of Representatives has to ask for permission from the Speaker before he does anything? Why does it make sense to target someone other than the person actually taking the action you are protesting?

Sorry for all the questions, but there is a reason why the argument by assertion is such an ill-regarded rhetorical technique. It generates little heat, and no light.

Cheers.

It appears that the blue dog "democrats" are paid by the Republican Party to oppose and undermine the Democrats "leadership" in congress. The former blue dog Democrats voted with Republicans against Democrats to receive bribes of one kind or another and it's the blue dog tradition. The fact is that with Carney's seat in Republican hands would benefit the Democrats. Bribery is the main rational for the blue dogs to act as they do. After all, they are politicians and corruption goes with the definition and the territory.