Anyway, no hard feelings, I hope.

Hey I have hard feelings. I was one of the "several commenters" who excerpted the "Obama kicking the baby in the face" comment only my post was incredibly funny and I got zero shout outs. I understand you're usually fighting on two or three fronts on any given day but take a break and have a laugh. Or maybe you didn't think it was funny, maybe you read it and it just left you feeling totally blase.

Of all the things I read today, the thing you just posted made me the sickest -- which is saying quite a bit. Maybe it's just because it's the end of a long day of sickness-inducing items (check out Rahm Emmanuel explaining why he's supporting the bill and the cliche he invokes to do so-- "the perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good," as though this bill gets anywhere near the realm of the "good").

But even taking those mitigating factors into account, comparing how they were so self-righteously opposed to immediate-vote give-aways where Members had no time to read bills even if they wanted to before voting on them -- a constant complaint when the GOP ran Congress -- to the less-than-24-hour immediately schedule vote on this extremely consequential and complex bill, all in order to prevent any real debate over what they're doing, is enough to drive the blood pressure up quite rapidly.

. . . the Speaker of the House of Representatives - second in succession to be President of the United States of America - profess ignorance about just what are the particulars of a bill before her chamber?

"I could argue it either way, not being a lawyer, but nonetheless, I could argue it either way.", so says Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Before I read this statement - and those damning words "not being a lawyer" - I had supreme respect for Speaker Pelosi; that respect is now dissipating by the second. She is not a lawyer? She is a legislator for goodness sake! Not just any ordinary legislator, but the most powerful legislator in the House of Representatives of the United States of America!

Now, I came of age during the heights of Schoolhouse Rock!, so I have at best a rhyming understanding of how a bill becomes a law, but with that modicum of knowledge, I have learned that the best way to understand a bill is to read it. And if your goal is to not enable the breaking of a law by the President of the United States of America, then you do not include any words, phrases or sentences that so much as even appear to do so.

Of course, the counter part is true as well; that if you do wish to countenance the breaking of a law by the President of the United States of America, then you include as many words, phrases or sentences to reach that goal as possible.

This bill - as I read it (and I am not a lawyer - contains an entire section with 139 words in one incredibly long sentence with at least 15 phrases (depending upon your sentence diagramming rules) that countenance said breaking of the law by our President.

Why is this bill being proposed now?

It just came to me in the midst of typing this post - and I would need to read the claims to be sure - but is this an end run around the articles of impeachment that Dennis Kucinich has filed? Is this the Democratic Party leadership conducting an end run around the law, to obviate the fact that Dennis has shamed them for calling out their dereliction to do their Constitutionally directed duties?

Shame on you, Nancy Pelosi. Shame on you.

Michelle L

Something is about to happen

And the Dems don't want to be blamed for hampering "intelligence" operations.

It's about to go down...

Pearl Harbor/911 style...

Do you have evidence of this or are you thinking out loud?

-- ethics_professor

The information flow will be a one way street. Anything on democrats and 'progressives' will be 'leaked' and anything that will finger repubs and neo-con jobs will be buried...

Didn't you know that?

Yes, I too feel that something is up for pre-election. I don't think McSame can win without it. Rumsfeld was right. It would be easier to win if 'something happened'. Well, and with all this spying going on, it should be a screaming mark of grand imncompetence that Bush couldn't keep us safe but they will squirt out of this and probably end up with soldiers on every street corner. Read 'The Handmaidens Tale'. Prophesy?

What are your options then? Not vote? Congradulations. Thanks for the help fighting the gop. OVER ONE ISSUE.

One issue eh? ONE ISSUE?! It is ONLY the 4th Amendment numbnuts. Of course, the 1st Amendment is only "one issue" too. Let them gut that one next and let that slide too because is is only one issue. Or how about the 5th? See, illegal spying on Americans is NOT just a direct violation of the 4th Amendment, it is automatically a violation of the 5th Amendment too. They not only search/seize your communications and travels and purchases and associations, they also collect that information to use it against you, by-passing the the protections of the 5th.

Let's just pencil out the 1st, 2nd, 4th (oops, already done), 5th (oops, already done too). Lets just cut them away every election year but STILL vote for Democraps because they "deserve" our support for spitting on the Constitution, their oath of office, and the People. NOTHING they do can ever EVER be worthy of NOT voting for them.

What you have is a weird religion that looks and sounds like politics. You worship the Democraps no matter what, nothing they do can really be bad enough to NOT support them, heart and soul.

Take that belief system and shove it. I am acting, henceforth, directly AGAINST the Democraps in all elections from now on.

I have given money to this effort to unseat/punish Hoyer, Carny, etc, and I will continue to do so in the future. But I am not made of money by any means. The last, best thing I ultimately have is my vote and the f*cking Democraps are never getting it again.