Ya's can come here to the stick-hills? No talking while picking blueberries is the only important rule. It's a felony to talk , scream, or whisper.

We/me can watch Red Tail Hawks, and maybe see a flying Eagle with feathers soar with the blue jays in the clear blue, and wide-open, blue sky.

No wet weather snipe-birds are ever-ever around.

`While @ the self-imposed Nature get-away-retreat....

`Hold every moment sacred. Give each clarity and meaning,

each the weight of thine awareness, each it's true and due fulfillment.

Thomas Mann ask that. I agree. Take good care while in the mountain hills....

No allow the jiggers, fleas, ants, and poison oak to irritate or spoil the rest...

Sweet dreams, all.

The real diff btw right and left is that for the right, the ends always justifies the means and for the left, the ends never justify the means.

I am disappointed in Obama's statement, but I am neither so pollyanish to believe that he is above making politically expedient calculations nor so cynical to believe he's abandoning the Constitution.

Much to the dismay of many posters here, myself included I guess, Obama doesn't need them (us). The likelihood that the passion for ethical behavior and Constitutional fidelity that drives them to the polls to vote for anyone capable of beating McCain, could be overwhelmed by Obama's equivocating on FISA is low. I would guess that the number of those that would actually give up on Obama are insignificant. (Which isn't to say YOU shouldn't vote on your principles.)

So, what are the ends for which you are able to sacrifice the sanctity of your means?

Thank you Glenn for exposing the supine leadership of the Democratic party. I decided long ago to give my money to Move On and Russ Feingolds PAC. We need to gradually challenge and remove the traitors in the ranks. When Steny and Nancy et al are faced with stiff challenges from real Democrats maybe they will grow a spine or be replaced by those with one. Two other observations. 1. When the thugs were in charge they had a rule that if 2/3 of the thuglican party did not support a policy it did not make it to the floor. If the spinelesscrats had the same policy it would have killed this. 2. I do think that Nancy and Steny are protecting their own asses. They are implicated in war crimes and are protecting themselves.

We either need to reclaim the DP or leave it and build an alternative. I for one am tired of being sold out.

"throwing hundred dollar bills onto the floor of the stock exchange"

Big inflation, William. You mean "throwing hundreds of dollar bills..." Much greater impact.

"About eighteen of us showed up. When we went in the guards immediately confronted us. 'You are hippies here to have a demonstration and we can't allow that in the Stock Exchange.' "Who's a hippie? I'm Jewish and besides we don't do demonstrations, see we have no picket signs,' I shot back. The guards decided it was not a good idea to keep a Jew out of the Stock Exchange, so they agreed we could go in."

Revolutionforthehellofit

We are all looking at this as just a free ride for the telecoms.

What the bill really says is that if the President tells you to do something illegal, you can do it and get away with it.

Think a moment.

What agencies in America could be asked to do something illegal by the President, to the neo-con's benefit?

Diebold?

The FCC?

The networks?

Blackwater? The Army?

I am disappointed in Obama's statement, but I am neither so pollyanish to believe that he is above making politically expedient calculations nor so cynical to believe he's abandoning the Constitution.

But in point of fact, he IS throwing the Constitution under the bus.

Much to the dismay of many posters here, myself included I guess, Obama doesn't need them (us).

Good, I won't be voting for him.

The likelihood that the passion for ethical behavior and Constitutional fidelity that drives them to the polls to vote for anyone capable of beating McCain, could be overwhelmed by Obama's equivocating on FISA is low.

Try me.

I would guess that the number of those that would actually give up on Obama are insignificant. (Which isn't to say YOU shouldn't vote on your principles.)

If I wanted to vote for someone who is willing to bend over for Dubya, I could have had Joe Lieberman back in 2004.

So, what are the ends for which you are able to sacrifice the sanctity of your means?

Here's a hint: If someone doesn't have the guts to stand up to the Republitards now, when the GOP is led by a sadistic retard with a 25% approval rating, they aren't going to say no to them next January. If they don't have the nerve to stand up for something during the election they won't muster the courage on Inauguration Day. I voted for Obama in the primaries and was an Obama delegate at my state's convention and after seeing this display of cowardice, I am truly ashamed.

If Obama thinks he can get by without the votes of people who believe in the rule of law, fine. That's what he'll have to do.

It's the principle of the thing.... ;-)

Bucksy's going to be our daily debunker?

He's just hanging around to spray a bit of lying propaganda and take you off the issue. You're wasting way too much time on the troll. Just remind him he's been discredited and move on.

Don't mind me. I'm just pissed off that most of the government has decided to sell us all out. It's disappointing, and something that isn't going to be easy to get used to:

A Kind of Fascism Is Replacing Our Democracy

"No administration before George W. Bush's ever claimed such sweeping powers for an enterprise as vaguely defined as the 'war against terrorism' and the 'axis of evil.'

Nor has one begun to consume such an enormous amount of the nation's resources for a mission whose end would be difficult to recognize even if achieved.

Like previous forms of totalitarianism, the Bush administration boasts a reckless unilateralism that believes the United States can demand unquestioning support, on terms it dictates; ignores treaties and violates international law at will; invades other countries without provocation; and incarcerates persons indefinitely without charging them with a crime or allowing access to counsel.

The drive toward total power can take different forms, as Mussolini's Italy, Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union suggest. The American system is evolving its own form: 'inverted totalitarianism'.

This has no official doctrine of racism or extermination camps but, as described above, it displays similar contempt for restraints..."

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpwol183376588jul18,0,3380237.story