http://insideoutthebeltway.blogspot.com/2008/06/goings-on.html

Hoyer paraphrase: "if we comply with all their demands, then they can't criticize us for anything."

It's the Bush doctrine: give them (the Democrats) everything they want, to "take the issue off the table", and win support for every new executive power imaginable. That's why he vetoed almost nothing in his first six years, but still preserved his "Vote for me or die" campaign slogan.

If the Democrat leadership thinks capitulation is a good campaign tactic, adopted from Republicans, where does it end?

Before the two parties are done, we will have a full-fledged monarchy again. One can only hope that "King Obama" will see fit to not use the powers he would be granted.

I want to say thank you for all your work, for the columns and for organizing the response, and for the advertising.

I want to suggest, again, that we keep up the advertising on Hoyer, in DC, in Congressional sources -- the HIll or whatever might be appropriate ...

Like with a strong headline

"Steny Hoyer is wrong!"

and a quotation from a Constitutional expert.

"Steny Hoyer thinks Dems should get votes by dismantling the Constitution..."

"Steny Hoyer Thinks You're Stupid!"

"Hoyer Leads Dems Over a Cliff!"

Thanks,

sandra

Congressman Hoyer, you're a Goddamn career political hack. You're a bastard. You're a piss-away-the-Constitution piece of shit. (And those are your better qualities, by the way.) You confirm Mark Twain's adage that Congress is America's native criminal class.

Barak Obama? Truth be told, I'm not expecting much from this flash-in-the-pan. He's too facile, too glib to be trusted. He tells the dummies what they want to here--and then pisses on 'em.

If Obama does not stand up and join the FISA filibuster and denounce Telecom immunity I'm concerned that he's sending a dangerous signal. He'll be saying that now that he's assured of the nomination and has created this rock star like excitement among the populace, along with him moving the operations of the Democratic National Committee to Chicago and telling the 527s to stand down as he takes full control of the Democratic Party he's doing the same to the net. Back off, don't get to big for your britches, I'm not that crazy about net neutrality.

Some excerpts from Senate Floor Statement of Senator Boxer

http://boxer.senate.gov/news/releases/record.cfm?id=299645:

One of the most basic tenets of our freedom is justice, and at the heart of justice lies the search for truth.

Throughout history, whenever the United States government has violated the trust of the American people, we have always worked to regain that trust by seeking the truth and allowing for a full examination of the abuses of government power.

Unfortunately, what we have before us today is a bill that would not only deny the Court the ability to finally make a judicial determination as to the legality of the NSA program but would effectively guarantee immunity for the telecommunications companies that cooperated with the Administration and violated the privacy of their customers.

Now, I would support granting the telecom companies indemnification, but this immunity provision blocks us from finding the truth.

I know that many of my colleagues in the Senate think we know enough about this program. But we do not know enough. The Bush Administration trampled on the Constitution, and we are not doing anything in this bill to provide accountability.

Simply put, this bill is a fig leaf that attempts to hide the truth about the warrantless surveillance program at the expense of the rights of our citizens. And if we vote for it today, we are perpetuating a cover-up.

But we should remember, as former Justice Thurgood Marshall said, "History teaches us that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure."

Having grown weary of studying FISA and convinced that there is no end to what I could learn about surveillance and congressional procedure rules, this evening, after thoughtful consideration of my own tractor & hay debacle and just how many dictionaries I might need to get WT or TW, (hey at least the pesky order of LWM now sticks), I turned my attention to the investigation of underpants gnomes and suicidal rat engineering. Entirely worthwhile. Thanks all for the interesting tips and links. Can't believe some of you have been here for years. Really???

Can't believe some of you have been here for years. Really???
— nicole p

Some of us have been here since before there was a here here.

per you:

"William and I have always been on the right side and that gauls the hell out of some of you. Deal with it. Shut up and listen."

Wow! OK, I'm shutting up and listening. What else do you have to say?

"...the old UT [is] just open to a broader audience and naturally it appears the 'quality' has suffered."

Naturally.

OK, PLEASE, please allow me to say just one more thing and then I'll shut up: I'm so sorry that the UT has lowered the drawbridge and let the rabble in. Foolish me. I thought the broad exchange of diverse ideas - whether you agree with them or not - was one of the foundations of netroots. Isn't it just a short hop, skip and a jump from smart and opinionated to self-righteous and authoritarian?

And upon further reflection, I won't shut up.

(from Edward Murrow) Maybe we need to see the reality that is staring us in the face. Look, a striped horse-like creature grazing in the savanna probably is, in fact, a zebra. Bush's administration has twisted, mis-used, re-interpreted and outright changed the law for almost 8 years. They have not been removed from office, despite too many offenses to count. The 5 major gas companies have just been given no-bid contracts in Iraq; not only was the war about oil, the administration doesn't even now care that we KNOW it. And yet, no general outrage from the public, no Congressional hearings, and the US soldiers did NOT, en masse, say "Good God, I'm not dying for some friggin' oil!" and throw down their weapons and refuse to fight. Obama would not have voted to go to war. Not because it was morally corrupt- I've never heard him say that - but because it was "unwinnable". I think only Kucinich came out and said it was actually an illegal invasion and wrong on moral grounds.

There is a resolution due to come to the floor, backed by lots of Democrats, that would, while not allowing an outright attack with weapons, authorize some strong measures against Iran that any country would take as acts of war. Will our representatives sign on to this and begin the count-down to war with Iran? Probably, because apparently the urge to flex our muscles and rule the whole world is too pretty a prize to turn down.

Is there anything that the Bush administration has done that our Congress considers so craven that action must be taken? Apparently not. Do any of our representatives want to curtail the taking of lobby money, the rule of big corporations over our country? I think the answer is no.

Obama voted for that farm bill a few weeks ago, the one that gave more subsidies to the big agri-businesses; that was a day after I heard him tell a bunch of mid-western "family farmers" that he was "looking out for them".

Obama is without a doubt a much better choice than McCain in pretty much all regards, but he is a product of what our political system is now. All of our representatives are. We elected them and then ignored what they were doing. While we (OK, not me, not you, not Glenn, but 90% of America) were watching "Idol" or staring at cars driving in circles for hours -Nascar - our group in Washington, Republicans and Democrats alike, were just doing what most benefited them without regard to the welfare of the general public.

Maybe the reason that the Democrats have caved on FISA and war-funding without a time-table for withdrawal and have said impeachment is off the table and will probably vote to embargo Iran is the "zebra truth" I first mentioned. Maybe they look at the absolute and unfettered power of the Bush administration and want it for themselves. Maybe it just looks good to them. Maybe it is that simple.

When Obama says, basically, "It's all right, don't worry about it. If I'm President, I won't mis-use this un-Constitutional power", maybe he is not kidding. Maybe he would LIKE to be President and maybe he would LIKE to have this un-Constitutional power. And maybe he won't mis-use it, maybe that part is even true. (It kind of begs the question of what happens if McCain wins and happily scarfs up all the Power In The Universe, but Obama correctly assumes no-one will remember his one vote in a sea of votes to give away this power when, 3 or 4 years from now, some people are grumbling about how the government is still spying on us.)

I am being simplistic. I know that. But perhaps it IS all just that simple. They all look like zebras; I would first assume they all are before bothering to get into some silly argument about whether it's white stripes on black, or black stripes on white.