As I understand you, "kitt" as in Kitt Carson or as in Ms. Kitty on the old TV show are names that must not be toyed with while screen names of people whose posts are objectionably (and they are, no doubt about that) may be made fun of at whim --- and one should be proud to do so.

I am having difficulty finding balance in that. I suppose I am not sufficiently enlightened and can not discern the inner mystery of it all. My head now hurts, so I will stop worrying about it.

-- heru-ur

No, that's not it. My actual name is Kitt. Nothing to do with Miss Kitty or Kit Carson (all though, I am a fan of Kit Carson). So making fun of dipshits like Tiberius who takes on the name of some famous, legendary person when his real name is probably Jim or Randy or Ted or something is not the same thing as trying to get a 'yuk, yuk' out of a sexist joke like calling me Kitty. As if to say that I'm just a dumb chick so why should anyone take me seriously. Do see how Aych is a sexist along with being not very funny? He thinks that calling me a girl's name is going to automatically belittle my comments. Ain't that just the way it has always been?

Better Democrats. That's the only solution. Starting with Harmon. We gonna find someone to run against her? Really run against her? -- had_enough

"Better Democrats" is not a solution. NOT A SOLUTION.

The problem is systemic. The "more and better" plan further enables a system, as it has been gamed by the corporate/MIC establishment and willing politicians, that is now the root of our problems. You folks want to work "within" that system to bring about change. How many times have we heard that before? Ask yourself -- how often does that work?

More and better politicians of any stripe are not the answer for two simple reasons. First, we will never be able to elect enough of them in any given election to affect substantive change in the short term. It will not happen. The results of the 2006 election go a long way toward proving this fact. What were they elected for? What have they done? What are they doing right now?? What about the Webb's and Whitehouse's? The former netroot darlings. Now you have to consider trying to oust them too, no? You all are hamsters on a wheel.

Secondly, because we can not elect enough of them this round, those that we are successful in electing into the current gamed system will either be compromised and/or marginalized by the time we are able add to their number with even "more and better." How are the few good ones that do get elected going to get rid of the corporatist influence? Wish it away?

There have been people attempting to elect better politicians for the entirety of our history as a nation. That is standard fare. You aren't doing anything new. What has been the result? What has been the outcome? You are watching it. You are living it. You are "fighting" it right now. If you follow this plan you and your progeny will be doing it for decades more and your children and their children will end up right where you are now (if they are that lucky).

The "more and better" plan is simply an unachievable fantasy. It ignores the underlying systemic problem. It is a, "one step forward, two steps back" approach that leaves us farther behind at every turn. Those that follow that plan are being irrational. What is rational and hopeful about continuing on an unachievable course? The only thing that will bring about substantive change is us demanding it. If you want change you are going to have to deal with them at some point. Why not now?

While I will grant that the ad campaign is marginally outside of the system, it isn't the answer. It might frighten and potentially even oust the odd individual but, in the end, the establishment will not be afraid of ads. They are the masters of spin. You are playing their game.

Here is a diagram for you scooter...

Since we know you have trouble connecting the dots I found a site which has both the old FISA and the new FISA diagrammed for you....

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends upon his not understanding it." -- Upton Sinclair

Sh**ter has demonstrated this repeatedly. A purposeful ignorance is a handy tool for any aspiring RW apologist.

Cheers,

To bad the founders didn't codify a remedy for this type of behavior

For all of their thoughtfulness it's really too bad that the founders didn't create some mechanism to prevent these folks from creating laws that would cover or make legal their conduct. -- KO Myers

Well it ain't in the constitution I will grant you that but at least one of them did warn us of what we might have to do.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

He must have just been kidding.

The recent revelations of the degree of high-ranking congressional awareness of Administration actions that were unconstitutional, felonious and/or war crimes simply does not support anything other than going full bore for the pursuit of impeachment proceedings against the President and Vice President. Period.

I am shocked, shocked to learn that congressional leaders were so clearly briefed ("your chips, sir"). But more than shocked, I am gratified to have this circumstance so vividly laid bare over the past few days. What I am NOT willing to do is conclude, from this, that (1) impeachment of the President is less, rather than more, necessary or appropriate now, or that (2) the "likelihood" of such impeachment proceedings should be considered lower, rather than higher, because of these disclosures.

It seems to me that those who received briefings from the Administration must be held to account, publicly, for their actions or inactions when faced by the disclosure of this information. It's their jobs to pay attention and critically review the information they received, they owe us an explanation of their thought processes. It could be that Nancy Peolosi likes to watch 15 year olds tortured; then again, it could be that these important people accepted the word of the President when the President said to "trust him, it's all OK". Whichever end of that spectrum the truth falls on, it's a pretty good bet nobody volunteered to show the legislators any of the garbage which passed for "legal opinions" which Cheney and Addington commissioned from syncophantic flunkies like Yoo at the behest of King George. So then, throw yourselves on the mercy of Article 8 from Nuremberg, you legislator types, and let's get on with it by evaluating what the President and his minions did here.

Pelosi should recuse herself and resign as Speaker of the House, at least for the duration of impeachment proceedings (after all, that's third in succession to the Presidency after the VP, and those two are the targets here). Congressional hearings on impeachment should be demanded and they should occur promptly. Let these complicit legislators be offered the opportunity to tell their stories before congressional panels.

Wringing of hands is not the right response to all this. Neither is "I told you so" or "nothing can be done." Vindication of the Constitution is what is and must be the most important, because if all anyone does here is bemoan the "fix" of it all, then the "fix" is indeed the norm. That might not be so good.

On the "right now" front, I urge targeting Nancy Pelosi with an ad demanding that she "do the right thing" and greenlight impeachment hearings at Rep. Kucinich's discretion (run the ads in Washington and in San Francisco) and make it clear that failure to do so will result in a concerted opposition to her candidacy in California (among other things).

What has just been disclosed is important, it is dreadful. But it is only corroboration and confirmation, it is not really anything wholly surprising or new. And for what it's worth, the light that is shining on these complicit legislators right now does not have to be allowed to justify further stonewalling or coverups by those folks, it could instead be a source of incentive to engage in morally acceptable conduct in conformity with the oath they all took: to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Does anyone not believe that these legislators have been through renders them acutely able to expound upon Bush & Co.'s direct attacks upon the Constitution?