[Mr. Tibby]: So... let's also go after anyone who sanctioned any war from the last 70 years.

[Arne]: Didn't read the post, didja? Because no one but you has suggested any such thing....

Cheers,

Ooh, right on the noggin. that's gotta hurt!

How many of our elected law makers own , are invested in , or have an affiliation with energy , health care , and insurance ? How many of them are profiting from high energy prices ?

....and you find snakes. Snakes with big names, under big rocks. Snakes with forked tongues, dripping unctuous tones of patriotism and sacrifice and bravado. Snakes attached to the tails of other snakes under other rocks, feeding and being fed. Snakes pretending to be warm and fuzzy creatures, snakes in teddy bear outfits, cuddling while they pierce you with their poisons.

Now I am not a Constitutional expert but isn’t AT&T and Verizon the “domestic enemy” here that wanted to attack the US Constitution and was able to do so with the recent FISA bill?

No, they are only the handmaidens and henchmen. The "domestic enemies" are the Bush administration and those members of Congress who were so quakingly fearful in the wake of 9/11 that they allowed these programs to be birthed and nurtured rather than fulfilling their own Constitutionally mandated functions.

While it is significant that these corporations broke the law, and they should be held accountable for that, the ultimate issue is the administration's lawlessness and Congress' complicity. Without an accounting of that, we can only look forward to making bets on which amendment will be on the auction block next.

Remember:

Dick Cheney is so deluded and denuded he fires a shotgun at a lawyer.

Next he'll think a child's jumprope is a snake disguised as a jumprope.

The war bloody, oil-soaked , black-crude, blokes are depraved vipers.

I'll have to admit that I'm pleased and proud that the consummate snark master, Arne, has taken on two of my pet names for two of the most ridiculed trolls in attendance here at UT, Tibby and Elephantdung. If I am not mistaken, I coined both of those nicks.

It was pretty obvious that there was some covering of butts in this legislation, but I question the legality of the laws they are passing. Forgive me if I am wrong, social studies was many years ago, but aren't 'ex post facto' laws illegal? If even I remember that from fifth grade, how can they imagine that the Supreme Court won't overturn these laws the same way they overturned the others? Do they really think that they can escape from all of this with no consequences? It's seems rather ostrich-like.

I have been e-mailing the Obama campaign almost every day about his reversal on that bill and I keep getting the same variations on the theme of "But I had to, this bill is better than the other choices we had" which makes me very angry. I will keep e-mailing him until I get a somewhat more honest reply, though I doubt that I will get one that actually says "I felt that throwing my Democratic party members into the same cell with Bush and Cheney would really hurt my chances to become President or to get anything passed by either party while I was President." But a girl can hope, right?

Harman, Hoyer, Rockefeller, and Pelosi are perfect examples of what I call "Fox News Democrats." These creatures are chosen, or choose, to go on that network and offer tepid "opposition" to the minutia of Republican policies, all the while endorsing and legitimizing the central premises; i.e., that any usurpations of the law and constitution are "necessary" to "keep us safe."

Like Lieberman, they are worse than Republicans, for the shameful "bipartisan consensus" they lend to each outrage, no matter how grave. What they accomplish is twofold: narrowing to parameters of the debate, and rendering such niceties as upholding one's oath of office a "fringe" position.

Harman did, in fact, have a credible but underfunded primary opponent in 2006, who may have gained enough name recognition then to mount a more formidable battle next time, and her despicable behavior of late might just be the spark that lights the fire. And think how humiliating it would be for Pelosi if Cindy Sheehan is able to turn her reelection into a squeaker.

Not only are these people not Democrats, they don't even play them on TV convincingly.

And they should all be "held accountable" as Nancy Pelosi so famously claims Congress is doing in relation to Bush & his henchmen. It sure would be nice to see a war crimes court set up, in the next dministration; and see all the co-conspirators and enablers prosecuted for aiding and abetting the destruction of the government of the United States of America and its Constitution. Nuremburg would have nothing on that...

For me, one of the truly disheartening things about witnessing the FISA debacle in both the House and Senate was seeing the sheer enormity of apparent complicity among members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. It was especially disheartening to see the Democrats—the “opposition party”—so eagerly and nearly universally enabling the criminality of the Bush administration. The only possible explanation for that I can conceive is that Congress is fundamentally complicit in those crimes and is brazenly and transparently attempting to cover their own asses.

Since we know Speaker Pelosi was briefed on, and probably signed off on, many of the twisted justifications for lawlessness, isn’t there a way to force her to recuse herself from the impeachment debate or face impeachment herself?

We find ourselves—our Constitutional Democracy—at the edge of a precipice; plunging over it seems ever more inevitable.

I know you are a cat crazy Lady.

You manicure the cat claws.

Each cat paw nail is sharp.

You paint a different color on each cat's sharp paw nail.

Your cats make visitors sneeze though. Achondroplasia.

Cats have little feet and big heads with prickly whiskers.

But why not declaw them cats?

Richard can back scratch you.