Madam Speaker: If the reports are reasonably accurate, your betrayal is profound.

[kpete]

Dear Madam Speaker: --- The democrat’s action last August to hand over Americans’ rights to the criminal Bush regime so Congress could hurry off to vacation was dumbfounding. But now, to permanently codify the abuses of past criminality and protect on-going and future abuses is betrayal equal to that of the Bush regime itself. You leave us, the Americans that actually believe in the principles embodied in the Constitution, Jeffersonian principles of limited government responsive to the governed and protector of individual rights, without hope. If the reports are reasonably accurate, your betrayal is profound.
tp://www.haloscan.com/comments/atrios/7974236822488556332/


Dems to Make 6 Month FISA Extension Permanent!

Administration officials say they are confident they will win approval of the broadened authority that they secured temporarily in August as Congress rushed toward recess. Some Democratic officials concede that they may not come up with enough votes to stop approval.

A Democratic bill to be proposed on Tuesday in the House would maintain for several years the type of broad, blanket authority for N.S.A. eavesdropping that the administration secured in August for six months.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/washington/09nsa.html?_r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=1&adxnnlx=1191931986-Nb1XM84QITlbPaJxed97QA

[southern_belle]

1. Is this the Twilight Zone???

:banghead:

[tandem5]

56. as I was saying on another thread...

I think we're in the bizzaro world... of course it is up to debate. Perhaps we are in the Twilight Zone, or maybe at the center of a black hole, or still, maybe, in null space; or what about the tired subplot that many a sci-fi series enjoys: like the semi-main characters who, while working in the lab have an odd accident (not terribly alarming at the moment of occurrence) and find later, much to their alarm, that they are out-of-phase with their former home universe and thus completely invisible to their friends, and, of course, only the fully-main characters can save them, but alas there is no way to communicate a solution, as the semi-main characters can walk right through walls and people (but oddly enough not through the floor?) yelling loudly in vain, we too have a difficult time getting through to those who can implement change!

yeah, sorry about the comma splicings... I've been reading Jane Austen lately.

[la_fenice]

129. nothing bizarre here

it's actually very plain, Bush must've got a lot of dirt on Pelosi, Reid, Conyers and others when he illegally monitored their phone calls and e-mails. It happens all the time, it's called politics. That's what you get when you vote for corrupt politicians with skeletons in their closets.

This is the only way to explain the complete surrender of Democrats after their victory in 06.

[tandem5]

132. if only tis was true,

but I'm afraid the reality is far more grim, muddled, and just plain pathetic. Ah I admire your purity of cynicism... but your newly reforged wings have not yet refelt the subtle turbulence that tatters the majestic feather over time. But you're right about the skeletons in their closets - I mean they gotta keep their spines somewhere!

On an unrelated note, welcome to the DU! Now please enjoy this completely pointless emoticon: :yoiks:

[la_fenice]

136. this has nothing to do with spines,

and what could be more grim than Bush having information about his opponents being just as corrupt as he is? About his opponents' war profiteering and/or nuclear ambitions being just as extensive as his?

I don't buy Democrats being spineless for a second.

[tandem5]

153. you think bush or his people

give a rat's ass about pelosi, reid, or the rest of the democratic leadership? If they did care, boy our little leadership would be all atwitter! Finally they were respected by those of *real* power. I will not generalize, but I'll agree that some members of our party are quite corrupt, but certainly not to the level of *most* republicans because if they were, well, then they would just be republicans (why stay a gold member when you can go platinum!?)

As for conyers, who you unfairly grouped with the likes of pelosi and reid, do you actually need to waste time finding dirt on him when you own the justice department and can simply have them decline to enforce his subpoenas?? Why dig up dirt, when you can simply hit people over the head with the shovel?

[SlingBlade]

139. EXACTO Dude

I’ve been saying this all along, What the hell happened to that supposed VICTORY we achieved on 06 ?

There you have it !

[ccpup]

2. isn't there something

some Democrat can actually DO to stop the forward motion of this?

And if I lived in Pelosi's District, her Office would be getting holy hell from me!

[lynnertic]

4. can individual representatives put holds on bills the way senators can?

[ccpup]

7. that's what I'm wondering

perhaps I'll give Nadler's Office a call -- he's my Rep -- and ask what, if anything, can be done.

[babylonsister]

14. Progressive Dems have so far blocked this, but I don't know what's

happened in the interim:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1981984

[John Q. Citizen]

42. No, they can't. But Pelosi could refuse to schedule a vote, if she wanted to.

[ooglymoogly]

67. she could prevent it from coming to the floor till she knew she

had enough votes to stop it. But then shitler would NOT give her a wink, wink, nudge, nudge. When the pukes were in charge they really were in charge and did not let anything with ever the scent of democracy in it to come to the floor. The DINO'S who have the same agenda have to tread more lightly or they will get booted, grandstanding when it is of no import and meekly voting on undemocratic issues and hoping it is not noticed. Sly-berman politics 101 to coin a phrase.

[howmad1]

74. Yes, there is something progressive Democrats can do!

Today, I went on line and changed my registered party affiliation from Democrat to Independent. I then sent an email to the DNC and told them I'm completely fed up with the Democratic party and I am ashamed to be affiliated with them. If enough people were to do just that, maybe the idiots in the Dem party might just get the message.

[FREEWILL56]

121. You know many in the gop did that in protest

to these neocon hoodlums that took over the republican party over the years, but the gop doesn't care and neither would the dnc. So tell me what independant would be up for nomination. LIEberman? Yea Right there's the answer huh?:eyes: :crazy:

[bluerum]

141. How does changing party affiliation change anything??

[Romis]

149. I changed my party affiliation 5 months ago......

and it appears that the Independent party has grown rapidly:
http://www.independentvoting.org/
However, the American paople have lost everything; Jobs, their homes and now
freedom. What haven't we lost? Paying taxes on the work we perform (for which
there is no law: http://www.freedomtofascism.com/), uncontrollable skyrocketing
costs for necessities (health care), paying for illegal immigrants education and
healthcare, etc. etc. There are only two solutions: Impeachment and/or a
revolution. There is no more "We the people................".

[Solly Mack]

3. I Spy

a big fuck you, Americans

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

5. We have been had, hook, line and sinker.

Is it Fascism yet?

[Double T]

24. Has been and always will be, specially when china forecloses on our loans.

[libnnc]

6. so they aren't going to "fix" this bad bill afterall?

That was Heath Schuler's excuse for voting for this piece of shit...we'll fix it later.

[Tesha]

27. It is being fixed, as in "fastened permanently in place". (NT)

[Richard Steele]

8. Recommended without comment.

[arendt]

9. But, its all Ralph Nader's fault. Don't you know? n/t

[Mme. Defarge]

48. Nader

has been vindicated. Never voted for him. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[ooglymoogly]

69. yes in point of fact it is. nt

[defendandprotect]

91. Yeah, it's had nothing to do with decades of stealing elections -- the loudest steal in 2000 ---

with 2004 not so quiet, either ---

See: VOTESCAM

This has been going on since the late 1960's --- book VOTESCAM written in early 1970's . . ..

We caught on sometime in 2000 -- !!!!!

[ooglymoogly]

154. Nader in order to feed his enormous ego, recklessly threw the election

into the stealable category with no hope of possibly winning. An election has to be close to steal. His actions were so dangerously reckless I spit on his name forever.

[HughMoran]

122. Nastiest, least contributing post ever

All I can say is - wow - bitter much?

[Perry Logan]

142. You said it. DU needs an "anti-recommend" option, for threads that suck.

[Vinca]

10. I cannot figure out our elected Democrats.

They seem to do exactly the opposite of what we elected them to do. We call, we write, we email, we demonstrate, we confront - it's not like they don't know. And then they have the nerve to ask for campaign donations so we can keep them there to do the opposite of what we want. What's that definition of insanity again?

[Mandate My Ass]

11. Welcome to one-party corporate rule

Please send a generous donation or else you'll find out what it's like to have the repukes back in the majority again. You're not supposed to notice it would be very close to identical to having dems in control. :eyes:

[raccoon]

20. Ding, ding, ding! we have a winner. nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

26. I'm going to send all the envelopes requesting Democratic donations

back, "Return to sender." Let them pay double for their unholy mailings. We should all do it. Let them realize that it may take pennies to get even with them, but those pennies will add up if we all do it.

I only donate to Democrats who are actually working for us.

[cascadiance]

41. Thanks for the idea.. I'm sending NINE of these back today for the DCCC and DSCC!

With all kinds of messages of what they should do and big 0's for what my contribution amount is!

I'd had them sitting over in a pile I'd not sorted yet, and now glad I'd not thrown them out yet. If enough of us do this and they see their ratio of postage go up compared to the actual amount of contributions, maybe they'll start to get the message? Probably not! But it's worth trying!

[Mandate My Ass]

43. I already did that with DCCC

I said you'll get a check when I see some serious opposition, and not one moment sooner. The onus is and should be on them to challenge and oppose Bushco, then put out their hands for my hard-earned cash.

[CrispyQ]

45. I stick a copy of "Joe Conservative" in the envelope

in hopes it will jog their memory of what real liberals stand for.

[stimbox]

49. Tape the envelope to a brick

or a cinder block and send it back.

[roody]

107. Yes! I will stop throwing them in recycle and send

them all back with comments.

[kath]

38. Yeppers - government OF THE CORPORATION, BY THE CORPORATION AND FOR THE CORPORATION.

It's the Murkan way.

See kpete's thread on the Salon article about our "election" system - we have only the ILLUSION of democracy in the US. It all fits together...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1998399

[AntiFascist]

73. Worse yet, they'll make threats....

"you don't want gay discrimination written into the Constitution do you?"

[dickbearton]

75. Yes, looks more and more like a one-party Fascist Corporate State.

[MuseRider]

13. At this point

there is no need to even try to figure them out. It is called complicity. As OMO said above, we have been had.

[RufusTFirefly]

61. The answer is shockingly simple: We are not their constituents

The fairy tale that our elected officials serve the people is just that: a fairy tale.

[Mr Rabble]

113. That is absolutely correct. And no one wants to admit it.

Your comment is totally spot on. Not only are we not their constituents, we cant even discuss this fact.

Even here, thread that even begin to suggest such obvious truths either sink fast or get locked and deleted.

How about this- in every instance of seemingly bad policy, consider who would actually benefit from these policies which so harm the public. It is always that .1% that really does well when we are miserable.

So really, it is all about your perspective.

Iraq? Bad for us, great for them.
Massive military spending? Same thing.
Tax cuts for them? You guessed it.
Katrina? Really bad for us, great for them.

I could go on.

There are two possible outcomes here.
Either they win, and the entire population becomes totally subservient and submissive.
Or we win, and we are dealing with rebuilding a new nation from the smoldering ruins of the American Empire.

[Bread and Circus]

68. That's why I tell them to fuck off every time they call for donations...

I gave over $4000 in the last 2 election cycles. Not anymore.

Any time a Democrat calls me for money I tell them to shove it up their ass.

If a Repub calls, I just hang up.

Fucking poisoned people, these politicians.

[Perry Logan]

143. Your only 180 degrees wrong.

"President Bush's success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.

"So far this year, Democrats have backed the majority position of their caucus 91 percent of the time on average on such votes. That marks the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1728952&mesg_id=1728952
http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002576765.html

Don't let the media rhetoric fool you. The Democrats have acquitted themselves quite well--especially given their bare majority in both houses, and a relentlessly obstructionist Republican minority.

[EstimatedProphet]

150. How dare you not attack the Democrats!

[anniebelle]

12. My party is losing its grip on reality.

I truly believe the Democrats have stepped over into the repugnican's alternate universe. Do they not hear the voices from the honest-to-god America lovers? I guess the smell of money is just too great for us mortals to adhere to our principals. This is the most depressed I've been in all my 63 years on this planet. My husband and I are both retired so we have a few dollars to give to our most passionate causes and for the life of me, I can't find a candidate that deserves even a dime of our hard earned money. We sent money for the first time ever to MoveOn last month and what do our 'leaders' (and I use that term loosely) come up with -- let's trash MoveOn and our base. :wtf:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

18. you got it. they are trading temporary (and patently false) electoral safety

or the perception of it, for our constitutional rights. They prefer their safety in office than to uphold their oaths of office. They are more afraid of the GOP attacking them than they are afraid of us.

we should change that equation, me thinks.

[MuseRider]

22. I am still trying to figure out

why they think this will give them job security unless they also benefit from our fraudulent election system. Really, who wants to vote for people who allow this?

[natrat]

50. there ya go

[babylonsister]

15. Recommended with DISGUST! nt

[WillyT]

16. My Party May Just Turn Me Green Yet !!!

<snip>

WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 — Two months after insisting that they would roll back broad eavesdropping powers won by the Bush administration, Democrats in Congress appear ready to make concessions that could extend some crucial powers given to the National Security Agency.

Administration officials say they are confident they will win approval of the broadened authority that they secured temporarily in August as Congress rushed toward recess. Some Democratic officials concede that they may not come up with enough votes to stop approval.

As the debate over the eavesdropping powers of the National Security Agency begins anew this week, the emerging measures reflect the reality confronting the Democrats.

Although willing to oppose the White House on the Iraq war, they remain nervous that they will be called soft on terrorism if they insist on strict curbs on gathering intelligence.

A Democratic bill to be proposed on Tuesday in the House would maintain for several years the type of broad, blanket authority for N.S.A. eavesdropping that the administration secured in August for six months.

<snip>

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/washington/09nsa.html?_r=3&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=1&adxnnlx=1191931986-Nb1XM84QITlbPaJxed97QA&oref=slogin

:puke::puke::puke:

[BR_Parkway]

30. So they'd rather be called soft on democracy than soft on terrorism?

WTF is up with these people? Do they honestly believe we sent them there for more of the same?

[Beelzebud]

37. They care more about the right-wing calling them weak, than their base calling them weak.

They never stop letting the right wing frame every issue.

So we're left with a party, that in a misguided attempt to "not look wimpy", only looks wimpy to its own base.

[12string]

58. Dems soft on terror

  It's not the fear of the right wing-nuts calling them weak
on terror.That is just a talking point used to create the
illusion that their agenda would otherwise be different.The
dems want the same powers when their turn comes.Things are not
going to change for the better no matter who gets elected.Sad
to say.

[Dinger]

59. Mee Too (nt)

[defendandprotect]

87. I don't think you're permitted to discuss that option on DU -- pity because . . .

it may be a poor option ---

There may be better options ---
but I don't see any discussions of options or Plan B's ----

[HowHasItComeToThis]

125. ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY

SO TRUE, SO TRUE

[mopinko]

17. my email to my rep

deputy whip, and member of the intelligence committee, jan schakowsky-
at your aug. town hall meeting, one of the few things that were of any comfort to me, and i think to many of the other folks there, was your promise that you, personally, would be working on correcting the fisa law that was passed at the last minute before recess. today's new york times reports that this morning that the new bill is little better than the old.
i find it harder and harder to convince my apolitical friends that there are any honorable politicians. the democratic majority that so many worked so hard to elect does not seem to remember the one word mandate that they were given. that word is NO. we sent them there to say no to high royal highness king george the evil 2 year old. what a shame to have so invigorated the grass roots of the party, only to have them pissed upon from the heights of washington d.c. somewhere along the line, there had better be a bright line drawn and stuck to. the netroots that this party now has are a very valuable asset. but they are also smart, well read and connected. we will not fall for PR or BS.
as large as your margins of re-election have been, and as much as your constituents like you, jan, if this congress does not accomplish your simple mandate, even officials like you will find yourself walking alone in the 4th of july parades, if you get my drift.

yours,
mo

[libnnc]

19. "Fixing the FISA law"

I think Pelosi sent all of them home to sing that tune. That's exactly what Heath Schuler said to Dems in his district.

"Don't worry. We'll fix it." Yeah, right...

[defendandprotect]

88. Have you figured out yet that they are ignoring you -- -????

[OnionPatch]

21. Seems to me that we need to work

to change our electoral system somehow so that third parties are viable. I will admit right here that I am a Green at heart but I am a registered Democrat because I feel my Green votes are thrown away. Until we break free of our two-party system, we will continue to have this conundrum where we have to choose the lesser of two evils. I volunteer for the Democratic party in my spare time, but I'm starting to believe I should hang that up and start working for any group that advocates changing our system. Instant runoff voting is one change we need. Time to start researching others.

[rambler_american]

72. IRV

Instant Runoff Voting would solve that. Evens the playing field for everybody.

[defendandprotect]

90. Democrats have shown no understanding of the need for third parties -- thus . . ..

any discussion of IRV here would be irrelevant --- wouldn't it ---

I say, you never know what you need -- so develop a lot of options --- !!!

[mopinko]

92. suppose al ran as a green?

just sayin'

[defendandprotect]

94. Al Gore is part of the ESTABLISHMENT; that's why he did little to contest 2000 ---

and why he called Jesse Jackson out of Florida where the butterfly ballot was being protested ---
he quieted down that whole thing ---


PS: He also picked Liebermann as his VP . . . I mean, think about that just a bit -- !!!

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. Several years = permanent?

:shrug:

[Beelzebud]

36. Yeah it does mean permanent. Start paying attention.

Patriot Act had a 5 year sunset rule. It's now permanent law.

This started out as a 6 month "emergency" provision. Now they're saying "just several years".

Do you honestly think they'll give up that power in a few years, when most have forgotten about it?

[defendandprotect]

95. Additionally, it's quite clear that the Patriot Act was written PRE-9/11 . . ..

Think about that a bit . .. . !!!

[OregonBlue]

25. BOMBARD!!!! Harry Reid with emails, phone calls. This must be stopped!!!

[defendandprotect]

96. We've already done that -- not that we shouldn't do it again -- but we are being ignored ---

[ima_sinnic]

28. now we can see whether the newbie turncoat Webb again sells out

I gave money to his campaign on the basis of all kinds of apparently false promises and have been sorely disappointed and disgusted in his 3 betrayals: extending eavesdropping, condemning the people for criticizing Petraeus, and not defunding the occupation of Iraq. Each time, he came up with total bullshit rationales for voting the way he did and he did mention the "oh it's only temporary" bit re NSA eavesdropping--so let's see whether he really did mean that about "temporary." I'm not going to hold my breath or anything.

[opusprime]

29. What are these people thinking?

Remember the oath of office you pathetic tools took at the start of the year?

I have to believe there is something else behind this, blackmail or some other kind of threat.

This is an easy one for the American people, and the Dems must think we are really dumb if they expect any support after approving criminal behavior.

BE WARNED.

[femrap]

31. K & R

Holy Mother of God. WTF is going on? We are the old USSR. I'm just sick. France is looking better and better.

[moodforaday]

76. France is now under the rule

of a repugnant, self-serving, self-satisfied wingnut. Try Spain.

[femrap]

119. Barcelona??? nt

[MattSh]

130. Hell, the old USSR IS better and better.

Two years in Kiev and debating whether I ever want to return, even to see family.

[Cass]

32. After reading stuff like this I feel like throwing in the towel.

I have yet to hear a rational and truthful explanation from an elected official of why complying with FISA rules is not sufficient. This is extremely disheartening.

:banghead:

[defendandprotect]

97. They'd really like you to throw in the towel and give up and go away . . ..

[Marr]

33. I know we always have to write and call our representatives-- but

I really wish these people didn't seem like such determined Bushies. We seem to call only to make the point that we've noticed their most recent attempt to sell us out, not to support them in promoting something positive. It's as if they're always pushing for Bush's agenda, not their constituents'-- and our activism is nothing more than registering the fact that we've *noticed* they're Republicans.

[defendandprotect]

98. OK . . . so now what -- ???

[Beelzebud]

34. We have 1 political party that pretends to be 2.

I'm convinced of it at this point.

[burythehatchet]

35. It's OK, we have an election to win> n/t

[defendandprotect]

99. What's OK. . . to elect people who betray you and your country.......?

[Gold Metal Flake]

39. "Save us, Hillary!"

crickets.wav

[FREEWILL56]

124. Sure, bushlite will save us.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

148. I'd even vote for Hillary if she promised to throw Bush and Cheny to the wolves, but you know ...

...that's not going to happen.

[kath]

40. VICHY DEMS.

[Truth2Tell]

44. K & R n/t

[The Stranger]

46. Pelosi is moving from being a co-conspirator to being an active participant, a criminal.

[dbonds]

47. And the cold civil war comes one step closer to heating up.

Our owners will not be satisfied till they have everything.

[colbertforpresident]

51. Name change

I wish this site would change it's name to the Progressive Underground. The Democratic party has been a HUGE disapointment.

[cui bono]

60. But it's not progressive. eom

[proud2BlibKansan]

62. I am with you on that sentiment.

[defendandprotect]

100. Aha . . . is anyone else thinking this . .. . ?????

[natrat]

52. i never was much for political rallies-but if pelosi speaks here i will attend and boo loudly

[BuyingThyme]

53. kcik

[debbierlus]

54. The majorit of democrats are not representing us - we must TAKE OVER the dem party

Electing REAL HONEST TO GOODNESS DEMS....

Enough is enough.

These people do not have the courage or conviction to lead in these times. We need FIGHTERS. Now, little wimps who don't even BEGIN to fight. It would be one thing, if they were out there giving it there all. But, they don't even TRY.

I am furious.

[defendandprotect]

101. How are Democrats going to wrest control back from the DLC -- -????

[The Doctor.]

55. It's almost as if the Dems are planning on using that power themselves.

Given their individual track records, I'd rather see this power in the hands of Dems right now... but then it's only a matter of time before they become as corrupt.

[hisownpetard]

57. K&R.m Beyond outrage! n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

63. Damn these people make me ill

Sadly recommended.

[cali]

66. It's mostly a calumny by the Times.

But you know that. You've seen Will Pitt's post with the exerpt from Think Progress.

[defendandprotect]

102. No I haven't thurs far . . . what's Will Pitt recommending in response to all this betrayal?

[indepat]

64. Fucking traitors all?

[MetaTrope]

65. Codifying the fascism

Although, if we get an honest Democrat into place next round and they use these powers to gather evidence on the corporate rapists, with subsequent legal action, it would be a sweet revenge.

Hey, a person can dream.

[sellitman]

70. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely

:grr:

[Mister Ed]

71. (Possible) Late-Breaking Ray of Hope (from Thom Hartmann):

Driving home this afternoon, I heard Thom on the radio saying that the NY Times story has it all wrong, and that the bill does not contain the concessions the White House desires at all. He says the Times article was written in advance of the bill being made available for scrutiny.

I've checked the show's website, and I found no transcript that I can link to. I can only hope against hope that he's right and the Times is wrong.

[creeksneakers2]

81. John Conyers gives the other side of this

and it looks to me like the newer bill is a big improvement.

Here's what Democrats have to say:

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/10/fisa_1.php

From Talking Points Memo:

But where are the House liberals? They are the key group to watch, because their mini-revolt against the legislation last week was taken as a sign that there would be heavy pressure on the House leadership not to capitulate by giving the administration too much power over wiretapping.

So where are they? According to House Dem aides, House liberals appear to be leaning in the direction of supporting the legislation -- though nothing is at all certain. Earlier today, an aide says, an internal count of House members showed very strong opposition among liberals to the bill unveiled today. But later in the day, some liberals appeared to be privately concluding that many of their demands -- which they unveiled amid last week's revolt in hopes of influencing the process -- had been met, this aide says.


http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/10/behind_scenes_liberals_ponder_supporting_fisa_legislation.php

[defendandprotect]

103. I hope it is an improvement, but they how do you trust this "we don't torture" administration --- ??

While Democrats have control of oversight, we may be OK -- ????

[creeksneakers2]

110. We can't trust the administration

The new bill creates mechanisms for oversight but no law can make Bush into an honest citizen. Bush would just break the law.

[hootinholler]

77. "may not come up with enough votes to stop approval."

Then why allow it on the floor?

Just let it die.

-Hoot

[Disturbed]

78. The Dems are thinking that they will win big in '08.

NSA has been spying on them since before 911 Attack. They want to do the same when they
are in power.

[SeanQ]

79. Why the fuck do we bother voting for these people?!?

Yeah, better than repugs I guess sure. But this sort of bs from 'my' representatives is really starting to wear me out.

[paulk]

80. why is it the Speaker's fault?

you should be pissed at the few Dems that support this legislation and the many Republicans who do also.

[AZ Criminal JD]

82. The Speaker can control whether it comes to the floor or not

[paulk]

84. the FISA legislation is important to national security

one way or another the issue must be resolved

she can't responsibly keep it off the floor

[defendandprotect]

104. Oh, stop! The FISA laws are already a violation of our Constitution.....

[paulk]

111. yeah, ok

that attitude will insure you years of frustration when it comes to politics.

[defendandprotect]

112. As they say . . . "politics" is the shadow cast over government by corporations ----

I think I can handle it --
and fortunately there are people who can still read the Constitution . .. . . .

[kurth]

83. Worthless, Spineless Bunch - No surprise

Your doorknob has more courage.

[jeff30997]

85. Oh Nancy ...

You're such a disappointment to me...

[defendandprotect]

86. What are we going to do about this --? Cutting off contributions would be one way to go --- !!!

But -- what do they care -- they'll just take more money from corps ---

[OxQQme]

89. Yup. Good Cop, Bad Cop-ing us

They be looking at us from the other side of the mirrors.
Be very suspicious when checking yourself out in the bathroom.

[Olney Blue]

93. It keeps getting worse. I can't stand it anymore.

:grr:

[defendandprotect]

105. OK -- where are you going --- ????

[Olney Blue]

106. I don't know. I'm angry, discouraged and disillusioned with my Dems.

[defendandprotect]

108. But . . . do you see that, in itself, is progress: Now you get to discuss what to do -- !!!!

And, I think we need more threads dealing with what we do now --
rather than just reciting what's wrong ---

[scarletwoman]

109. Oh dear. I am SO shocked! NOT.

Get a clue, people. It's not Dems vs. Repugs, it's the State vs. US.

sw

[Megahurtz]

114. God.

:wow: If yours isn't the truest Post on this Thread I don't know what is! :(

[scarletwoman]

116. Thank you! Why is it so hard for so many people to see this? (nt)

[Harper_is_Bush]

115. Why does this smell more like a knee-jerk outrage than a reasoned examination? n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

151. Because it is.

[Major Hogwash]

117. So, she lied in August when she said they were going to change the law when they got back this fall.

Why am I not surprised. She is the worst House Speaker the Democrats have ever had.

[Rose Siding]

118. Glenn Greenwald: More complicated, less depressing than NYT suggests...

After noting that dems have done precious little to prevent us from assuming the worst, Glen Greenwald writes:

snip>
But at least thus far, from everything I can tell, the picture is more complicated and less depressing than this NYT article suggests, and the defeat is not yet a fait accompli. To begin with, the bill to be proposed today by the House Democratic leadership actually contains some surprisingly good and important provisions.

That bill would compel the administration "to reveal to Congress the details of all electronic surveillance conducted without court orders since Sept. 11, 2001, including the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program." It would also require the maintenance of a data base to record the identities of all Americans whose conversations are surveilled. And it provides nothing at all in the way of amnesty or immunity for lawbreaking telecoms or administration officials. The bill introduced by House leadership is a bill the White House will never accept and would certainly veto, and it is vastly better -- in important ways -- than the atrocity they enacted in August.

That bill would compel the administration "to reveal to Congress the details of all electronic surveillance conducted without court orders since Sept. 11, 2001, including the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program." It would also require the maintenance of a data base to record the identities of all Americans whose conversations are surveilled. And it provides nothing at all in the way of amnesty or immunity for lawbreaking telecoms or administration officials. The bill introduced by House leadership is a bill the White House will never accept and would certainly veto, and it is vastly better -- in important ways -- than the atrocity they enacted in August....

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/index.html

And this important update, at the same link:

Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies, one of the nation's premiere FISA experts, has issued a statement (via email) which provides, in part: "We welcome the bill by Chairmen Reyes and Conyers as an important first step towards restoring the civil liberties protections lost in August. Their bill would be a vast improvement over the current law passed at the President's urging, and it is much more protective of any of the bills considered in August." Martin goes on to emphasize, however, that even this current bill violates the Fourth Amendment by failing to require individual warrants for every international call (Russ Feingold's statement made a similar objection).

[nadinbrzezinski]

120. Correct, the NYT is playing us

to be brutally honest

[HughMoran]

123. Thanks for posting this!

Wow, a little reality check - I'm glad I read this before posting. I will reserve judgement for the time being.

[chill_wind]

127. What? No amnesty for the Telco's that GW wanted?! Fresh New Terra Alert Time!!

"Terrah! Terrah! 911. Give me my bill!! We're in imminent new danger. Danger! Danger! Terrah!! Sqawk!! Terrah Alert! Terrists! Ter'rists! If Anything Happens It will all be Dems' fault. Dems are weak on terrah and we are strong. Terrah! Terrah! 911!!!"


:sarcasm:

[HowHasItComeToThis]

126. I AM REC 100, THERE SHOULD BE SEVERAL HUNDRED RECS

[cali]

134. Problem is this story is 95% bullshit lies

check Will Pitt's links in this thread. Go read thinkprogress and Glenn Greenwald.

[NuttyFluffers]

128. well, that's not neighborly.

predictable, and detrimental, and suicidal -- but not neighborly. i think i'm going to take off my Mr. Rogers sweater and cuff my deck shoes all over their parquet floors, those fuckers!
x(

[cyclezealot]

131. Dennis Kucinich is our cure.

Few out there of prinicipal. And today David Sirota says, Barack Obama will vote for Cafta in Peru.

[earth mom]

133. Hmm...blackmail...could it be related to this?

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2506.shtml

I've been thinking that "some" of the dems & rethugs are in cahoots together...

but maybe this is capitulation in order to keep the BFEE from ordering up another 9/11 LIHOP/MIHOP.

:tinfoilhat:

[cali]

135. Hmm. could it be that this story is mostly a lie?

Yes it could. Check Glenn Greenwald and ThinkProgress on this. Links in this thread.

[EstimatedProphet]

152. You're using reason. You know that's not allowed.

[orleans]

137. k&r. n/t

[liberal N proud]

138. Making the police state official

[SlingBlade]

140. The Only Fair Thing For

The democratic leadership to do is to resign.
If they are not up to the job due to moral or ethical problems that the Bush Gang is holding over them then they owe it to the people not only to resign but to expose this filth of government sponsored blackmail.

[Perry Logan]

144. I love the goofy conspiracy theories about Republicans having "dirt" on the Democrats.

Someone's been watching too many bad movies--especially since the Dems have in fact OPPOSED the administration more than any group of Democrats in 50 years.

[Perry Logan]

145. Meanwhile: "Democratic-Led Congress Breaks Record For Highest Number Of Roll Call Votes In History"

I think some of you have been reading the mainstream media again. No wonder you freak out every five minutes:

The House last week held its 943rd roll call vote of the year, breaking the previous record of 942 votes, a mark set in 1978. The vote was on a procedural motion related to a mortgage foreclosure bill. When the House adjourned on Oct. 4 for the long weekend, the chamber had reached 948 roll call votes, putting Democrats on pace to easily eclipse 1,000 votes on the House floor in 2007.

Last year, the Republican controlled House held 543 votes, and for historical comparison, the last time there was a shift in power in Congress, Republicans held 885 roll call votes in 1995. The Senate, which has held 363 votes this year, isn’t on pace to break any records, but has already surpassed the 2006 Senate mark of 279 votes.

Much of the lack of progress can be traced back to obstructionism by conservatives. Approximately “1 in 6 roll-call votes in the Senate this year have been cloture votes,” noted a July McClatchy report. “If this pace of blocking legislation continues, this 110th Congress will be on track to roughly triple the previous record number of cloture votes.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/09/roll-call-record/

[Ganja Ninja]

146. At what point can we call her lazy, stupid and incompetent?

This has gone on long enough. Cindy Sheehan is looking better all the time.

[0007]

147. Pissing myself even and recommending.........nt