Let us being with these profiles in courage from your leading Democratic Senators, showing the nation how strong and tough they are:
"I haven't read it," demurred Barack Obama (Ill.).
"I just don't have enough information," protested Ben Nelson (Neb.). "I really can't right now," John Kerry (Mass.) said as he hurried past a knot of reporters -- an excuse that fell apart when Kerry was forced into an awkward wait as Capitol Police stopped an aide at the magnetometer.
Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) brushed past the press pack, shaking her head and waving her hand over her shoulder. When an errant food cart blocked her entrance to the meeting room, she tried to hide from reporters behind the 4-foot-11 Barbara Mikulski (Md.). . . .
So nonplused were Democrats that even Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), known for his near-daily news conferences, made history by declaring, "I'm not going to comment." Would he have a comment later? "I dunno," the suddenly shy senator said.
Republicans were grateful for the gift. The office of Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.) put a new "daily feature" on its Web site monitoring the censure resolution: "Democrat co-sponsors of Feingold Resolution: 0." . . .
Many of Feingold's Democratic colleagues agree that Bush abused his authority with the NSA spying program. And they know liberal Democratic activists are eager to see Bush censured, or worse. But they also know Feingold's maneuver could cost them seats in GOP states. . . .
"Most of us feel at best it's premature," announced Sen. Christopher Dodd (Conn.). "I don't think anyone can say with any certainty at this juncture that what happened is illegal."
The column goes on and on like that, also naming Debbie Stabenow, Mary Landrieu, and Jeff Bingaman as Senators who virtually tripped over their own feet running away from the Feingold Resolution. There were a few -- very few -- honorable exceptions:
Dodd must not have checked with Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa). "The president broke the law and he needs to be held accountable," he said. "Talk about high crimes and misdemeanors!" Harkin said he'll vote for the Feingold resolution -- if it comes up.
And Reid did say: "Senator Feingold is a man of principle . . . I think that people should cool their jets and let the process takes its course." But when asked about his view on the Resolution, he would only say this: "It's a question that's been asked 33 times in the last few hours And so, for the 34th time, I'm going to say the same thing: I'm going to wait . . . ."
As a result of all of this, we have seen headlines over the last two days like this:
* Feingold Draws Little Support for Censure
* Some Democrats Wary of Resolution On Wiretapping
* Democrats Beat Quick Retreat on Call to Censure President
That's the way to show the country how Democrats will take a stand. It's always a great political move when the verb "retreat" is used in a headline -- accurately -- to describe the conduct of Democrats. And abandoning one's own ally and fellow party member, while wallowing in so much fear as to not even be able to articulate a position, is really a great way to demonstrate the courage and principle that lays at the heart of the Democratic Party. It's almost as though they are purposely re-inforcing all of the weakness and indecision imagery which has been imposed on them so successfully for the last couple of decades.
Making matters much more inexplicable, and infuriating, is this list, compiled by Liberal Oasis, of the 24 Senators (19 Democrats, 4 Republicans and Jeffords) who are still in the Senate and who co-sponsored Dianne Feinstein's resolution to censure Bill Clinton (not just for lying but expressly for having an "inappropriate relationship" with an adult woman). Included on the list are many Senators who are afraid thus far to support Feingold's resolution -- including Schumer, Reid, Landrieu, Feinstein and Kennedy. Most political positions are subject to reasonable debate. Favoring a censure of Bill Clinton while opposing a censure of George Bush isn't one of them.
And, relating to A.L.'s post below on the abject willingness of the media to simply pass along even factually false claims, much of the fear exhibited by Democrats is based on this factually false premise repeated in today's Washington Post:
Many Democrats, while sympathetic to Feingold's maneuver, appeared to be distancing themselves from his resolution yesterday, wary of polls showing that a majority of Americans side with the president on wiretapping tactics.
That is just so very false. Reading polls is not that hard. Even reporters -- and Democratic consultants -- ought to be able to manage that. And one poll after the next for weeks now has shown that a majority believes (.pdf) that the President broke the law, and that a majority opposes eavesdropping on Americans without warrants. There is just no excuse for this falsehood to be repeated.
Finally we come to a characteristically vile little e-mail sent around by Ken Mehlman, exhibiting the only tactic Bush followers really can rely on these days -- accusing anyone who criticizes George Bush of supporting The Terrorists:
This week, liberal Democrat Russ Feingold called on the Senate to censure the President for a program that is successfully stopping terrorists. After months of searching, Democrat leaders are finally beginning to find their agenda: take away the tools America needs tofight terror. . . .
Weakening our national security is their agenda. Is it yours? Sign the petition to tell the Democrat leaders to stop undermining the War onTerror with cheap political stunts. We are a nation at war. Our President has no more basic responsibility than to protect the American people and fight terrorists who want to kill us.
It's one thing if a lone Senator wants our government to look the other way when an Al Qaeda terrorist contacts a sleeper cell inside the United States. It's entirely another when Democrat minority leader Harry Reid commends Feingold's censure move for "bringing [theterrorist surveillance program] to the attention of the American people."
So, to summarize what our survey reveals: We have Democrats running and hiding, afraid to stand up to the President even when he gets caught breaking the law. We have the media mindlessly reporting GOP talking points even when they are factually false and when the falsehood could be easily verified with about 60 seconds of research. And we have Republicans accusing those few Democrats who are willing to criticize the Leader of being on the side of Terrorists, while the media passes along those false accusations without comment and Democrats run away and hide some more, never showing any offense or anger at all from watching Republicans accuse them of treason.
That's our system of government, in a nutshell. These events over the last 24 hour news cycle, by themselves, would be sufficient to teach a Civics class how our national political institutions work right now. That is the system which Sen. Feingold decided to disrupt, and few things need disruption more than this morass of dishonesty and principle-free corruption that permeates every single component of our national political life.
I may have to stop following this story. It's making me too sick. At the very least, please provide warnings at the top of each post where you include quotes from Democrats who run away from the resolution. My blood pressure honestly can't withstand reading any more of those.
ReplyDeleteI joining the "anybody but democrats and republicans" party. honestly, im done with these people. Spineless whinge bags. Id rather vote republican, then at least i can snicker now and then.
ReplyDeleteThey are afraid of Karl Rove, I think. Remember the Ron Suskind article in the New Yorker, January 2003?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000032.html
"Inside, Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. 'We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!' As a reporter, you get around—curse words, anger, passionate intensity are not notable events—but the ferocity, the bellicosity, the violent imputations were, well, shocking. This went on without a break for a minute or two. Then the aide slipped out looking a bit ashen, and Rove, his face ruddy from the exertions of the past few moments, looked at me and smiled a gentle, Clarence-the-Angel smile. 'Come on in.' And I did. And we had the most amiable chat for a half hour."
Remember, too, that Rove was the one person that no one in the then-current administration team would talk about for attribution. They too were afraid of him.
I believe Rove is a dangerous, disturbed individual, who must be stopped. He is also responsible in large measure (through indirect channels) for the press intimidation we have seen expanding, especially in TV and radio, over the last 10 to 15 years.
"Nothing appears more surprising to those who consider human affairs with a philosophical eye, than the ease with which the many are governed by the few."
ReplyDelete{ - David Hume}
I agree with Elaine, this is getting far too depressing. There's ONE GUY in the whole of the government AND the mainstream media who's willing to stand up for what's right?
ReplyDeleteHow can that be? I'm about ready to put my head back in the sand and stop following politics at all.
Jeff
In a way it is good that this happened at this time. It is better to know this now about the majority of Democrats in the Senate than to find it out during a crisis when one of them has been elected President.
ReplyDeleteBTW Bush and Rumsfeld got caught lying again:
US general says no proof Iran behind Iraq arms
By Will Dunham
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States does not have proof that Iran's government is responsible for the presence of Iranian weapons and military personnel in Iraq, the top U.S. military officer said on Tuesday.
President George W. Bush said on Monday components from Iran were being used in powerful roadside bombs used in Iraq, and Rumsfeld said last week that Iranian Revolutionary Guard personnel had been inside Iraq to stir up trouble.
Asked whether the United States has proof that Iran's government was behind these developments, Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon briefing, "I do not, sir."
Rumsfeld said that there was evidence, which he did not specify, that Revolutionary Guard troops "have been and/or are in Iraq," and that it would be reasonable to suggest Iran's government was responsible.
So what's new huh?
For those feeling so down. Watch the rerun today of the Daily Show. Ed Helms works with Paul Hackett to point out the joke (pun intended) that the dems and their party advisors are. I think, if Crooks and Liers puts up the video, we should all send the link to every dem and ask for comment.
ReplyDeleteI make sure I go to bed every night after watching some type of comedy. Don't go to bed after watching the news, weather or a drama show. It is not good for your health.
There is something astounding here that we must appreciate. A few years ago, we would never have known the true state of affairs we are now witnessing. Before the internet, pre-blogs like this one, running away would have worked; corruption and incompetent would have gone unnoticed; the MSM would have continued to blatter their propaganda and we (this community) would be none the wiser. The worm has turned.
ReplyDeleteThere is no more corruptable group of people in the world than the 535 members of Congress. Their actions for the past several decades have proven that. The MSM and their corporate boards of directors are in bed with them. Keep it up, Glenn. Public pressure is rising. What we need is perspective, you give us that.
Those cowardly dems dashed my hopes again. I say Feingold for president!
ReplyDeleteHi Glenn, Since you've also recognized the power and the passion of the blogosphere I've been thinking of ways for the blogosphere to somehow make an impression on the deaf dems. If you can't do it I don't know who could but I think there's something concrete the blogs can do to show even more support for Senator Feingold and censure and impeachment and finally returning our country to the rule of law.
If all the blogs could put Support Censure or Support Senator Feingold at the top of every page of their blogs then everytime there's a shot of one of them on the tv we'll see it. And any newcomers seeking information and probably affirmation of their feelings and intent would get a sense of unity immediately. And I won't get started on hope (you're welcome:)
Also I'd love to see every blog with a picture of the next senator from Rhode Island Carl Sheeler's billboard/bumper sticker featured prominently on their sites.
It's the truth:
"Be patriotic
Impeach Bush" with a lovely background of We the people. I'm getting one:)
The blogosphere is We the People. I also think we're quite united and while we're writing all these words put the important ones boldly up top. Censure today, impeachment tomorrow, a lawful functioning government NOW. We can show the Dems how to unite and be strong. Unity, such fun! And sooo United Statesy! And right now constitutionally obligated.
I, not only reclusive but generally deemed antisocial, have lent my voice to the blogs to help make our voices heard.
And why don't dems.com &.org come together? Could be fun, could be productive. Again, top of the page boldly supporting the patriot's cause. Today Feingold and censure, Conyers and impeachment. Tomorrow the world! HAhaha
What do you think, Glenn?
Take care, Jan
Oh and do you know why I can't get Firedoglake's site to come up?
What petition?
ReplyDeletethere's something else the Bushistas are holding over the Dems, there's just GOT to be. Something like, "we can't do individual eavesdropping pursuant to wiretapping because there's just too much of it! We have to scoop up ALL communications then sift them for terrorist-related stuff to find it. We HAVE to use the latest technology to just plow ahead to keep America safe."
ReplyDeleteSomething like that? They are being told SOMEthing behind closed doors that is scaring the bejeebus out of them.There HAS to be something. Glenn and A.L. have laid out the case so plainly and so forcefully that nobody that reads their posts on the NSA could reasonably disagree, unless there is some sort of gun pointed at their head...
The Democrats are a party walking backwards, they look to yesterday's polls for guidance instead of leading the public to the future.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the numerous Republican scandals presently on simmer in DC, this Democratic "strategy" is pathetic.
Let's start by taking a deep breath and reminding ourselves just how far the Bush administration has pushed the envelope: manipulation of elections; global, unending war against a tactic adopted by a changing but expanding cast of enemies; massive and increasing reallocation of income and wealth toward the rich; rape of the environment; destruction of the social safety net; suspension of habeas corpus; institution of massive international and domestic surveillance without legal sanction; secret imprisonment and torture; assassination of enemies; bombing of civilian targets . . .
ReplyDeleteOK, breathe again. Let's look at this calmly.
And what did Congress do while the Bush administration took the nation into this hell? Not nearly enough. These legislators, whether elected or "elected," hold positions of trust by definition, not by right.
So who trusts them now? Russ Feingold offers them a chance to rediscover what it is they were sent to Washington to do. Someday, maybe in 2006, maybe in 2008, they are going to have to answer the obvious question: Regardless of whether your party was in the majority or in the minority, why didn't you do something?
How can it be so hard to recognize the need to censure someone who has been a very bad boy?
This is a chance for senators to respond. Whether censure succeeds or fails, it will mark the moment when some did the right thing and others did not. If Republicans don't join in supporting censure, it is the Democrats' chance to give the voters a sign that they're the party that means to stop this rolling disaster.
The Bush administration has now idea how to make any of this better. As the months and years pass, everything is going to get worse. Senators who don't want to vote for censure need to think about that.
It is so obvious to me that we must focus on the MSM, which is, indeed, the Corporate/Republican media. If the cowardly Dems in Congress are too frightened to confront them on these talking points, we don't have a prayer of convincing the public that these are lies and gross manipulations. I keep beating this poor horse, but I believe there is plenty of life left in the noble beast: Al Gore , Russ Feingold and Howard Dean need to appear on all the major network and cable news shows repeatedly and tear a strip off this rotten facade. Maybe Durbin and Levin. I don't care what have to do to get there. It will be hard as hell to break through the media lines, but that is what leadership is all about! Absolutely no more "political strategists" should show their miserable faces on Hardball. Jeez, there is so much evidence of the lawbreaking by Bush and the attempts by Dems to improve port and border security that have been crushed by the Republican Congress. Surely a sharply focused message can be framed and presented. I don't want to minimize the efforts and accomplishments of the blogosphere, but we are preaching to the choir here, and we may or may not have success in stiffening the jello in the backbones of our Senators. Until we can reach the man/woman on the street through television, the medium that the masses trust (and think they understand, poor fools) we won't affect real change. We need to hit these folks in the ancient, primordial ooze of the limbic brain in order to achieve results.
ReplyDeleteI saw yesterday that one of the talking heads was saying that Feingold was simply playing a political game, posturing himself for 2008 as the real candidate of the left vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton. Now, I have no way of looking into anyone's heart, but to accuse the one person who has consistently been the only person who has stood on principle rather than "playing politics" of doing this only for political gain seems pretty disingenuous. I think that those who would espouse this are probably really afraid that if Feingold is left unchecked, he may actually stir things up enough that the truth might emerge. And, Lord knowsd, the last thing that the Republicans want at this point is for the truth to emerge.
ReplyDeleteIt angers me that people like VP Cheney and Scott McLellan continue to play the "afraid to confront terrorists" card. I suppose they believe that by repeating often enough that those who oppose the Terrorist Surveillance Plan are "weak" on protecting the country,k rqather than simply opposed to the Administration breakiung the law, that they will win the day. While it may work in some cases, the results of the polls show that a majority of Americans are not buying into their lies. I suppose our only hope is that Feingold will continue to stand up and be heard until the truth wins out.
This is so disgusting I had to stop eating breakfast this morning.
ReplyDeleteThe evidence is right freaking there for cryin out loud.It's not like these chickenshit Dems have to even dig that hard for it.
This is Exhibit A as to why the profit has to be taken out of politics.I don't know how to go about it,or how to help people understand this and STOP accepting it as"the way things are",but that's wtf lies at the heart of the problems we're in.
I also stand firm behind the tinfoily notion that the GOP has dirt on EVERYONE in DC,Dems,Repubs,Media types,and gods know who else.There's no other explaination that makes sense to me when I ask myself why more people aren't fighting for us on the Hill,and why the media isn't even trying to do it's job.(I also think this is the purpose of all the spying and why this administration is screeching about how badly they need to break the law and not be held accountable.I don't believe for a second they've restrained themselves from spying on their percieved"domestic enemies")
Our grandkids and kids are going to have a mess on their hands that they're not even close to being prepared to deal with.
I'm not giving up,but when I see stuff like this,I really wonder if we've got any recourse left beyond a full out insurrection.
I'm calling my republican senators today,as often as I can and asking them why they support the president lying and breaking the law whenever it suits him.I've got all my facts on index cards ready to go.After that,I'm calling the offices of some of these spineless Dems and giving them the same treatment.
I'm sick of being polite about this stuff,but I won't be rude,just firm and demanding.What is WRONG with these people?
OK, Glenn, on another note. The Hutchinson newspaper is coming out and against Senator Roberts.
ReplyDeleteSee.. http://www.hutchnews.com/opinion/editorials/stories/loyalty031406.html
And on a humoruos note the minor league hockey club in Las Vagas is having a Dick Cheney Hunting Vest promotion where the vest has on them, 'I'm Human Don't shoot me'.
See....http://www.lasvegaswranglers.com/wranglers.aspx?pid=106&pressid=258
Well, the only difference to Clinton, is that the Democrats are scared shitless that if they question the wiretapping they are weakening our national defense.
ReplyDeleteAnd the Dems are very scared to be labeled weak on defense...it's the world we live in, it's the reality we all face.
It's a sad reality, but there's no way out.
What about trying to bring a TEST CASE LAWSUIT to get the "Bush violated the Constitution and FISA and should be held accountable" issue to the Supreme Court?
ReplyDeleteFor the moment I will say this: I am coming to believe that Russ Feingold is the immediate answer and I am inclined to support him. However, it is almost certain that the Democratic party will not permit Feingold to be its presidential nominee. My question then -- for anyone -- is: What happens once Feingold loses the Democratic nomination?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think it's way too early to know the answers to those questions. For me, the priority it to: (a) rid ourselves of the one-party system we have so as to restore at least some balance, oversight, and logjam; and (b) promote anyone who is willing to vigorously oppose the very real threats posed by this Administration.
At this point, it's hard to even look at the political system from a Democratic v. Republican perspective because the real issue is whether someone is willing to fight the corruption and illegality that has taken hold of our government and which will only continue to worsen. There are some conservatives, some independents, some liberals who are willing to do that, and then there's a huge group in both parties which isn't. The goal is to expand the group of people which is willing to take that stand.
Nonetheless, it the case that if absolutist Republican control ended and Democrats had at least control over one of the branches of government (or even half of one branch, like the House), there would be marginally more limits on the Administration than there are now, and since I think the lack of limits is a very real crisis for our country, I'd have to consider a Democratic takeover of the House to be a good and desirable outcome, for that reason and that reason only. Beyond that, who knows?
(And just by the way - does anyone know how to make Blogads thinner so they don't intrude into the text? - please e-mail me if so).
Recluse asked "do you know why I can't get Firedoglake's site to come up?"
ReplyDeleteThe answer is - they moved to http://firedoglake.com/, and their old site is forwarding to http://www.firedoglake.com, which apparently isn't set up. I'll let them know. Click here for their new site.
Vichy Dems, every one. This must be what it was like to watch all of the non-Nazi party members (with the exception of the Communists and some Social Democrats) fall all over themselves to pledge loyalty to the Fuhrer.
ReplyDeleteAll the Democrats who wonder why people would vote for Ralph Nader need look no further. The Republicans have been waging an all out assault on the constitution and if Democrats are too cowardly to stand in opposition, they are part of the problem.
ReplyDeleteWe have a president and a ruling party which took power by marketing greed, bigotry and intolerance as traditional American values. Now that their blatent criminality and gross incompetence is obvious to all but the dwindling hard-core Republican base and a majority of people are not only receptive to, but demanding an alernative, the Democrats are running away from them in a desperate attempt to appeal to the Fox News and Rush Limbaugh dead-enders who will always hate them. It's as if they have internalized the Republican propaganda and refuse to let go even as most of America is rejecting it.
It seems few of our politicians are capable of learning from history, or if they do they generally draw entirely the wrong lessons. Democrats have seen Republicans beat them by prowdly spewing right-wing extremism. Democrat's conclusion has been that what America really wants is right wing extremism. Wrong. What Americans want to see in their leaders is what every people want to see in their leaders, the willingness to stand up for *something* and not back down or run away whimpering when someone calls them names. It's not what Republicans were willing to stand up for that made them appealing, it's that they were willing to stand up at all.
Kaplan asked: "What about trying to bring a TEST CASE LAWSUIT to get the "Bush violated the Constitution and FISA and should be held accountable" issue to the Supreme Court?"
ReplyDeleteI think this case qualifies:
The suit contends that the government's interception of conversations between al-Haramain officer Suliman al-Buthe in Saudi Arabia and lawyers Belew and Asim Ghafoor in Washington violated the Fourth Amendment, attorney-client privilege and the federal law that requires a court warrant to tap certain domestic phone conversations.
That's from a March 3 article in the Washington Post; I could find nothing more recent on the matter in Google News searches.
You know, we keep calling Senators and they ignore us - but not one is going to do anything when the media reports that Democrats don't want to listen in on terrorists, completely ignoring the facts.
ReplyDeleteI think most senators have just adopted a 'let them hang themselves' attitude about the 06 elections, and don't want to do anything to stir the pot (although we all seem to agree it would be a good thing).
Again, I would like to suggest, that if we are going to have an impact, it cannot be through online petitions (Conyer's half a million signatures related to the downing street memo has been forgotten)or online letters to senators via email.
I firmly believe that we need to remove the slant of the 'lefty radical blogsphere' and get down to the 'average Joe Blow' type attack - on the media via editorial letters. We cannot appear too smart or too well informed - we need simple talking points that go to editors. They are not swayed by fact or truth. They are swayed by the 'common man's interests' so I believe we should give it to them.
Simple emails to The Situation Room. Simple emails, from common man Joe to Fox and Friends, to Oreilly, etc. Emails about how, in our gut, things don't seem right. How we thought we were being protected but we weren't. How we wonder about the President's judgment in this wiretapping thing because his judgement on the ports deal was so off. Simple seeds of doubt that the stupid media take and run with. Their ratings are based on excitement, not facts or truth (hence weeks of the Aruba story).
We really really need to make a sort of common man ground swell, and, as sad as it is, I don't think we can do it through our Senators the way we can through this lapdog media.
Guess I watched too many Bonanza episodes as a kid because the westerns' message was that if Ben Cartwright was called a coward, he'd shoot up the whole town! The Dems are called cowards to their faces and in every media outlet across the world, Hell, ya gotta believe that Europe is cheering Feingold on, and yet given a choice, they choose to run away. This is not how this country was built.
ReplyDeleteAnd furthermore, I know this is the slimy stuff that Republicans do. But hey, it seems to be working for them, and for the first time in my life, I am so scared for the future of my country, the constitution and my childrens' futures, I am willing to stoop to that level. Not lying, but acting like a simple sheep of an American, that follows the herd - in our preferred direction
ReplyDeleteI also stand firm behind the tinfoily notion that the GOP has dirt on EVERYONE in DC,Dems,Repubs,Media types,and gods know who else.There's no other explaination that makes sense to me when I ask myself why more people aren't fighting for us on the Hill
ReplyDeleteAngry Old Broad, I was thinking the same thing, but I the sheer unlikelihood of it makes it hard for me to believe.
I think there is a better explanation, and I think it's this: The Democrats see the powergrab that the current administration is making, and they also see the 36% approval rating of the president. They've seen the polls indicating that if voting happened today, Republicans would lose a lot of seats in Congress.
They look at the power the president is consolidating for himself, and they want that power for themselves. They think they're going to be the majority party soon and that if they just keep their mouths shut, step back, and watch the self-destruct continue, they will inherit all the power that the Republicans are currently hard at work consolidating.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but that explanation seems more likely to me than the Republicans blackmailing everybody. And it seems to fit the facts. It explains why the Dems are so intent on ignoring we unwashed masses on the blogosphere, and it conincides almost perfectly with their observed behavior. And it doesn't require anything greater than incompetence on behalf of the corporate media.
I welcome this disaster and a part of me actually hopes it does hurt the Dems in the fall. Really. This is, hopefully, the dragging the rot out into the open where it can be sterilized by the warming rays and UV of the sun.
ReplyDeleteI truly hope that his causes a thorough cleaning out of the Democratic party. The detritus, the hangers-on, the leeches, roaches, and bacteria that are MOST of the party "leadership" needs to be stood up before the populace and spat upon.
We have to destroy the party in order to save it. Really. For THIS purpose, that otherwise insane sentiment from the Vietnam war era is correct. The Democratic party needs to be destroyed in order to save it...from itself. The only people left standing will (by rights) be Murtha and Feingold. The rest? Down the storm drains and into the sewage treatment plants with the lot of them.
With two exceptions mentioned above, the entire Dem party is made up of DINOs.
JESUS CHRIST! Bush is at 34% He's well into Nixon territory and the Dems are still terrified of him! It is, literally, insane.
Your call to terminate the present one-party rule appears, on its face, to be a euphemism for electing more Democrats.
ReplyDeleteThere was nothing euphamistic about what I said. I said I thought that it would be a good thing if Democrats take over one of the Houses of Congress in 2006 in order to restore some balance, impose some oversight, and ensure some limits on our government. My goal isn't to replace absolutist Republican rule with Democratic rule; it's to find a way to solve the severe problems plaguing our government, most of which are caused at the moment - in my view - by the unchecked exercise of power.
There are limits beyond which the Bush Administration simply cannot go and those borders are being reached. So there is some self-correction in the nation; it is still a democracy, after all.
That's just all theory. If the Republicans maintain control of both houses of Congress in 2006, what checks can you think will possibly exist on what the Administration can do for its (presumably) last two years?
Moreover, even if you personally advocate Democratic candidacies only or even primarily to provide partisan balance and end one-party rule, it is quite obvious that yours is a minority position among those who will support your effort to end the so-called "one-party rule." Most of the bloggers with whom you are in league are Democrats, plain and simple.
I'll make common cause with anyone who is devoted to the goal of ending the corruption and law-breaking which has taken over our Government. Bob Barr introduced Al Gore's speech. That's my model. I'm happy to work with people whose views and objectives converge with mine on these most important issues, even if there are lots of disagreements with regard to the secondary issues. Purity is not a virtue when attempting to achieve political goals.
I don't see the place for non-Democrats in such an effort except perhaps to be co-opted (used is too strong a word, perhaps) by Democratic operatives to achieve their routine objective of electing Democrats.
In 2006, in every race that has an outcome that is in doubt, there will be two candidates on the ballot - a Republican and a Democratic candidate. One of those two parties will control the Senate and the House. That's just reality. It'd be nice if one didn't have to choose between them, but the reality is one does. I won't support Democrats just because they're Democrats. I'll support anyone who believes in the importance of combatting the threats posed by this Administration.
America is dead. the bushies killed it while the dems cowered in a corner.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, Glenn, thanks for the excellent blogging and analyses.
ReplyDeleteThat said, this just goes to show that neither side really gives a fuck about the morals and values they claim to stand behind, only poll numbers and what proported opinion will keep them in power.
I'd say it's time to vote for a third party, but that's really not viable with the electoral college. A revolution is needed to change this archaic system. They ALL need to be removed from power.
Here we sit, reading and pontificating about how bad things are and why.
ReplyDeleteblah blah blah blah
Then we go to work, eat, maybe watch a little John Stewart.
Then we read and pontificate again the next day.
blah blah blah blah
Weeks become months, months become years, and still we read and pontificate.
blah blah blah blah
I just called John Kerry's office in DC and they said, "we will support it." I asked if that means he supports the idea or he will actually get up and vote for a censure. They said he will vote yes.
ReplyDeleteBut of course, it's all the Dems fault.
ReplyDeleteI know that because I read and pontificate every day.
The ABA resolution on warranteless wire tapping has gotten limited media attention. More people should look at the ABA resolution, dated February 13, on warrantless wiretapping which rejects the administration's arguments.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.abanet.org/op/greco/memos/aba_house302-0206.pdf
I won't support Democrats just because they're Democrats.
ReplyDeleteI, on the other hand, will not support Democrats because they are Democrats. No, I wont vote for GOPers either, they are all the same (clearly). I'm sad to see that Feingold has made this fact clear by his offering up the censure motion only to see the ENTIRE Democratic party (save Harkin and maybe Boxer) run for the dark corners like cockroaches.
What our choice is in the fall is for a party of OPEN criminals who are full of hate (the GOP) or a party of OPEN cowards who are furtive criminals (Dems). The ultimate outcome is harmful to the country either way so pick whether you like open hateful criminals or cowardly criminals.
Me? I choose neither. I hate to say it but if Nader runs again, THIS time I will vote for him (unless, somehow, Gore or Feingold are the "Dem" candidates for president). As for senator? I will vote Green. For the House? Green (because in Indiana there are no worthy Dems anyway). I'd prefer to help give the Greens support for future runs than feed the corruption and cowardice of the current Democratic party.
I'm a vet and a lifelong Democrat, by the way. This censure thing is the straw that broke the camel's back. I'm out. They can't count on me for ANYTHING. They can go to hell.
I am tired of people who are too tired to take a stand.
ReplyDeleteKeep on fighting,GG.
Glenn: Please, please, PLEASE get out the word that FISA does not cover any internationally intercepted surveillance that "targets" al Qaeda. Such calls can and are monitored by the NSA. When al Qaeda calls a "sleeper cell" here (or even their N.Y. dry-cleaner), it's fair game.
ReplyDeleteThe distinction is who is the "target" of the surveillance (and to a lesser extent, whether the target or the tap location is domestic). See 50 U.S.C 1801.
The Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to non-U.S. "persons" overseas, and if they call a "U.S. person", that's fair game even if the "associate" (party called or party calling the "target") is in the U.S. or is a U.S person.
People need to know this. You (with the big microphone) need to stress this. The oft-proclaimed but false idea that we can't snoop al Qaeda calling "sleeper cells" in the U.S. without a warrant is garbage. We don't even need a "reasonable suspicion".
It's only when the "target" is domestic, and we want to tap all calls that Osama's tailor in New Jersey makes to anyone, that a FISA warrant is needed (and then can be gotten retroactively). And despite what TOWSNBN says, if the tailor actually is an al Qaeda agent, a FISA warrant should be NP.... TOWSNBN has claimed that FISA warrants wouldn't be obtainable (based on the strong "evidence" of his own personal unsupported opinion), but the evidence as we know it is that FISA warrants are handed out like candy ... if you have some actual evidence (essentially no FISA warrants are ever denied). What Dubya wants is to spy on whoever he wants domestically ... whenever he wants, and on whatever evidence (or lack thereof) he wants.
Cheers,
I agree that America needs a two party system and balance among the branches of government, etc. however I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that all of that is being eroded away because the Democrats are too afraid of the president to participate in running our government.
ReplyDelete"It's almost as though they are purposely re-inforcing all of the weakness and indecision imagery which has been imposed on them so successfully for the last couple of decades."
Imposed on them?
Some Democrats are plainly so far out of touch that they are afraid to act because they don't know what the result of their own actions might be. If Democrats want to "restore balance", instead of constantly focusing on the Republican administration, they should come up with a meaningful platform of their own, then try to find some new candidates that aren't so lame.
The implosion of the Democratic party and the corruption of the Republican party has led to fury and disgust among sensible, thinking Americans. You, Glenn, have tapped into that energy. The question is what should be done with it.
ReplyDeleteDavid, I understand what you're saying. Your concerns are valid. But I think the first order of business is to persuade the public of how broken our government has become and how serious that of a crisis we have, how close it is to doing even more irreversible damage. If you're right - if public opinion is a sufficient check on government abuses - then it will all work itself out if this persausion can happen.
I'm not convinced that some grand plan needs to be mapped out in advance - mostly because I'm not sure it can be in a way that will keep everyone on the same page. For the moment, I think there is an urgent crisis that has to be fixed. There are lots of deep-rooted problems but the immediate crisis is coming from those who currently control our government.
Working on that immediate crisis is the objective I'm interested in at the moment and the method for fixing it is, at least for me, to finds ways to persuade more and more Americans of what the real situation is. The strategizing and logistics are somewhat of a separate question and will only matter once this persuasion happens.
It would appear that there are far too many Democrats in the Senate looking at a future beyond that house in Congress. And it goes beyond the pale to see 'strategists' leading these horses down a path of safety which has conspicuously lead the party to losses each and every year against an opposition that demonstrates time and again that it cannot govern a country nor protect/respect its citizenry.
ReplyDeleteYou get what you pay for in this instance. If we continue to elect a body of Democrats that act singularly for their own further political advancement, we will get more of the same.
This is not to say that Senator Feingold isn't taking this tack for a particular political motive, but it seems the purview of the troops in the field that this is more than appropriate.
Witness: Representative Jack Murtha speaks up and speaks out about the occupation in Iraq not going well and puts forward a common sense solution and Democrats turn and hide on a respected conservative Democrat from Pennsylvania. Senator Feingold wishes to hold this President accountable for still yet-to-be-determined-legal/illegal activities that infringe on Consitutional rights, and his colleagues close their mouths or worse, speak against the resolution.
If they don't understand how awful and disgraceful this is, than they really don't deserve a vote from me.
I'd urge you to do the same if things don't change.
Most of the Dem Senators didn't say they wouldn't support the censure resolution, they said, "no comment", or "I dunno". So email them--call them--encourage them to do the right thing. There's probably an easier way, but I google "U.S. Senate", click on "Senators", and try to email "I respectfully request you to consider..." messages to at least 10 Senators @ day. Try it!
ReplyDeleteI just learned that 2 national peace groups do not want to support the Censure because they think it lets Bush off too lightly, and because the "feeling on the hill" is that "the Dems are waiting out taking a position on impeachment and ending the war so they will win big in November."
ReplyDeleteIf it is true that "the Democrats are waiting out taking a position on impeachment and ending the war so they will win big in November," then what have we to lose by Censuring?
Do people really believe that the Democrats will get on board with impeachment? No way. Not yet, if ever. Only the most courageous --and we know there are excruciatingly few of those-- will do so. The same may be said regarding ending the war immediately.
So if we take as a given that the Dems are unwilling to risk supporting either impeachment or ending the war, and we do not ask them to support Censure, then we gain nothing between now and November.
To think that supporting this cowardly and supine position will serve to increase their support in November is both cynical, self-serving and more of the same outrageous equivocating, triangulating, trembling at the thought of being called unpatriotic,
anti-security, -- the mush that has been substituting for principled leadership among the Democrats in Congress.
The Democrats will never find out how grateful a lot of Americans would be if they don't stand up, stand together and take a strong, unified action to show their profound disapproval with the actions of this Administration. The country is not ready for
impeachment. It needs more evidence of what some of us already know to be true about the nature and motives of those running this show.
Censure of the President has been used only once before. It would send a powerful message, even if it couldn't be passed because of the Republican majority. It can be used as a step toward eventual impeachment, not as a substitute for it. It can be
used to gain momentum to get investigative hearings.
The Left is woefully divided, as ever (with the exception of the post-nomination Kerry presidential race). When will we ever learn? Look at what the Right has accomplished through party discipline and unity!
Maybe I'm dead wrong. I've been wrong before. But I don't think I am this time.
There is a very real need to start new forms of mass action.
ReplyDelete... targeting the media. Shut it down.
Would we be having this Constitutional crisis if Al Gore had been elected instead of George Bush?
ReplyDeleteTake a look at Gore’s speech, introduced by Bob Barr. Now if you still can’t see the difference between him and the authoritarian cult that the Republican Party has become, then I suggest you follow the advise of those advocating that Glenn start his own party, a prospect that will most certainly guarantee the perpetuation of the cult of Bush.
I’m glad that Glenn seems level-headed enough not to succumb to the delusions of grandeur put forth by some here that he launch some quixotic utopian crusade outside of the existing parties.
As bad and pathetic as the modern Democratic Party has become, it still is not in danger of adopting the authoritarian, anti-democratic and lawless policies of the Bush-worshippers. I hope Glenn continues to work with members of both parties, as well as trying to influence our pathetic media.
I agree with Glenn that the best way to do that is to work toward Democratic Party control of at least one part of Congress, which would enable investigations to go forward. That, as he says, is the immediate objective.
If that means he’ll lose the support of the quixotic crusaders who won’t support him in that effort because of his temporary alliance with the Democratic Party, then so be it. If he joins them, he’ll lose a whole lot more support, believe me.
Advocating and supporting an irrelevant third party a la Ralph “there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference” (between Gore and Bush) Nader, is what got us into this mess in the first place.
Now, for heaven’s sake, is not the time to do it again. Remain focused, Glenn.
I just tried to call my senators, Clinton and Schumer. Lines are busy. There's a firestorm out there that they can't hide from any longer.
ReplyDeleteTheoretically, a member of Congress represents a chunk of Missouri or Connecticut, and these voters alone get his or her mailings, satellite television feeds, and weekend visits: he or she is their representative. But the reality of what the average senator or congressman represents is a tailored slice of interest-group Washington: the party caucus or national committee, some contributors and polictical action committees, and a collection of think tanks and coalitions, associations, corporations, and unions. Grassroots party loyalty being so loose, 75 percent to 85 percent of senators and congressmen can use the right combination of interest-group backing to entrench themselves. To ordinary voters, representative government has become a shell - and behind it, only the influentials are truly represented.
ReplyDeleteKevin Phillips, the Republican strategist responsible for Nixon's Southern Strategy, wrote that in 1994 in Arrogant Capital a book in which he argued that politicians and lobbyists were quickly killing our democracy because they can profit from it.
Phillips ends the book with a number of suggestions on what to do about it.
genesimmons --
ReplyDeleteI know I've felt largely the same as you have, but while the cycle feels endless, imagine what our collective consciousness would be if nobody did this. There is a value to knowing things are messed up even if we feel we lack the immediate ability to do anything about it. Over the course of a long period of time, the more people discuss these things with friends and relatives, the more traction the discontent garners, and eventually changes, however minor, can occur.
Ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance would compel us to believe that George W. Bush is the infallible great leader protecting us from The Terrorists (apologies to Glenn,) and then nothing will ever come of it. Do you believe that Bush has suffered such a spectacular collapse in popular opinion based on the sniveling, feckless coverage he gets from the "liberal media?" I think it's clear that some progress has been made at least. A vast majority of the American people disapprove of Bush's performance. It's a start.
I don't wanna get too far into the "Bash the Dems" game today, since I think it's a little off the more immediate topic: What We Can Do To Stop This Administration From Limitless Lawbreaking.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I do believe that every single voter who is registered Democrat helps, by their very membership in the party, to perpetuate the non-principled stance that the party is taking. Basically, you're legitimizing the Democratic Party, and its positions and platform, with your membership in it. That's fine if you happen to agree with the Democratic Party and its positions and platform. It's problematic if there is *another* political party whose positions and platform you are in greater accord with, but which you opt not to join.
I, for example, happen to be a registered Green, because the Green Party's platform is in greater accord with my values than is the Democratic Party's platform. And, to a tiny extent, I legitimize the Green Party and its platform with my very membership in it. The more members the Green Party has, the more legitimate its platform is perceived, relative to, say, the Democratic Party's platform. The fewer members the Green Party has, the less legitimate its platform is perceived, relative to, say, the Democratic Party's platform. In this way, I am casting a vote for the Green Party and its positions every single day that I am a registered Green.
Those of you who happen to be registered Democrats are, this very day, casting a vote for the policies the Democratic Party is espousing. If you're fine with that, great. If you're not, I'd counsel making a change, or casting a different "vote" today.
p.s.: FWIW, I do consider party affiliation and party building a means to a progressive end (as opposed to folks like Kos, who has made it clear that party building--specifically Democratic Party building--is, for him, an end in itself... something that is ugly and revolting to me.). As such, and in contrast to Kos's stated philosophy, I frequently volunteer for, donate to, and cast votes for principled candidates of other parties besides my own, and this includes the Democratic Party. Toward that end, I'd like to remind those still reading to please join me in actively supporting Democrat Marcy Winograd, who is mounting a vigorous primary challenge (in my safe Democratic district) to Jane Harman, who is the self-described "best Republican in the Democratic Party," and who is an active and key Democratic supporter of the president's illegal, warrantless-eavesdropping program.
Here's Marcy's website:
www.winogradforcongress.com
Please join me and many other volunteers of various partisan affiliations in helping to replace a Bush Democrat (in my liberal district... Venice, CA!) with a true progressive (who also happens to be a Democrat) we can count on to defend the Constitution, and the rule of law.
And that's all from me. I won't talk about the Green Party or the Democratic Party any more today, and that's a promise.
Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA
I think all the talk about the power of the blogosphere is overblown and ill-conceived. While the excellent points and discussion going on here and elsewhere is important, it means nothing because it is simply words in a medium that verges on nothingness.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, it's all too abstract. as many people have shown, the public sphere has been reduced to such a point that we are all anonymous voices and pseudonyms spouting ire and neat concepts but only within the comfortable zone of privacy.
Nothing will be done until people regain the public in the phrase public sphere. Until they take to the streets, hold town mettings, house discussions, and so on these politicians can just lie through their teeth because they know it's gonna be a whimper rather than a bang when it comes to real action.
I am not one for mass movements--though they have served their purpose in the past. More important are symbolic acts of individuals standing up and saying they'll be counted. Look at Thoreau and others who have followed this example.
Feingold is in fine company in this regard. He's set the example for all who care about this issue--a solitary individual willing to withstand the scorn, ridicule, and media disdain for his belief.
This does not mean that people should stop calling their representatives, writing newspapers, contributing to forums such as this one. It does mean, I think, that until people come up with creative ways to put their own bodies, spirits, or reputations at risk, the insiders on both sides will just yawn and smirk about the ghosts of the blogosphere.
Unbelievable. Im sure my blood pressure went up like 10 pts just reading this article.
ReplyDeleteI say we the people find their own candidate and thru grassroots support get them elected. The only way that I personally will vote for a candidate is that they at least address some of the follwing issues:
what about running a candidate that has strong support for, or even addresses some of the following issues:
* removing the influence of corporate money in politics by making federal elections publicly funded such as already happened in conn, ariz and hopefully in Calif
* removal of the use of the 14th amendment by corporations to protect and promote their profits at the expense of people and the environment
* have voting done in an alternative fashion such as instant run-off voting where candidates can be ranked. That would have certainly solved the "but for" problem you mentioned.
* committment to heavily fund sustainable energy and economic development and move away from limited fossil fuels that put millions of years of accumulated carbon back into our atmosphere in the span of a few hundred years. And we wonder why the climate is heating and the ice caps are melting?
If these for issues are addressed then every other political problem will be solved by the system(ie government) much like a virus is attacked by our immune systems. The real question will these issues ever be brought into the dialogue of american conscious. Or better yet can someone bring them in?
What does everyone else think about these issues. lets start a discussion.
"Feingold must be stunned, like a soldier leading his machine gun-toting men into battle who then run screaming away from the rock-throwing enemy." - Rude Pundit
ReplyDeleteI just noticed last night that if you replace the word "terrorist" with the word "gremlin," you get a lot better idea of the way Republicans are trying to scare everyone:
ReplyDelete"This week, liberal Democrat Russ Feingold called on the Senate to censure the President for a program that is successfully stopping gremlins. After months of searching, Democrat leaders are finally beginning to find their agenda: take away the tools America needs to fight gremlins. . . .
Weakening our national security is their agenda. Is it yours? Sign the petition to tell the Democrat leaders to stop undermining the War on Gremlins with cheap political stunts. We are a nation at war. Our President has no more basic responsibility than to protect the American people and fight gremlins who want to kill us.
It's one thing if a lone Senator wants our government to look the other way when an Al Qaeda gremlin contacts a sleeper cell inside the United States. It's entirely another when Democrat minority leader Harry Reid commends Feingold's censure move for 'bringing [the gremlin surveillance program] to the attention of the American people.' "
To get the ball rolling on the suggestion i just made:
ReplyDeleteBrainstorm 1: Thousands of people petition the government, individually, for information on whether their email, phone calls, etc. have been monitored. I do not know the legal paperwork involved here--perhaps someone hasa website where this type of legal stuff is found?
PFAW has a way of doing this, cynic librarian:
ReplyDeleteFOIA Request Form
Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), anyone has the right to request information from the government. Last strengthened by Congress in response to the Watergate scandal, FOIA gives citizens a way to demand transparency from the Administration -- and take the government to court if necessary.
Many Americans -- especially those with family and friends abroad -- are wondering whether government agents have been listening to their phone conversations or reading their email. If you're worried this has happened to you, you can use this site to help you find out.
We can't guarantee that the Bush administration will disclose all this information in compliance with the law, but we can help you through the process. By filing a FOIA request, you will send a strong signal that American citizens believe in the rule of law and aren't afraid to stand up to the President when he violates the Constitution!
Brainstorm 2: Stand on Main street's corner with sign saying: Stop Govt. Spying on Us: Call Senators ###-###-####
ReplyDeleteBrainstorm 3: Place ad in newspaper with same message as 2 above.
Last night I spent considerable time going to various blogs and reading the comments, something I rarely do except on this blog. I visited blogs across the political spectrum.
ReplyDeleteI noticed something. There were many Republican bloggers on sites which represent them, Conservative Bloggers, Independents, single issue commenters (like abortion) and commenters who supported Feingold's censure motion--strongly.
The only thing I didn't see, not one in the thousands of comments I read through, was a single Independent, Democrat, progressive, or liberal commenter who was AGAINST Feingold, and who was writing in support of the Democratic party.
NOT ONE.
NOT ONE.
A week ago there were Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Plus the trolls, of course. Now there are Republicans, Independents and people who hate the Democratic Party but love Feingold!
I also did notice that there were moderate Republicans who said they would vote for Feingold for President, but for no other Democrat.
It would seem the blogosphere has managed in a few days, although apparently the MSM has not picked up on this yet, to demolish one of the two main parties: the Democrats. Sure, the big money/special interest groups will continue to donate to them and the MSM will continue to shill for them, but the "people" have jumped ship!
This is good. Now the question is, how do we do the same to the Republican party? Or in destroying the myths surrounding the Democratic Party Machine and their corrupt politicans and advisers, are we amassing the power to make sure a Russ Feingold can get the nomination, and reform the
Democratic party from within?
I keep reading the same comment over and over on almost every blog I visited: at this point, people do not trust a SINGLE individual to reform either party in a broken system except Russ Feingold!
Everyone wants an alternative now. Everyone is talking third party. But it's probably more practical to work within the system, since time is so short, and shift the emphasis to getting Feingold elected President.
It would be a refreshing change to finally have a President who represents the people of this country, and not just the power elite.
I imagine we'll be hearing a lot from the MSM that Feingold can't get elected because he's Jewish, because he's been divorced twice, because blah blah blah.
They're used to being able to damage the candidacy of people they don't want elected by those twentieth century tactics.
That's another thing the MSM and the party machines have not picked up on yet: nobody the F cares! What people want is an honest person with principles.
If every newly impassioned Democrat and every disgusted Independent and every principled Republican who is against Bushco came out to vote in droves, because there will finally be someone to vote FOR, instead of casting a vote for the lesser of two evils, wouldn't the 2008 election be a MASSACRE?
Those who have written that Feingold shouldn't have done this without consulting the Democratic Party have missed the entire point. If he had the party behind him on this from the git go, we wouldn't be looking today at the very real possibility of Feingold becoming President.
He led, and others could have followed, but they failed to do so. He's exposed the fact that the system is broken. Could he have done that any other way?
Glenn said:
ReplyDeleteDemocrats run away and hide some more, never showing any offense or anger at all from watching Republicans accuse them of treason.
Speechless. I'm rendered speechless. Why won’t anyone FIGHT?
I’m well past the point of suspecting that our Democratic Party has been subsumed and has become an apparatus of the Republican Party. The Demopublicans.
Looking back over the Bush presidency through the lens of one party rule and things begin to make a lot more sense.
Taken in this context with the a jaundiced eye examining the run up to the war and the subsequent scandals that don’t get covered in any meaningful way by our media, I see there is no reason for Karl Rove to fret. His permanent republican majority dream has already been achieved.
Our only assignment now is to topple our (as David Niewart calls it Fascism Light) government through external means. Money, and the dictatorship of the moneyed class are here.
The NSA scandal is either the chink in the armor or more than likely it could be the canary in the coal mine. Direct usurpation of constitutional power without consequence will only embolden those that would seek further untrammeled power for the executive. Because we are at war, we’ll have to give up everything to Dear Leader. Anything less would be treason.
I fear our populace has not seen the canary croak, they understand they don’t like the direction of the country but the propaganda of the moneyed class makes it difficult to understand exactly where their discontent is coming from.
In short, educating the people has to be done through the media. The media is hopelessly broken right now.
How will the blogs fill the void?
Brainstorm 4: Engage a conservative evangelical in discussion about how come they're against RFIDs and other potentially intrusive government tracking capabilities but not against NSA spying. There's a big disconnect here in the evangeical community. They think that the Anti-Christ will set up systems of controls similar to Orwell's 1984. Yet, I have read none of these leaders or others come out against the idea that the NSA is potentially spying and tracking them now. You have to buy into any of the mythology to simply educate them about 1) the NSA's p[rogram and 2) about their seeming contradiction on this point. On other words, why's it okay for Bush to spy on us but not the Anti-Christ?
ReplyDeleteLeft Coaster's commenter Anja has come up with the idea of calling Feingold's offices to thank him. They have 5 #'s there and I figure for the cost of a latte I would call. I called all 5 offices, took me about 5 minutes, they were all very nice, asked for my addres & phone only on one. They are taking a tally.
ReplyDeleteAlso, shouldn't our emphasis shift from contacting politicians to get them to support Feingold (who really cares at this point if people who don't share our values or vision of government decide it would be politically correct to support Feingold?) and concentrate on overwhelming the MSM so they will at least know what is going on? They may not choose to report it, but at least they will know.
ReplyDeleteThere is absolutely NO press or media coverage of this fever which is sweeping the country. It's all happening on the Internet. It is kind of thrilling, I must add, to see that there is finally a way for people to really communicate with each other in this country, the Internet, and not have the MSM telling everyone what the "people" are saying. It really is sort of like Revolutionary times, when people rode around on horseback to take the news to the populace.
Glenn writes:
ReplyDeleteI'll make common cause with anyone who is devoted to the goal of ending the corruption and law-breaking which has taken over our Government. Bob Barr introduced Al Gore's speech. That's my model. I'm happy to work with people whose views and objectives converge with mine on these most important issues, even if there are lots of disagreements with regard to the secondary issues. Purity is not a virtue when attempting to achieve political goals.
I have to agree with all of that. No one could be more surprised than me that my favorite politian on the planet at the moment is a left-winger like Russ Feingold. I abhor the McCain-Feingold campaign finance "reform," but that just isn't the important issue at the moment.
George Bush's theories of why he is not bound by law are as dangerous to anything I can imagine for our system of govt and the rule of law. If we don't hold him accountable, such notions could become institutionalized. And he won't be held accoutnable, and such notions won't be meaningfully challenged, as long as the Bush/Frist GOP controls all branches of govt.
This is simply not the time to be promoting third parties. The crucial thing is to end GOP hegemony in govt, because right now, that is where the dire threat lays. Electing Democrats to at least one branch of govt -- or one house of Congress -- is the only sensible strategy, in my very strong opinion.
The WSJ Opinion Journal shows how scared the Bush supporters are of an impeachment proceeding. Lefties should take heart; the Repubs are quite literally shaking in their boots:
ReplyDelete“...everything that Mr. Bush has been accused of during the last five years, no matter how Orwellian or thoroughly refuted, will be trotted out again and used as impeachment fodder...Not only do they want to block his policies, they also plan to rebuke and embarrass him in front of the world and America's enemies. And they want to do so not because there is a smidgen of evidence that he's abused his office or lied under oath, but because they think he's been too energetic in using his powers to defend America. By all means, let's have this impeachment debate before the election, so voters can know what's really at stake.
Oh, that part about the shaking? Well, take that with the same grain of salt that you should be taking when Mr. Greenwald says: “...few things need disruption more than this morass of dishonesty and principle-free corruption that permeates every single component of our national political life.
The key is to remember: There is a battle going on for the hearts and minds of the RNC -- the RNC leadership has only non-sense to rely on.
ReplyDeleteSo speak to the RNC members: Encourage them to choose between the RNC leaders' rebellion; and the Constitution. [ Details: Issues which can speak to the RNC membership ]
Also, the RNC cannot claim they are "for national security" -- they are at odds with it: Look at their results.
Also, speak to those who are independent, and not committed or frustrated: They want to see the new leaders who will emerge and assert the rule of law, not phony polls and legal non-sense.
You're on the right track. Reframe the issues in terms of what the RNC membership has to decide: What will ensure power is appropriately used, not squandered based on lies – the assent to law and the Constitution. Large national debts put their future financial security at risk – increases the chance they’ll have to do grunt work.
I believe Rove is a dangerous, disturbed individual, who must be stopped. He is also responsible in large measure (through indirect channels) for the press intimidation we have seen expanding, especially in TV and radio, over the last 10 to 15 years.
ReplyDeleteWell, if he is that dangerous, and he is almost directly responsible for torture and the killing of tens of thousands of people by locking in place a corrupt government on all levels, isn't it time to out him?
He's the engineer of the politics of personal destruction
and intimidation. Why does he, and all the other high ranking hypocritical Republicans who talk one way and live another, get a pass?
This Feingold Censure Resolution is unmasking the hideous underbelly of almost every Washington institution as vividly as anything that can be recalled.
ReplyDeleteGreat post -- important point. Regardless of what the DINOs do, we have a small "victory" if we can keep people talking about the rule of law, the pResident's disregard for the Constitution (damn piece of paper...), and how the media works.
If we can continue to carry these messages, its a start. Thanks!
And they are assaulting judges who give decisions they disagree with in really astonishing ways as pointed ou by Slate
ReplyDeleteA fascinating read. Welcome to bizzarro world.
FWIW
ReplyDeleteI gave the "journalist" that penned the WaPo story the links that Glenn provided for the correct polls and asked where she got her information that a majority of Americans support this program. I'll post her response if I get one.
I just found out about the sneak and peek clause in the new Patriot Act. The government can enter your house when you are not there and search everything, and not tell you about it for a year. And now, they can do that without a warrant.
ReplyDeleteThe National Security Archive Director says that the protections put into place after the Nixon scandal have been removed by Cheney. He says that the reason that we should have a government that operates openly is that it is simply inefficient to do otherwise. Decisions made in the dark are not good decisions, he says. His name is Thomas Blanton.
His words: "The secrecy is not protecting us, and that's the problem. If it was protecting us, we'd all be for it. But it is simply not protecting us, and is working against us."
Hope somebody finally realizes that there is a huge untapped "market" out there. All these older people who call into CSPAN sound like real patriots. They grew up and fought for a system of government which they now see is slipping away.
I don't think most of them read blogs. How do we reach them?
Is it time yet to organize demostrations and marches? Who can do it? How can we be of help to Feingold? I am completely fed up.
ReplyDeleteBrainstorm 5: (piggbacking on eyes wide) Put an ad in the newspaper with the following words: "I just found out about the sneak and peek clause in the new Patriot Act. The government can enter your house when you are not there and search everything, and not tell you about it for a year. And now, they can do that without a warrant."
ReplyDeleteWendy you write: I just learned that 2 national peace groups do not want to support the Censure because....
ReplyDeleteForget what's after the "because". We know what the real reason is. They raise LESS money from angry people if those people see a possibility of redress some place other than through giving money to those peace groups.
Please post their names, Wendy, if you can, so we know who else not to support.
And everyone should remain honest. Stop praising Murtha. He did not come out in favor of this censure motion. He is "one of them" in everything except his opposition to the war in Iraq, which could even be simply because he doesn't think we can win it. Well, neither does William Buckley. Should we be calling him a hero? Ans: Hell no.
ej. About FOIA Request Form. Here's the problem. I won't use it. I consider it a very real possibility that our government will simply use that list of people concerned with issues of privacy to start snooping on those people even more.
ReplyDeleteWe need some new lawyers we trust, beholden to nobody, maybe under Glenn's wing, a new, smaller, grassroots type of ACLU devoted solely to these two issues of illegal government spying and illegally detaining and torturing people.
Tea party, anyone?
ReplyDeleteI'll bring the crumpets
Glen,
ReplyDeleteThis statement of where we are is one of the most profound statements I've ever read. We need you badly to continue to articulate these views.
Thanks.
Altan: Sure, why not? Do you have access to a community that'd be willing to do it? I imagine there are plenty of groups who'd be willing to support a call for this. But, as I said earlier, this is merely one part of a larger strategy. Many people are simply unwilling these days to engage in large groups--either because they work huge hours, are afraid, or something similar.
ReplyDeleteIf you can muster a group gathering of this kind, be sure to get press coverage by sending our press releases several weeks before the event, then calling the day before the gathering each news org you sent the release to.
As bad and pathetic as the modern Democratic Party has become, it still is not in danger of adopting the authoritarian, anti-democratic and lawless policies of the Bush-worshippers.
ReplyDeleteOh you are SO wrong. The Dems are a danger to democracy every bit as much as the GOP. The GOP is overtly dangerous and authoritarian while the Dems are more subtle about their authoriatarianism.
For the Dems, it is quiet authoritarianism by corporations (via money to Dem candidates that then do the bidding of corporations). For the GOP, it is loud and obnoxious, like NAZIs, but it also carries the corporate money/bribe thing too.
The Dems pat you on the head as if you are an errant puppy, say that they know best, then do the bidding of the corporate masters. The GOP tells you to "shut your face traitor!", has the SS run you outside to dump you in the gutter, then go on to do the bidding of their corporate masters.
Either way, it is authoritarianism via corporation (corporatocracy). Either way it is anathema to our formerly Constitutional form of government. Either way it gets you ignored no matter how loudly you howl and gets the corporations happy. Either way there is no functional difference, push comes to shove.
Glenn, you make too much sense. Your reasonableness (is that a word?) makes me question my own political philosophy. I thought I was a raving liberal, but I think I'm just standing as far away from what I am not.
ReplyDeleteLike a seventeen year old boy defining who I am by beating up on homosexuals. This is probably why I still have not answered Hypatia pointing out principle/policy ideas posted days ago.
That suit is a fraud:
ReplyDeleteI think this case qualifies:
The suit contends that the government's interception of conversations between al-Haramain officer Suliman al-Buthe in Saudi Arabia and lawyers Belew and Asim Ghafoor in Washington violated the Fourth Amendment, attorney-client privilege and the federal law that requires a court warrant to tap certain domestic phone conversations.
Our government has its hand in this suit. It's a suit intended to fail, but one that makes people think something is happening so they don't bring other real suits that would succeed.
The first thing people should do is to question everything.
And they should realize on a conscious level that failing to be aware of and identify one of the most basic strategies of tactical warfare is a recipe for disaster.
That basic technique is to dress up as the opposition, get the opposition forces to follow, and lead them off a cliff.
Nobody knows this or practices it more effectively than Karl Rove.
Every day of my life I am newly shocked at how few are able to see it when they are being duped by another who is using that technique.
Glenn Greenwald said
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, it the case that if absolutist Republican control ended and Democrats had at least control over one of the branches of government (or even half of one branch, like the House), there would be marginally more limits on the Administration than there are now, and since I think the lack of limits is a very real crisis for our country, I'd have to consider a Democratic takeover of the House to be a good and desirable outcome, for that reason and that reason only. Beyond that, who knows?
I would expand this line--there would be marginally more limits on the Administration's illegal domestic spying than there are now...
I would like to hear any arguments that would support this position. I see no evidence that if even the democrats took both houses that anything would change except the illegal part.
My perception of the democrats election philosophy related to this issue is one of "who are you gonna vote for, the republicans?" The democrats response to the censure motion could be viewed as out of touch and tone deaf or it could be viewed as the very confident assumption that the vast majority of those concerned with this issue will vote for the democrats no matter what positions the party takes.
I won't support Democrats just because they're Democrats. I'll support anyone who believes in the importance of combatting the threats posed by this Administration.
This line seems to contradict your earlier point about the democrats obtaining a majority in congress. I agree in a general sense that a divided government is a great check and balance but without any evidence about the positions/actions of current and potential future members of congress related to a specific issue this seems to be the kind of wishful thinking that the current leaders of the democratic party are banking on.
This should be about specific issues and specific people that hold specific positions. As soon as this is an amorphous battle of political parties it is game over.
Eyes Wide Open: If I'm afraid to send an FOIA request, then I should also be afraid to make international phone calls, sign my name to LTEs, contribute $ to certain organizations and people with my credit card over the internets, check out certain books at the library, e-mail people like Feingold, expose my IP address to sites like this, etc., etc.
ReplyDeleteI have nothing to "hide," except all of the above. Bring it on.
david shaughnessy, come back. List your suggestions for the precise way people can take action to combat what is happening. If they are better than Glenn's, they'll be taken note of. Tell me a Republican you support and I will throw my support to that person also if he represents the same values about which you have written on this blog.
ReplyDeleteconstant, thanks. Will look into those suggestions tonight. Good work, as usual. I hope everyone reads your site, which is superb.
Cynic, am loving your brainstorming ideas. I was having many of those same thoughts myself. Too bad there are only 24 hours in a day. As soon as this immediate Feingold situation is resolved one way or another, your ideas are ones which are going to have to be acted upon as part of this whole effort.
to 'the cynic librarian': Thanks for the reply. Oddly enough I am not the social popular type of person who knows a lot of people etc. I am hoping others will organize stuff that I can contribute to. But maybe one of these days I will get on the street and start shouting...
ReplyDeleteGlenn:
ReplyDeleteThe Republican Party is the devil and Democrats (minus Feingold/Harkin) his brother.
Feingold has proved that the American people have been duped by both parties! It's the standard "good cop"/ "bad cop" rolls they play off one another to give the illusion that there is a political tension between the two parties when in reality there is none. I believe Russ Feingold revealed this politcal reality in stark detail this past week.
Why has it become so apparent now? I think it's because of Iran. If you haven't noticed yet, the Bush Administration and the media is ramping up (or preparing the American people) for war with Iran and not surprisingly most Dem law makers are going along along willingly (kicking and screaming...just for show of coarse!). Well with Iran brewing big time...a censure vote is a political wrench thrown in the middle of the Repub/Dem scheme to expand the war in the middle east. A censure vote against the President would be such a huge political hit that what little political capital was left to go after Iran is lost. Dems would be forced to take a harder stand against the President's Iran venture...the would demand it.
Have Dems voiced any substantial opposition to going after Iran? No! And I think Feingold's actions have revealed this Repub/Dem game.
Feingold's call for censure is the right thing to do, but I also think that the timing of his actions is also an attempt to derail the expansion of the middle east war (ie Iran)....and God bless Feingold for that!
Any thoughts?
I just wanted to thank everyone here for all the entertainment provided daily with Glenn's posts and the commentes attached thereto.
ReplyDeleteTo thank everyone I wrote this:
If the neocons can keep their heads while all about them are losing theirs....
Just how much abuse do you chickenshits have to take before you quit being the new african americans of the democratic party. How much more blathering about tin foil hats, betrayal, and cowardice do you have to direct at the democrats YOU VOTED FOR before you demand of yourselves the very same backbone and principles the absence of which you decry in the democrats YOU PUT IN OFFICE?
Gets some backbone and do that which you whine so loudly about. Quit the democrtic party and put your votes and your actions where your big fat mouths are.
Says the "Dog"
Here's the party I'm supporting.
ReplyDeleteNo More Elephants! They walk all over everything, stick their snaky trunks in your pockets, steal all your cabbage and leave behind huge piles of crap.Vote Anti-Elephant Party in 2008!
Ok; now seriously.
Graphictruth: If there are no other supporters of Sen. Fiengold's resolution...
I'm seriously pissed at Harry Reid, who's office has not even bothered to respond to me - or anyone else, from what I'm seeing.
Worth noting from the Mehlman missive: all Democrats are going to be tarred with this anyway. If you're going to be punished, might as well at least have the pleasure of the sin.
ReplyDeletenotherbob2 quotes WSJ...
ReplyDeleteAnd they want to [impeach] not because there is a smidgen of evidence that he's abused his office or lied under oath, but because they think he's been too energetic in using his powers to defend America.
Mmmmm... that looks like some tasty, tasty Kool-Aid. Darn my luck I'm "diabetic".
That's our system of government, in a nutshell.
ReplyDeleteOkay... pick a winner!
Feingold is a complete asshole(I did not vote for Bush in 2004(in Ohio) solely simply because he chose to sign the completely unconstitutional legislation that had Feingold's name on it...)(note: That made me 0-4 in all my chances of ever voting for a man named "Bush"...) (88-"abstain")(92-Marrou) (96-Browne) (2000-"abstain") (2004- Peroutka)
You seem to get "good cred" for your 'movement' from the "conservative" side...
Are you now 'voting' "Democrat"? (Who?!!)-- Is there any 'possible' "third way"?
Or, do you think that the First Amendment just does not matter... as compared to Bush's crimes?
My major 'political goals' are the complete elimination of both Social(ist) (In)Security and Medi(S)care...
Are you really a conservative?
...or just a "RINO"- with 'second thoughts'?
The WSJ has it right today on this:
ReplyDeleteAs a legal matter, Mr. Feingold's censure proposal is preposterous. The National Security Agency wiretaps were disclosed to Congressional leaders, including Democrats, from the start. The lead FISA court judges were also informed, and the Attorney General and Justice lawyers have monitored the wiretaps all along. Despite a media drumbeat about "illegal domestic eavesdropping," Mr. Bush's spirited defense of the program since news of it leaked has swung public opinion in support.
But as a political matter, the Wisconsin Senator knows exactly what he's doing. He knows that anti-Bush pathology runs so deep among many Democrats that they really do think they're living in some new dictatorship. Liberal journals solemnly debate impeachment, and political-action groups have formed to promote it. One of our leading left-wing newspapers recently compared Mr. Bush to J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, as if there were even a speck of evidence that this White House is wiretapping its political enemies.
Mr. Feingold's public service in floating his "censure" gambit now. He's doing voters a favor by telling them before November's election just how Democrats intend to treat a wartime President if they take power.
Not only do they want to block his policies, they also plan to rebuke and embarrass him in front of the world and America's enemies. And they want to do so not because there is a smidgen of evidence that he's abused his office or lied under oath, but because they think he's been too energetic in using his powers to defend America. By all means, let's have this impeachment debate before the election, so voters can know what's really at stake.
Says the "Dog"
Gotta love spin. This is a perfect example of the medias bias and almost intentional misleading of the public.
ReplyDelete"As a legal matter, Mr. Feingold's censure proposal is preposterous. The National Security Agency wiretaps were disclosed to Congressional leaders, including Democrats, from the start. The lead FISA court judges were also informed, and the Attorney General and Justice lawyers have monitored the wiretaps all along. Despite a media drumbeat about "illegal domestic eavesdropping," Mr. Bush's spirited defense of the program since news of it leaked has swung public opinion in support."
First, the wiretaps needed to be APPROVED by the FISA judges which is not the same as informing them.
Second, bush completely bypassed the courts and did not ask for retroactive approval. In fact a judge retired in protest for this very reason.
third the Congressional Research Service, a research arm of CONGRESS has said that Bush's actions are legally questionable.
Everything else in the article means absolutely nothing in terms of the legality of his actions.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
This is exactly what Democrat voters hate about their party. Their represenative should take positions that are well thought out instead of cowardly running away from the most important issues our country can face. The only reason why I'm voting Demnocrat is because I hate what Bush has done and don't want it to happen again. Not because I support the Democratic party or its represenatives that still cannot decide what positions they take on anything-particularly the most important ones.
ReplyDeleteLike Kerry, no democratic candidate believes taking a position on anything will help them get elected.