Condi Rice makes me sick every time I look at her or have to listen to her. She and the rest of Bush& co really dropped the ball prior to 9/11. Thier solution was to start a war to stay in power. Now thier solution to stay in power is to continue that war and to start other wars. There will a very special place in hell for these people who have with cold blooded calculation sent our young people to be maimed and killed for thier own profit. Hell will get these ....in the long run. In the shortrun, we need to get these ....out of office. To fail to do so will be to fail to protect the American people and our Democracy.

I see that Lieberman once again voted along his party line and sided with his Republican brothers and sisters on the torture bill.

We should all thank them for flipping off the rest of the world and telling them that the Geneva Conventions don't apply to us, as well as using the Constitution to wipe their backsides.

Thank you for thinking of our soldiers and realizing that their protection was far less important than stopping Bush's temper tantrum in Washington because we expected him to play by the rules.

Shame on all those that voted to give Bush ever more reaching power and brushing aside accountability.

Republican Mission Statement:

The Rules don't apply to us and if you say they do we will change them.

Yesterday I predicted that a minimum of five DLC Senators would vote to codify the United States' entry into the club of nations which sponsor terrorism (and if you think that spiriting away suspects to hidden prisons for an indeterminate amount of time, denying them legal counsel and torturing them is not "terrorism," then perhaps you should consider dual citizenship with our ally Uzbekistan - buy some winter vacation property there, perhaps. You can learn how to boil political dissenters in oil and send the meat to their relatives.)

Whoo boy was I wrong!

12 Democrats voted for the bill and nine of them were DLC'ers.

So...9 of 19 DLC'ers think that torture is peachy keen and habeus corpus is an inconveniece - 47% -
while only 3 of the remaining 25 non-DLC Senators
agree with them - 6%. This proves again, as if we needed further proof, that a DLC Democrat is roughly 8 times more likely to vote like a Republican than a normal Democrat.

I sincerely mean this - if an incumbent DLC Senator is running for reelection, the country and the Democratic Party would be better served if the Republican were to win. It's too hard to get the assholes out of office once they're elected, and I'd rather take my chances with a decent Democrat six years hence than give a DLC'er six more years to turn us into a single party banana republic.

Here are the Democratic Bush butt lickers who voted for this atrocity:

Carper
Johnson
Landrieu
Nelson
Nelson (yes, both of them)
Lieberman
Lautenberg
Pryor
Salazar
Stabenow
Menendez
Rockefeller

reposting from last open thread:

Posted by Kathy_in_Indiana on September 29, 2006 at 09:31 AM

Kathy, I find it extremely funny that the Republicans are talking about Democrats raising taxes when this year alone Republicans made sure my taxes went up while the Democrats fought to get the sales tax deduction untangled from various bad laws, such as cutting income to min. wage workers while making the appearance that they were in fact raising the standard.

Any of you that live in states that have a sales tax rather than an income tax can personally thank your Republican representatives for raising your tax bill this year.

Posted by Kristen on September 29, 2006 at 09:37 AM

I found this on the net last night... the whole mugshot lineup: Democrats for Torture. I say hold all their feet to the fire -- all the way up to their butts.

While Bill Clinton was "smoking" Chris Wallace, I was on my feet Cheering! I hope Bill Clinton speaks out even more often on the issues. Current historians have been way to easy on Bush. When objective historians in the future look objectivly at the presidencies of Bush and Clinton, Clinton's legacy will tower over that of Bush.

George Soros out of politics?

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292006/news/regionalnews/anti_w__oros__i_quit_politics_regionalnews_maggie_haberman.htm

RedLetter_Rev -

I like the trademark on 911 - used by permission of the RNC. Good one!

And let's note, too, that Sherrod Brown is on the list. Recall that hackett was pushed out of the race by Chuckie Schumer, another DLC'er.

I can't believe that Lautenberg voted for this bill. Dementia muct finally be settling in.

"... for political purposes."

Ok, this should serious scare the crap out of you.

They cry, pray to Bush and wash out the devil - welcome to Jesus Camp

The children at the Kids on Fire summer camp are intent as they pray over a cardboard cutout of President George Bush. They raise their hands in the air and sway, eyes closed, as they join the chant for "righteous judges". Tears stream down their faces as they are told that they are "phonies" and "hypocrites" and must wash their hands in bottled water to drive out the devil....

...At one point Pastor Fischer equates the preparation she is giving children with the training of terrorists in the Middle East. "I want to see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ as the young people are to the cause of Islam," she tells the camera. "I want to see them radically laying down their lives for the gospel, as they are over in Pakistan and Israel and Palestine." /blockquote>

Posted by Kristen on September 29, 2006 at 10:21 AM

Actually Kristen, I'm not that frightened by that camp. It will most likely result in some screwed up kids who will give all their money to psychologists some day.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on September 29, 2006 at 10:37 AM

Or blow up something up. What happened to not bearing witness to false idols? The idea of praying over a picture of GWB makes my skin crawl.

Joseph - Good read!

I would add, though, that the reason for outing Plame was more sinister than a smear job on Wilson.

I've never bought the idea that you could sell a trip to Niger of all places, as a boondoggle.

The purpose of outing Plame was to tell everyone in the intelligence community - "Screw with us and you will lose your career, and you may be find yourself in some very real danger."

Hmmm...I wonder how the DLC feels about exposing our CIA agents?

I wasn't around here much yesterday so this may have been talked about.

House approves wiretap law

Do you think that the Constitution comes in two-ply? I would think Republicans would be starting to chafe from number of times they have wiped themselves with it.

I hope that I will not be abused for posting this.

I've been a proud Democrat and progressive all my life. And I've been passionate about it - very much so, believe me.

This morning I've been trying to come to terms with the abolition of habeus corpus, the legalization of torture, and the retroactive indemnification against prosecution for war crimes of all members of the Bush administration.

I've been trying to understand what it's going to be like, living in a country which has given the President the LEGAL power to kidnap, imprison for life, and even torture to death anyone he pleases, without the slightest danger of ever being called to account. He can do this to any American citizen, entirely at his option. No one may question him. There are no checks or balances. He has more power than any king.

And my party stood by. They cast their "nay" votes - all but twelve traitors to their oaths of office - but they knew full well that they were going to lose.

Why didn't they filibuster?

I suppose...I fear that it was because they were afraid that if they filibustered, the Republicans would use that against the party. News flash: Bush and the Republicans are using that against the Democrats ANYWAY. They already have, this morning. And no one, no one who knows anything about modern politics can honestly claim to be surprised.

Any one senator could have filibustered. None did. I still can't get my mind around it. What happened? Please, what happened? It's like a nightmare.

I don't see any way around it. The Democratic Party no longer stands for the ideals I believe in - the ideals of basic human rights for all citizens. And so, with great sadness and even more fear for the future, I just called my local Board of Canvassers and have requested disenrollment forms for myself and my family.

I see no way around it. The party has left me. And it let America die. Disenrolling is almost totally meaningless, I know...but how can I remain in a party that won't even stand up for the right to not be tortured, for every citizen to get their day in court?

I was a proud Democrat all my life. I hoped to remain one forever. I can't tell you how sad I am that this has happened to our country, and to our party.

Kristen -

Edward R. Murrow once said, "We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."

What the fuck was HE thinking, anyway?

Peter, you surely won't be beat up for your post. I believe many here are wondering the same thing and the simple truth behind their votes seems so incredibly shallow that it is hard to believe it really boils down to wanting to save their careers.

An article I read this morning said that those that voted with the Republicans are in tough re election bids in their states and come from Republican leaning districts so they wanted to take the bite out of the 'soft on terror' barb Republicans are using this year. (and past years for that matter)

This seems extremely short sighted when you think of what these laws truly mean to us as a Country and what we have always stood for, with Bush's laws it is clear the terrorist (Bush) has won, we have been scared into handing him our Constitutional rights and thanked him for taking them away.

Posted by Peter on September 29, 2006 at 10:47 AM

No, I'm not going to beat you up. But I will question your reaction. How does that help your fellow Americans?

Hey I'm getting sick and tired of you people bitching and moaning about how the weakest members of our party were forced to vote for torture.Their constituencies wanted this crap and shooting these democrats in the back is a disgraceful display of your allegiance to the red scourge.How many of you have done something so easy like joining the ACLU or at least signing their petition online(aclu.org)?Have you sent your checks to the DNC?Are your signs up on your home? What about contacting friends or relatives that live in these districts to voice your opposition to torture?Stop being played like cheap fiddles by these despicable ugly red americans and stand up for what you believe!

Peter - you're not alone.

As for the filibuster, you may recall that seven mutant Dems, mostly DLC members by the way, decided that the only time it would be appropriate to filibuster is when the majority party says it's OK. The Democrats essentially promised not to filibuster in order to preserve their right to filibuster. Kind of like a teenager deciding to have sex to preserve his or her virginity.

I'm with you in feeling despair, but I hope against hope that the party is not fatally flawed by DLC Democrats who would rather compromise and capitulate in the belief that their actions will keep them in office, rather than fighting for principle with the knowledge they may lose their office fighting for a just cause. And that's being charitable. More likely is that most of these DLC assholes really would rather be Republicans, but can't figure out how to make the switch and survive their next reelection campaign.

Do you think Paul Hackett would vote for torture is he became a Senator from Ohio? Sherrod Brown, the DLC Schumer poster boy, has already shown his colors.

The DLC is EVRYTHING that is wrong with the Democratic Party.

Something from Dear Abby

Dear Abby,

I am a crack dealer in Bradenton who has recently been diagnosed as a carrier of a rare virus. My parents live in a suburb of Tampa and one of my sisters, who lives in Sarasota, is married to a child molester. My father and mother have recently been arrested for growing and selling marijuana and are currently dependent on my other two sisters who are prostitutes in Miami.

I have two brothers. One is currently serving a non-parole life sentence at Stark for murder of a teenage boy in 1994. The other brother is currently being held in the Manatee County Jail on charges of neglecting
his three children.

I have recently become engaged to marry a former Thai prostitute who lives in Jacksonville and, indeed, is still a part-time "working girl" in a brothel.

My problem is this: I love my fiancé and look forward to bringing her into the family and of course I want to be totally honest with her.

Should I tell her about my uncle who voted for Bush?

Signed,

Worried About My Reputation

ER -

Democrats who regularly vote with Republicans on the most important issues of the day (war, USSC nominmations, taxes, social security, civil rights and more, in no particular order) - and I'm talking about DLC Democrats - deserve to be pilloried in any forum available, particularly if other Democrats may be listening.

That said, doing so does not preclude anyone from taking any of the actions you suggest, although I would argue that giving money to the DNC is the wrong way to spend your political money. A much better spend is to suport specific Democratic candidates who agree with you on the major issues. Money given to the DNC will fund, in some part, the election campaigns of DLC Democrats.

Bush is lying to you about Iraq, Americans told

THE Bush Administration has lied about the level of violence in Iraq, especially against American troops, according to the investigative reporter Bob Woodward, who has spent the past two years researching and writing his new book State of Denial.

Woodward says that not only has the Administration lied about the level of violence, but it has buried intelligence reports that warn of the insurgency in Iraq getting worse in 2007.

BlueinIdaho wrote:

No, I'm not going to beat you up. But I will question your reaction. How does that help your fellow Americans?

I have a son. He's the most precious thing in my life. This is not the world I want to leave for him. If there was something I could do, I'd do it. I've tried for many years now, but wasn't able to stop this day from coming.

But please tell me why I should remain in a party that will not stand up for even the most basic human rights? Habeus corpus, for god's sake! Torture! How can I stay in a party that won't speak out about that? How can ANYONE sane think for ONE SECOND that it made sense not to stand up in the Senate and say "NO. Not this. This is not American."? Even if cloture passed, even if they went down to defeat...what the hell does victory at the polls gain them now? A junior piece of the pie in a dictatorship?

Where was Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? Russ Feingold? ANY of them? Please, please, please explain it to me.

Dean on cnn live now - I want to see a replay of this one.

There is a season for all things. A people, a nation have to be ready for Democracy. One of the tests of whether or not apeople are ready for democracy is; will they come together, will they work together; and most of all, will they fight for Democratic government
The government that we have installed in Iraq meets none of these tests. They will not only not fight for thier own freedom. they won't work together. They know amoung themselves who the insurgents are and they won't even furnish thier own government information to stop the killing. This is because they are more interested in killing off the opposing islamic sect so that the winner can install thier own version of an Islamic theocracy
It does not matter when we leave, one month from now, 6 months from now or years from now, these peoiple do not really want democratic government, they are not ready for it; they don't even understand it. If they did understand it, if they did want it, they would have already run with the opportunity we have given them.
It is time for us to cut our losses in troops, money and equiptment. We need to pull all of our troops out within 90 days and redeploy a substantial number of troops to Kurdistan. The Kurds have set up a functioning government and economy and have earned our support.That is only if the Kurd's want us there, if not bring all of our troops home now and lets regroup and learn something from all of this.

Peter, maybe this perspective will help:

Nonetheless, it is simply a fact that virtually every Republican in the House and the Senate (with one sole exception in the Senate and only 7 in the House) voted in favor of this tyrannical bill, while Democrats overwhelmingly opposed it (in the House, 160 Democrats voted "no," while 34 voted "yes"). With those facts assembled, it is fair to say that the Republicans are the party of torture, indefinite and unreviewable detention powers, and limitless presidential power, even over U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. By contrast, Democrats have largely opposed these tyrannical, un-American and truly dangerous measures. Even if Democrats didn’t oppose them as vociferously as they could have and should have — and that is plainly the case – this is still a meaningful and, at this point in our country’s history, a critically important contrast.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

Posted by goodfoe on September 29, 2006 at 11:11 AM

That reminds me of something our Dem Candidate for Congress said at a meeting recently:

"I don't think that I'm the first person to tell President Bush that it will be hard to turn a nation of Islamics into a Christian Democracy".

It simply will never happen.

Peter - you have to do what is right for you.

I don't see any party better right now, and I still want to work on fixing this one. I for one have been saying much about popular candidates suchs as Harold Ford Jr. (who is a which way is the wind blowing checked before doing any vote - or conveniently doesn't vote) and there are many more (look at the list - and some arent on this list). I get hammered all the time about "you shouldn't be saying anything about them before the election", :don't give the repubs ammonition" and "troll". But these candidates need to be put on a list to be removed - if they can't get with the larger majority of the democratic views then they need to go. I also don't want to hear any nonsense about they voted for their constituients either, because I have lived here in W TN for 14 years, have voted Democratic all those years and have yet to be polled by any of them( dems) yet, I have been polled by republicans, and even invited to town meetings by Republican Paul Stanley. In TN the Dems seem to be a closed group, who don't go out of which ever box they are in to find new people who want to be heard, they just want the usual statis quo - well if you and me don't start to be heard both locally and nationaly (hense I have started blogging - not just here and doing other work) and continue to work hard like many others here. How will it get better if we all just jump ship. What are your options, move to Canada, crawl in a hole, or work to make it better?

This is what the Party of Torture (GOP) gave America:

Geneva Conventions Not Establishing Source of Rights- No alien unlawful enemy combatant subject to trial by military commission under this chapter may invoke the Geneva Conventions as a source of rights.

And, when they say "alien unlawful enemy combatant", that means every person in Iraq and Afghanistan they have rounded up so far and into the future.

Baronscarpia, you fail to understand that the dnc is not funding as much money to dlc candidates as they would like.Dean has kept the money for party infrastructure for future use.Your simple-minded attack on some faction of the party is not constructive now and should be saved until after nov. 7th when it would be more appropriate.Hold your fire until then and I'll be happy to join you in making some changes in what many of us agree is a flawed policy of being republican-lites.I appreciate your views but timing is essential to winning right now.

ER wrote:

Their constituencies wanted this crap and shooting these democrats in the back is a disgraceful display of your allegiance to the red scourge.

Look, it's not like I'm mad because they won't support something esoteric, like public financing of elections or equal national funding for all schools. This is habeus corpus and torture. Just how low ARE your standards? Just how little do you EXPECT from party members, from your elected representatives?

If this isn't a betrayal of their oaths of office, what is?

How many of you have done something so easy like joining the ACLU or at least signing their petition online(aclu.org)?Have you sent your checks to the DNC?

Does being poor mean that I don't have the right to an opinion or voice? Am I less of a citizen? Less of a party member?

Are your signs up on your home? What about contacting friends or relatives that live in these districts to voice your opposition to torture?Stop being played like cheap fiddles by these despicable ugly red americans and stand up for what you believe!

Just what more do you want me to do?

And...look, I don't like to say this, but NO DEMOCRATIC SENATOR was willing to filibuster. So far I have yet to hear ANY acceptable explanation why. I've given as much as I could to the party for my whole life. And now they've accepted torture and the loss of habeus corpus.

Where does it stop? I'll continue to vote Democratic, but why should I be a member of a party that did less than it could have to oppose torture? And they're committing political suicide into the bargain!

Peter, I don't know what to tell you or how to answer your questions. The Repukes are smart, tough and they have a lot of money to work with. What they have very cleverly done is to create a situation where it would create division in the Democratic Party. United we stand, devided we fall.
Don't give up hope yet, "The cream has a way of rising to the top." The Democratic Presidential primaries may well produce a strong leader who can reunite this party, give it unity and bring us total sucess, ie, contol of the House, the Senate and the White House. Until then we have to trudge on, differences and all. The alternative is joining the Repuke party where dissent is not allowed. True Democracy is a best, the melding of many different opinions, not blindly following a political party like the Repukes no matter what they do. The people of Germany blindly followed Hitler to destruction, not only for themselves but also for a large part of the world. 20 million people died in ww2, we can't afford another hitler, so, PLEASE STAY IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!

Did you see the interview today on CNN with Howard Dean. The anchor was very contentious with Mr. Dean. Very disrepectful! Saying comments like UMM when he was giving his answers and o'really!

One question was how would the Democrats capture Osama Bin Laden. The last I knew THe PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONTROLS THE MILITARY!!! WHY DON'T THESE FAKE TAKING HEADS ASKS THOSE TYPE OF QUESTIONS TO THE REPUBLICANS!

Peter I don't expect you to support torture but who would you give your support to? The party that wrote this garbage or the party that opposes it? Would you have democrats in weak positions commit political suicide for your views? If they did I don't think you'd be very happy with their republican replacements.PS why fillibuster a bill that has no validity? It's garbage that can't withstand judicial review.No senator would risk political damage for dribble like this bill.

The republicans have no ideas,that's why they always ask what we will do.Don't give them any.

I'll continue to vote Democratic, but why should I be a member of a party that did less than it could have to oppose torture?!

Posted by Peter on September 29, 2006 at 11:37 AM

Because, if we do not grow the party that, in large numbers, opposed this unAmerican, unConstitutional rape of the world, we could be in for far worse.

I don't have an answer as to why they did not filibuster, as I agree, this is THE ISSUE to use that tool. However, people like you and me have to reach out to others to tell America what their leaders did. It is historical and sometime in the future we will collectively hang our head in shame. Just as we did when we imprisoned the Japanese and used Africans as slaves.

Peter then help John Edwards!

Did you see his statement posted on One America Committee:

"In its zeal to score a political victory before Congress adjourns for the midterm elections, the Bush administration and the Republican leadership are playing politics with our national security by pushing through a deeply-flawed bill that would undermine our long term ability to win the war on terror."

"Congress clearly must address the issue of the interrogation and judicial review of terrorism suspects and detainees. But Congress must do so in a manner that upholds the legal ideals and moral principles that for more than two centuries have made the United States a beacon to the entire world."

"President Bush is now proposing legislation which will repudiate the writ of habeas corpus and grant him the power to imprison whomever he pleases for as long as he pleases without trial, charge, or judicial review. This bill signals to the rest of the world that the United States government condones torture."
"To win the war on terror, we must preserve our moral authority to lead the world. If we are to succeed in spreading democracy abroad, we must defend the fundamental principles of democracy at home."
"The Senate should reject this proposed legislation, and address the issue of terrorist detainees in a manner worthy of our people, our heritage, and our values."

One America Committee here

dk2 wrote:

What are your options, move to Canada, crawl in a hole, or work to make it better?

But the leadership of the Democratic Party doesn't seem to be interested in this fight. There doesn't seem to be anything - ANYTHING - that they're willing to stand up about and say "No. Not this. I would rather die than see this happen to our country."

I believe that Howard Dean is a good man, and that his heart is in the right place. But he's only one man. There are a few other Democrats who I respect and trust - Barney Frank, for example. But I simply cannot get my head around the fact that NOT ONE DEMOCRATIC SENATOR was willing to filibuster. Not one.

And this isn't the first time this sort of thing has happened, either - look at the 2000 and 2004 elections, for starters. What does it take for the party leadership to say "Enough"? I can't escape the conclusion that there's NOTHING they'll stand up for. Somehow the party of FDR has turned into...this.

It's not just a betrayal, it's pure political idiocy. It makes no sense to me, not on any level. This clearly isn't my Democratic Party any more.

Oh, on a low level - people like most of the posters here - I'm with you. We're on the same page, you and I. And I'll keep on voting Democratic, no question. But I can't stay a member of a party that tacitly allows torture, that didn't fight to its UTMOST to save habeus corpus.

Those simply aren't my values. My father and grandparents fled a country like that, and I can't stomach the idea of being a member of an organization that allowed those things to happen here.

But the leadership of the Democratic Party doesn't seem to be interested in this fight. There doesn't seem to be anything - ANYTHING - that they're willing to stand up about and say "No. Not this. I would rather die than see this happen to our country."
****

peter,

They listen to the damned analysts, consultants and DLC money people way too much. What cracks me up is that these people have brought nothing but failure. Why continue going down the same road to failure? Makes no sense.

The one pleasant thought I can hang onto is the idea of Bush, Cheney and Rove being strapped down and waterboarded until they finally tell the truth as to why they invaded Iraq.

Those cowards will give it up before a single drop of water hits their face.

"The Senate should reject this proposed legislation, and address the issue of terrorist detainees in a manner worthy of our people, our heritage, and our values."
****

Thank goodness for Edwards! Kerry was also against this thing. So, what gives with Menendez?
Stupid, stupid, stupid ... never politics with your principles and never sell out the base.

Y'all know I rarely ask this, but if you're feeling charitible, would you mind giving me a read (and mebbe a recommend)? It's too long to post here and I'm not catharsized yet. If I don't write this out of my system, I'm going to explode.

Thanks, y'all.

Daily Kos

BlueNC

PartyBuilder Blogs

(Blog in haste, repent at leisure)

ER -

In the first place, I know a lot more than you evidently think about how money that is donated to the DNC is allocated to Democratic candidates, be they DLC or non-DLC. The argument between Dean on the one hand and Rahm Emmanuel and Chuck Schumer (chairs of the committees to elect Democratic Reps and Senators, respectively) on the other is not about WHETHER the DNC should allocate money to individual campaigns (as your argument suggests), it is about HOW MUCH should go to individual campaigns rather than the funding of staff and other expenses to build up the party structure in states previously "written off" by Dems. So yes, some of the money donated to the DNC will go to structural improvement of the party, but most certainly "some part" (as I said) will go to funding the campaigns of Democrats who may or may not espouse the core beliefs of the person making the donation.

As for the timing of my remarks about the DLC, I respectfully submit to you that there is no bad time to observe that a group of politicians are charting a course which is inappropriate. In fact, the DLC's very existence is based on a fundamental disagreement with the course the rest of the Democratic Party had taken through the sixteies and seventies. Sorry if the timing is inconvenient to you, but I think election time is PRECISELY the right time to be talking about Democrats who think and act and vote like Republicans. I won't apologize for taking a group like that to task, and I certainly won't refrain from isolating them from the rest of us after they whent and built their own fucking tree house for their own goddamned club with their own secret handshake, just to emphasize the point that they were different and apart from the Democratic Party.

Sorry if that's too simplistic for you.

And while we're on the subject of simple-mindedness, I would further suggest to you that there could be nothing more simple-minded than the adopting a political strategy which reduces the number of sitting Democrats in the Senate from a high water mark of 61, I believe it was when Ronnie took office, to the current pathetic figure of 44, and then proclaiming that what we need is more of the same strategy, and a further shift rightward, which is just what assholes in the DLC say to the rest of us Democrats.

The DLC represents everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party, and I see no point in keeping that our special little secret until after the elections. None at all.

Hey, Baron,

I hope whoever put that Dems For Torture page up will finish it. Dagnabbit, we don't need traitors to the Constitution in our midst. As soon as each and every one of those folks comes up for re-election, I hope and devoutly pray that a real Dem will step up to the plate to replace them.

Back to work with me. I'm still shaking my head over yesterday's disaster. Just can't wrap my brain around it at all...

Posted by RedLetter_Rev on September 29, 2006 at 12:12 PM

As always, dead on.

It's too long to post here and I'm not catharsized yet. If I don't write this out of my system, I'm going to explode.
****

You blog entry is exactly right. Destroy th econstitution and bill of rights and there is no more America.

I am amazed that people don't realize that. They are giving in to fear. They are buying the argument that politicians can gaurantee their security.

But there are guarantees. Taking away all civil liberties will NOT protect us. All that accomplishes is to make our lives miserable while the threats remain.

Back to work with me. I'm still shaking my head over yesterday's disaster. Just can't wrap my brain around it at all...

****

I said last week to prepare for disappointment. At the time, I didn't expect my two Senators to be part of the disappointment.

But there are guarantees.

****

Correction:

But there are no guarantees.

ER wrote:

Peter I don't expect you to support torture but who would you give your support to?

The party that wrote this garbage or the party that opposes it?

Would you have democrats in weak positions commit political suicide for your views?

It would be better to commit political suicide than to go along with a bill like this. Because either way, the bill would be rammed through; but at least history would judge the Democrats kindly, and the world would know that SOME Americans, at least, were willing to take a stand.

But why are you so sure that it would be political suicide to oppose torture and support habeus corpus? Is it impossible that a principled stand might actually HELP Democrats at the polls, instead of hurting them? I don't know, but I would love to find out.

PS why fillibuster a bill that has no validity? It's garbage that can't withstand judicial review.No senator would risk political damage for dribble like this bill.

If you or the Democratic senators are relying on the Supreme Court to save us all, I believe you'll have a very painful lesson soon.

And so will we all.

I believe it was when Ronnie took office, to the current pathetic figure of 44, and then proclaiming that what we need is more of the same strategy, and a further shift rightward, which is just what assholes in the DLC say to the rest of us Democrats.
****

Baron - what you said, what you said! It's time to dump that bunch of losers called the DLC. They are the ones that create confusion in the Democratic party. I would almost venture that the DLC is funded by GOOPERS (that may or may not be true). They clearly have been subverting the party and alienating the base. What a great strategy - alienate your base and activists. Do they honestly think they get Repubs to vote Dem by acting like Repubs? Why not just vote Repub in that case?

I knew when Bush started talking about installing a Democracy in Iraq, that he didn't have the slightest idea what he was getting us into. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had no understanding of Islam or the many devisions in Islam. The thought that you could ever bring the Shiites and the Sunni's into a "Democracy" was sheer stupidy. They didn't know that they didn't know and in thier arrogance, they didn't care. It is time to admit that we have made a tradgic mistake and bring the troops home. Now! 90 days and that's it!
Afer the dust settles, then we can go in and negotiate a contract for the oil. They prabably won't sell it to us, but they have to sell it somewhere which will increase the supply on the open market. AND NO MORE TRYING TO BUY FRIENDS WHICH MEANS NO MORE MONEY FOR RECONSTRUCTION IN IRAQ. THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ IS ALREADY IN BED WITH IRAN, SO THEY CAN GET TJIER RECONSTRUCTION MONEY FROM IRAN.

Peter i'm not gonna beat you up either and your frustrations is understandable but i hope you'll reconsider and not leave because in 40+ days we have an enormous chance to take back the house,and i hope we'll do everything in our power to help Howard and put in real progressive candidates who will stand up for the constitution.

And i agree with my fellow posters and they're preaching to the choir about the DLC,this is there fault that they put us in this position and we must put an end to that.

My advice go to Barry Welsh's website and in there is a list of real progressive candidates in the 50 state strategy box and choose who you'd like to support.

I knew when Bush started talking about installing a Democracy in Iraq, that he didn't have the slightest idea what he was getting us into.

****

Now, that's for sure. I knew we were in deep trouble when Bush talked about the "axis of evil". I immediately said to myself - what the hell does this have to do with 9/11? Unfortunately, many Americans don't ask the tough questions. They just go along with whatever the government says. That's how we get into trouble. That's how we lose our liberties and expend resources foolishly.

ap215 wrote:

...but i hope you'll reconsider and not leave because in 40+ days we have an enormous chance to take back the house...

They recently ran someone against a seated Democratic state representative to punish him for trying to unseat a powerful mayor. He lost.

Just to clarify, a progressive, SEATED Democratic state rep was defeated by the state Democratic party machine for the crime of trying to unseat a corrupt mayor.

But that's beside the point. I'll continue to vote Democratic. The party isn't losing my vote. It's losing me (and possibly my wife) as a member. Here in Rhode Island, that means less than nothing.

But it means something to me. I have a problem with torture, you see. I don't like it.

The more I think about it, the more I conclude that it comes down to how willing are we to challenge authority. I think that's the real agenda behind Bush's tribunal legislation. He wants to instill in every American the fear that being critical of your government may result in you being locked up, tortured or even killed AND he can get away with it by accusing you of terrorism. I think the showdown with the people is coming. Don't expect much help from the politicians. Populist movements are rarely embraced by politicians. When it comes down to it, most politicians embrace power that emanates from money and people in high places.

Judicial Reveiw
The power to strike down laws is not specifically listed, but is an implied power derived from Article III, and Article VI, which declares that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land: no state or federal law is allowed to violate the Constitution. The ultimate court for deciding the constitutionality of federal or state law under the Constitution of the United States is the Supreme Court of the United States. The doctrine of Judicial review was first established as part of Federal law in 1803 in the Supreme Court decision Marbury v. Madison.

Regardless of the legislation passed or voted on there is probably a pretty good chance that there will be a challenge to the constitutionality of that law.

President dickwad has already had a stike against him in federal court.

My guess is that some of our more backwards representatives are hoping that this legislation will be tested in the near future, letting them off the hook.

I'm not quite sure how the issue of previous offenses will be handled and the blanket immunity proved for the commander in cheese on down.

But, it will be tested and there is a very good chance that the legislation will be deemed, unconstitutional here and in violation of the Geneva Convention.

Makes for good pre-election erections though.

If you're a scum bag, gun totin', gay slappin', republican bitch.

Canadian soldier killed by blast in Afghanistan. The member of the 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment, based in Petawawa, Ont., died after triggering an explosive device while on foot patrol in Afghanistan's Panjwaii district around 1 p.m. local time.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/09/29/soldier-afghanistan.html

Posted by RedLetter_Rev on September 29, 2006 at 12:12 PM

Always a pleasure to read ur' stuff:):)

Keep on brutha'

Rice Ignored Osama Bin Laden Warnings Prior to 9/11: By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092906A.shtml

Many Rights in US Legal System Absent in New Bill
By R. Jeffrey Smith

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092906K.shtml

Book Says Bush Ignored Urgent Warning on Iraq
By DAVID E. SANGER

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/29/washington/29account.html?hp&ex=1159588800&en=3862efd9e06a71e9&ei=5094&partner=homepage

THE Bush Administration has lied about the level of violence in Iraq, especially against American troops, according to the investigative reporter Bob Woodward, who has spent the past two years researching and writing his new book State of Denial.
Woodward says that not only has the Administration lied about the level of violence, but it has buried intelligence reports that warn of the insurgency in Iraq getting worse in 2007.

Posted by Kristen on September 29, 2006 at 11:08 AM

How mad are you though at the MSM and to a certain extent, our representatives. Surely, someone had a heads up on this.

Wonder how they are going to spin this shit. Woodward will probably be pillored as old, tired and unreliable. Poor sources.

But, where the hell is our democratic senators that sit on the intelligence committtes? Why is is that if Woodward has his facts right, that none, no one has said (after numerous trips to Baghdad) that what we are hearing and seeing on the MSM, is bullshit and the attacks are 5 times what we are being told. Where is the foreign media on this??

If this is in fact true and we as americans are being lied to by a complicit act between this administration and the MSM, it's just not the government that needs to be tossed out on their ass, it's also a cleansing of the way news is delivered in this country.

Attacks, missteps cost Iraq $16B in oil exports
Production slipped after invasion, still hasn’t fully rebounded.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15052173

I'm lost with words, simply no ethics or moral in this entire bunch.

Just wait until other countries adopt similar laws and copy our example. It will not be safe for normal people to travel abroad!

Big business could tag anyone as a threat, go squeal on their political connection, and anyone could become an enemy combatant anywhere without recourse.

You say it's only for aliens; how do you prove you are not an alien if habeas corpus is removed and you are denied representation!

Shameful, shameful, shameful...

Congresswoman Nancy Johnson (R) caught in the act taking the side of big drug companies instead of looking out for you. Watch the short video to learn more.

http://pol.moveon.org/donate/redhandedJM-QT.html

Congresswoman Deborah Pryce (R) caught redhanded taking the side of big drug companies instead of looking out for you. Watch the short video to learn more.

http://pol.moveon.org/donate/redhandedPM-QT.html

Congresswoman Thelma Drake (R) also caught in the act taking the side of big drug companies instead of looking out for you. Watch the short video to learn more.

http://pol.moveon.org/donate/redhandedDM-QT.html

Last but not least Congressman Chris Chocola also caught redhanded taking the side of big drug companies instead of looking out for you. Watch the short video to learn more.

http://pol.moveon.org/donate/redhandedCM-QT.html

Senior military officers have been pressing the government to withdraw British troops from Iraq and concentrate on what they now regard as a more worthwhile and winnable battleground in Afghanistan.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1883785,00.html

Take heart. In the UK, where they have a government, the military is actually telling the government, that they should withdraw.

It's the politicians that are keeping their troops there.

Has a familiar effin' ring doesn't it??

How does one prove he or she is an American if habeas corpus is removed from his or her rights?

My guess is that some of our more backwards representatives are hoping that this legislation will be tested in the near future, letting them off the hook.
****

That's my guess too though I never thought of my two NJ Senators as backwards - I still don't. In this case, I think they made a bad political calculation.

HybridFuel wrote:

How does one prove he or she is an American if habeas corpus is removed from his or her rights?

It doesn't matter if you're an American citizen or not any more. I'm still looking for the text of the bill itself, but read this article from the LA Times for more information: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-ackerman28sep28,1,1031691.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

Here's an excerpt (emphasis added):
"The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights."

Now that Republicans have redefined torture, will it be practiced in the United States, and will different states allow it within the state allowing the CIA of FBI to interrogate within their jurisdiction. If the CIA can do it the FBI must be allowed the privilege. Or must it be done away in secret away from American jurisdiction like Guantanamo, or in Europe, Egypt, or Syria.

Now that Republicans have redefined torture, is it redefined automatically by NATO, European Common Market, Canada, and the other democracies of the world by worldwide American definition.

Now that Republicans have redefined torture, will the White House CIA be allowed to practice it with impunity and no World Court oversight?

Now that Republicans have redefined torture, how will the religions of the world vote for it or vote against it. Ask the Pope and other leaders.

Maybe what an American President says needs no borders that it applies worldwide automatically by America’s "At Will" philosophy.

Many Rights in US Legal System Absent in New Bill
By R. Jeffrey Smith
***

Good article! It explains the schism we now have in our system of justice. There is grave danger here. All it takes is for a person to be accused of terrorism and it's off to the black hole of Calcutta. That just doesn't seem right. The real victims will be our troops who will receive harsh traetment if they ever are captured.

"Friends of Hillary" just sent me a copy of Senator Clinton's Senate Floor statement in opposition to this dispicable legislation. Senator Clinton did not cave in! In my response, I stated that I would like to see Bill Clinton "smoking" more of these people like Chris Wallace. Bill Clinton is liked and respected by a lot more people than Gearge Bush is; I hope he'll speak out more!

Now that Republicans have redefined torture, is it redefined automatically by NATO, European Common Market, Canada, and the other democracies of the world by worldwide American definition.
****

Nope! What it does is to make the United States a rogue nation. We are now more isolated than ever before. There is no more moral high ground. I pity our poor troops - pray that none are captured ever.

"Friends of Hillary" just sent me a copy of Senator Clinton's Senate Floor statement in opposition to this dispicable legislation. Senator Clinton did not cave in!
****

I agree - she stood her ground.

I don't see how Menendez, Ford and Brown hope to gain from supporting this. Supporting torture does exactly what for you?

Baffling!

But, keep in mind that this was a Republican bill that would have passed even with no Dems supporting it. Only one Republican Senator voted no - namely Chaffee.

Posted by Peter on September 29, 2006 at 02:19 PM

It doesn't matter if you're an American citizen or not any more. I'm still looking for the text of the bill itself, but read this article from the LA Times for more information: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-ackerman28sep28,1,1031691.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

YOU HAVE TO READ THIS ARTICLE ON HOW THE CONSTITION WAS REDEFINED THAT BY FREE SPEECH ONE CAN BE IMPRISONED WITHOUT TRIAL.

Day by day, week by week, the picture of what the republician party is building becomes more clear. They seek to build a permenant majority with an all powerful head of state. These are the Tories, the royalists of old. They believe in the virtue of a powerful central govt controlled by the rich and influential, themselves. Add to that picture the concept that Mr. Bush, with the help of Mr. Chaney, has determined that he may be able to remain in office beyond Jan. 20, 2009 if he has a congress that will support it and a Supreme Court that will not oppose it. The only loose end is the results of the coming election in Nov. If the GOP retains control of the congress, he's in.
Well, almost. The open question is if Justice John Paul Stevens can hang in there long enough. He is about 85, so it's "iffy". So if we understand the motivation and the plan, why can't we stop it? That's where 9/11 and Iraq come into play. Now that Bob Woodward's new book is being released we get another piece of the puzzle. It appears that they may have permitted the attack of 9/11 to occur. Not plotted or even encouraged it, just sat on their hands and let it happen. We also know now that they were fully aware that the intel on WMD in Iraq was unrealiable and mostly false, yet they treated it as valid in order to justify their invasion of that country. Why? Because a president has much more power as "commander in chief" when the country is at war. So, start one. In so doing, they have successfully neutrilized democratic opposition because to oppose them is to be "soft on terror" "unpatrotic" or "nieve".

There is one more element to this plot which is so sinister that it remains as secret as possible. "If you are not a good christian, you could be in serious trouble in the future." They would never vocalize this, nor would they even admit it if asked, but it is there, under the surface. So to all my friends and fellow Americans I have one thing to suggest: If this movement is not stopped and you are other than of the christian faith, it's time to start thinking "if not here, where?" If we Democrats and loyal Americans, believers in the principles upon which this nation was founded, are unable to find the courage and the strength to stop this onslaught upon our freedom, we will surely loose what has been know as the "American experiment" and the cause of true freedom will be gone from the earth. I have made a pledge to speak out on this subject and will continue to do so, regardless of the consequenses. I am reminded of the last phrase of the Declaration of Independance, "to this cause we pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."
Won't you join me?

14th Amendment to the Constitution:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

A law can be passed but it has to be constitutionally sound.

Be interesting to see how or if they can get around this amendment.

goodfoe wrote:

Senator Clinton did not cave in!

The only way to even slow it down was a filibuster. She could have stood up on the Senate floor and made a statement. She could have at least TRIED to stop this tragedy from happening to America. A filibuster was the only way.

She didn't do it. Not one Democrat did it. Nor did any Republican. She stood by, cast her symbolic "nay", said some flowery words, and let this be done to all of us, and to the Constitution.

And now? If George W. Bush wants, he can pick her or ANYONE - anyone in the entire world, American citizen or not - have them secretly taken away, imprisoned for life, and tortured to death.

And here's the funniest part: it will be LEGAL for him to do that.

So tell me, what was Hillary thinking? That she could trust George W. Bush and Dick Cheney not to abuse that power? That the Supreme Court would overturn the bill - the same Supreme Court which hijacked the 2000 election?

I'll tell you what she was thinking. She was thinking that if she filibustered, the Republicans would scream to high heaven and her chance to win the Presidency in 2008 would be reduced. She thought of her own political power, her own selfish interests, before the good of her country and her oath of office.

And the same thing is true of every other Senator in Congress.

Wake up. No one is going to save us now. The door is open, and the wolf is among the lambs. With the sheepdogs at his side, maintaining a properly pious look of regret...and waiting for their share of the meat.

"If you are not a good christian, you could be in serious trouble in the future."
****

Yes that fits very well. Think about it - all dictatorships use religion to give them legitimacy. It won't surprise to see the Repukes push for an official state religion - they already are pushing bills that trash the establishment clause. Once they have a state religion, they will then persecute anyone who doesn't conform to Christianity (at least their concept of Christianity). It's feudalism that is being setup. Rule by a wealthy elite at the top, blessed by religion and total suppression of the people. This is what Repuke trolls seem to like. Either they are too stupid to understand what is coming or they genuinely think that would be a good system of government.

irratateya -

Thank you for passing along the perspective of a party that has a "big tent" the size of a mailbox.

The only way to even slow it down was a filibuster.
****

Okay, what the cloture vote? What Dems voted for cloture? These days it;s a matter of cloture votes. There ae no more Mr. Smith Goes To Washington moments. Does anyone know how the cloture vote went?

President Bush=Emperor Palpatine

For those of you who know about the Star Wars movies, the current political environment reminds me of Emperor Palpatine. Emperor Palpatine was the evil dark side Sith Lord who worked his way up to the presidency of the Republic. He ended up manipulating and lying to the Republic senate so that they became merely a rubber stamp body and when the time was right, President Palpatine became the all powerful Emperor Palpatine. While Star Wars is of course just a science fiction movie, the behavior of George Bush really scares me and I compare it to the behavior of Emperor Palpatine. George Bush has lied and manipulated his way to the point where anyone in congress that does not approve of his will is automatically branded a traitor or un-American (dare I say a member of the Rebellion). Just as Palpatine had Darth Vader and General Tarkin to do his bidding, Bush has Darth Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. I remember a couple of years ago in the run up to the 2004 presidential election many were saying that we need to reelect President Bush because we are at war and cannot risk changing leadership at this time. Well, at this rate we will still be at war when Bush’s term limit is up. Don’t be surprised if Bush does not try to get congress to pass a law ending term limits for the presidency. This would be the equivalent of Palpatine becoming Emperor. We would then have Emperor Bush. We cannot let that happen.

rjsnj wrote:

Okay, what the cloture vote? What Dems voted for cloture? These days it;s a matter of cloture votes. There ae no more Mr. Smith Goes To Washington moments. Does anyone know how the cloture vote went?

That's pretty much the epitaph of American Democracy, you know. Right now your only hope is to pray that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney don't decide to abuse that power...because nothing and no one is standing in their way.

This is not fiction. This is not a dream. You and ALL of us have lost the most basic human rights. And the people who should have tried to stop that from happening...didn't.

Thank you for passing along the perspective of a party that has a "big tent" the size of a mailbox.
****

More like the size of a black hole.

This Repuke trolls don't even understand what they are arguing for. They are tricked by these red meat issues. They don't think through the implications because they just don't think about what they don't think about. That must be why they like Rumsfeld and Bush so much.

I wonder if they would really approve of this crap if they understtod that it is leading to a feudal dictatorships. You don't have to have moats and castles for feudalism. Just an unbalanced with all of the money and power concentrated at the top. Throw in religion to bless those at the top and say that they rule by the grace of God and you are there.

There was no cloture vote because no one tried to filibuster. Not one.
****

Damn, so they verbally agreed to cloture? No call for the yeas and nays. That's really bad.

For those of you who know about the Star Wars movies, the current political environment reminds me of Emperor Palpatine.
****

Yep, it's exactly the same. Hardly surprising as I suspect George Lucas was trying to send a message about the current state of affairs. This is without a doubt on the road toward a fascist feudal society.

This is not fiction. This is not a dream.
****

It's a nightmare and no laughing matter. It's th enext step on the road toward a totalitarian nation.

rjsnj wrote:

Damn, so they verbally agreed to cloture? No call for the yeas and nays. That's really bad.

If I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will tell me.

But anyway, no one filibustered. They didn't even threaten to.

A law can be passed but it has to be constitutionally sound.

Be interesting to see how or if they can get around this amendment.
****

that's true. Over the course of time, it could be found to be unconstitutional. Generally, Supreme Court judges are persauded by how the populace views an issue. In this poisonous environment created by Repukes (along with the media and their idiotic parrots/trolls), it will be hard to overturn it.

>>>>>BREAKING NEWS

Congressman Foley has announced that HE IS DROPPING OUT OF HIS RACE IN FLORIDA in the wake of disclosures about his sending "weird" e-mails to a 16 year old male page.

My understanding is that cloture only takes place if a filibuster is attempted. It's not required for every bill. No filibuster, no cloture needed.
***

I don't think so. The way it works is that they schedule time for a debate, after the debate is over, there is a cloture vote (that means the debate is over). I think they can have a voice vote to ask for cloture.

Well, let me know if I got it wrong. There are some bills where no cloture vote takes place - I thought those were all of a financial nature (appropriation bills).

Posted by irritateya on September 29, 2006 at 03:05 PM

Didn't King George swear to uphold the laws of the U.S. and the Constitution. You guys are all liars.

Bush will not need an act of Congress to remain in power. Think about it: If there should be another attack upon the US in the fall of 2008, perhaps in mid-October, it would just be too dangerous to hold the electon on the first Tuesday of November. That would necessitate postponing the election "in order to protect the saftey of Americans". Sure, who could argue with that logic? Forget the Iraqis who braved the open threats of insurgents and went to the polls anyway. If we don't get to vote in a new president, I guess the present one must simply stay in office until an election can be held. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it? The sheep will buy in with no questions asked. When will it be safe enough to hold that election? When George says it is. Translation, never.