Any member of Congress not pushing this vote needs to be recalled and prosecuted for not "defending and upholding the Constitution"

Mr Buffalo Man---sorry but if you want us "Dem-haters" to
read your posts in order to glean some words of wisdom, you really should do some gleaning yourself. While I am willing to consider my own observations as to what is going on with the Dems, in light of real evidence that my observations are faulty, I don't need another "radical" like Welshman to tell me, in his opinion, why I'm just plain wrong.

Call it head-banging-fatique, call it the disgust quotient., or call it Give me a break with your "faith-based" promises that we just have to give the Dems another chance, and they will start representing the will of the people.

WE HAVE A F--KING CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, Mr Buffalo Man, and if the Dems would rather risk that this criminal cabal can be trusted to play fair for the next 14 months, and THEN we'll start restoring (maybe) the rule of law, (You're just gonna have to trust us folks)... and on and on and on. There are actually more important things than political considerations, than whether the D's have it or the R's. And if I can't see the difference anymore, and the D's tell me they don't need my unrealistic demands getting in the way of their victory, well, then, they can just get along without me. I am bloody tired of playing the victim, and I am even more weary of threir self serving political games.

Clearly you aren't as confident of the party's leadership or you wouldn't be posting volumes to try to shame the rest of us here into re-joining the rigged 2 party system.

Sorry, SEQUOIABISON, my memory is not so short as yours and Daniel David's, nor am I so generously forgiving. You seem to have forgotten that the last time the Democrats had control of the executive and legislative branches, they pushed through programs that shrank the middle class, brutalized the poor, and rapidly accelerated the migration of wealth to the top, outrunning the policies of Reagan and Bush I. The current crop of Democratic leaders are behaving just like Bill Clinton so why in Hell should we vote for more of that? Oh yes, the Republicans are even worse. So they are, and I won't vote for them either.

You people who think that all we need to do is vote in enough Democrats and life will become a bowl of cherries are living in fantasyland. Steny Hoyer's FIRST act in office was to call K street and let them know the new kids are here. So my question is, are you uninformed about what they are up to or willfully ignoring what they are doing?

"Rove pulled out all the stops to ensure that Republicans helped Nader get on the ballot in every state in the Union, especially in the swing states like FL and OH."

If Rove was putting all of his resources into getting Nader on the ballot in Ohio, he would have succeeded. In Florida, the Democrats sued to keep Nader off the ballot while giving Bush a free pass for missing a filing deadline.

Rove had the 2004 GOP convention in New York City in early September, which was after the filing deadlines in nine states. Instead of changing the convention date to comply with the law, the GOP tried to change the law to fit the convention date. In all nine states, the Democrats helped them, including states with a Democratic Governor and a Democratic legislature. The Democrats are the ones who are really in bed with Bush.

"It was republican lawyers that helped Ralph get on the ballot; it was republican corporate money that helped sustain Ralph to Election Day."

Nader only got 4% of his donations from Republicans. Kerry raised more money from Republicans than Nader raised from Democrats, Republicans, Greens, and Independents put together.

The Democrats used corporate law firms that gave most of their money to Republicans to keep Nader off the ballot. Toby Moffett, who was one of the leaders of the effort efforts to disenfranchise Nader voters, makes his living by representing defense and tobacco companies. He admitted that the anti-Nader lawsuits were about tying Nader down and making him spend his money in court rather than about ballot integrity.

In response to harsh criticism of Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party, I thought some of the Common Dreams readers might be interested in this very long but well articulated article, which I found in Daily Kos.

At least it's a change from my self-righteous tirades.

Enjoy.

DAILY KOS
In Defense of Nancy Pelosi
BY:
WELSHMAN
"For us, it is not a fault that we delineate our policies so starkly. That is our job as radicals. It is not for us to make the compromises or temper our thoughts to gain effect or acceptance amongst the wider mass of voters. That is for those whom we elect to handle such matters whilst we hold them accountable. I will not accept criticism that we speak so clearly because we do not have the responsibility of power. It misses the point of why we are here.
We need to be conscious of what we are doing, however, otherwise we are writing with an ingeniousness that undermines our credibility as political commentators. Many of us do not have the excuse of our diaries being the product of the awakening thoughts of a young poet. Nor would we want them dismissed as such. We ask that they are accepted as the genuine aspirations of the netroots. Yet we are necessarily idealists, in that we have to define a clear set of values by which to measure those whom we observe. Even so, we need also be realists. It is this realism that gives depth to our understanding of the nuances of power.
It is, however, a fierce and unremitting stance we take. We demand a purity of performance in a world of politics in which nothing is pure. We may wish it were otherwise, but it is the way of politics. Nor is Daily Kos immune from our celebrity culture, where we build up Obama, Edwards, Gore and others to heroic levels, only to feel let down and rejected when they disappoint us on some issue. (Here on Daily Kos, the majority seems to have already rejected Hillary Clinton for this reason before the Primaries had even begun) These hopefuls, of their own ambitions and our own desire for them to give us at last some of our Promised Land, will always disappoint us on some issue - all of them in their own individual ways. However keenly that which some term as "betrayal" might be felt, it is surely only the naive who will express a shock when this occurs. It rarely should lead to the rejection of the totality of the person whom we had previously so highly elevated.
Is it possible that the political position taken by many liberal commentators is sometimes as intolerant as that taken by many of the conservative on the right? I believe it is and none are suffering more from this at the moment than Nancy Pelosi.
How does the world outside our own hallowed site see the performance of this once bright luminary of our firmament? Well, I turn to the Investors Business Daily to inform me:
"Democrats can't depend on Pelosi to deliver, Republicans can't depend on her to run the House fairly and the American people can't depend on her to bring integrity to Capitol Hill. Is there any reason for her politics-driven speakership to continue?" - (10/31/2007)
Forgive me if I reject the Investors Business Daily as the formative source of my political opinion. Yet I find this echoed time and again here on Daily Kos.
Rather than commit the unpardonable sin of calling out one of our diaries or comments (though I cannot for the life of me see why doing so is not fair comment here) let me turn to one of our allies in trying to bring decency to this indecent world of ours. Let us read what Margaret Kimberley, who normally writes at BlackAgendaReport.Com, says:
" Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of what passes for Congressional leadership have perfected their criminal enterprise. Every act of treachery is followed by lame excuses for inaction. The truly spineless ones, progressives wallowing in denial, foolishly whine, asking each other what is wrong when the answer stares them in the face. The Democratic party is complicit in killing democracy.
Well, forgive me again if I utterly reject this view, made all the harder because it is written by someone whose opinions are so often alongside many of our own. It crosses the boundary where our polemic as radicals destroys the very thing that we most want to achieve. It gives delight to our opponents whilst destroying our own confidence in our own people. It marginalizes us in the classic way that we have seen radicals in Europe as well as the States marginalized, so that our voice no longer counts.
It is her interview in Christian Science Monitor that has most recently outraged many. For example, Capitol Hill Blue gives its interpretation that is not contained within the newspapers own report::
"Talking about anti-war progressives and moderates whose complaints were growing louder every day, she became both dismissive and insulting: "They are advocates," she said. "We are leaders."
She did not dismiss, insultingly or otherwise "anti-war progressives and moderates". Those who read the article will find no such emotive colouring of her comment. She made a simple statement of fact – a simple reminder of the reality of political life. We are indeed advocates, we do not have to compromise in the way that our leaders do, because they have the responsibility of treading through the entanglement of the political web. If there is a need to gently remind us of this fact, then we should not react like it is two years before we have come to understand the difficulties of exercising political power in our countries by condemning out of hand those to whom we entrust this task.
Rightly in that interview, Nancy Pelosi tells us that ""The war has eclipsed everything." She is not without self-criticism "I don't disagree with the public evaluation that we have not done well in ending this war," she said.
Nancy Pelosi has the difficult and often competing tasks of not just trying to enact new legislation now but also of trying to create a climate for the election of a Democratic president in 2008. "But the majority of the people want what we want" is the frustrated cry of so many on here "Why can't Pelosi deliver?" Yes, the majority of people want to end the Iraq war, but it is a skittish opinion and insecure in its willingness to accept the concept of defeat – even self-inflicted defeat through mal-administration. I have read nothing more devastating than the poll result (fortunately modified by others) that says that the majority of American people are willing to bomb Iran. Which one of us is so certain that we know the right political stance to take now that can use such volatility in public opinion, an opinion that has failed to learn the lessons of the last six years, so it can ensure the climate for success for whichever candidate emerges as our choice in 2008?
Again yes, we know that American public opinion overwhelmingly wants change. Yet it is not a foregone conclusion that the majority are committed to that change being Democratic.
I do not envy Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or anyone the job of pulling the strings of this entangled mesh. Maybe it was just me, in my country bumpkin way in the hills of Wales three thousand miles away, that was so surprised to find, after the euphoria of taking control of Congress, that a firm minority and a stubborn President could combine to veto those policies that had suddenly seemed attainable. Maybe it was just me who failed to realise just how easily a strong Democratic Party was vulnerable to being wrong footed in the eyes of the electorate. I would be a damn fool, after these many months of watching the machinations of the Republican minority and the influence that can be exerted on the attention-deficited electorate that exists in both our countries, if I didn't now realise the truth.
I have not forgotten that the most Conservative of British newspapers revealed shortly after Nancy Pelosi assumed office the details of the "Republicans plot to bring down Pelosi ... and Clinton with her". I do not want to assist them in this task. It hurts when I see diaries on Daily Kos do this to her or to any of our Primary candidates who may be entrusted to take our hopes forward, to whatever greater or lesser extent.
I remember what the BBC wrote in praise of her on its site shortly after Nancy Pelosi took up her leadership role:
" Ms Pelosi's personal voting record puts her to the left of many in her party. She was one of 126 House Democrats to vote against the use of force in Iraq in 2002, although after the war had started she voted to finance it.
However, her track record as a fiercely partisan House leader who has succeeded in unifying her party on important votes may help her to balance these differing expectations.
She is credited with masterminding the Democratic Party's successful strategy for derailing Mr Bush's plan to overhaul the social security system through partial privatisation.
Her fund-raising prowess is unquestioned: the mother-of-five has raised more for the Democrats in this mid-term election than almost anyone else."
Since then, despite Bush, despite the solidarity of the Republican vote, much has been achieved in Congress by her. I will criticise the level of that achievement freely with many of you, I will question the effectiveness of the tactics, and I will certainly bewail some of the outcomes. That is my job as a writer on Daily Kos, that is our entire job as radicals. I will do so without having to modify those views by obscuring them with the obfuscation that is called political realities. I ask only that we do not do the Republican job for them by disparaging personally our leaders, whether they be leaders of the Senate Majority or Primary candidates struggling to enunciate our views against a GOP back-cloth of deliberate misinterpretation and a superficially influenced electorate. That is not our job on Daily Kos nor anywhere else where we are fighting for our ideas.
We must not let our denunciation of our own people become more shriller as the Primaries begin. Or should I say "more Schiller". Most of us are not young poets with no experience, but by now are seasoned political commentators with a clear idea of how to strongly voice our ideas without the need for naivety in how we do it. It is the thought of seeing a Democrat in the White House that is one of the things keeping me, and will keep me, going. In this, you are all my friends, so forgive me if I question how sometimes we approach it and ask for a small transfusion of support for Nancy Pelosi and the others up there trying to do their job."

THANKS Welshman
My feelings exactly.

Americans need to start burying their collective foot in a few behinds!

Where does this congress believe it gets the right to call anyone to testify before them? Heck, for that matter by what right do they sit and govern?

Do these seem like inane questions? Well if you don't have a Constitution you don't have a government at least in this country well for that matter you don't have a country without the Constitution. SO HELLO WAKE UP !!!!!!!!

Either stand up and defend the US CONSTTUTION, or admit what a true farce this Nation has become.

IMPEACH AND PROSECUTE NOW ACCORDING TO THE US CONSTITUTION

SEQUOIABISON, by all means keep indulging your social fantasy. I won't stoop to engage in a colloquy with a person who presumes to impugn the intellects of those of us who see through the Democratic Party's shameful posturing, except to note that apart from your self-righteous invective, your analytical skills and comprehension are woefully deficient.

I'm not impressed by your simplistic understanding of the political process, or your snide exasperation. You must be one of those people who refuse to leave the carnival milk bottle knockdown game until you win the prize, not realizing that the game is rigged. And you probably leave satisfied after you've acquired a stuffed animal with five hundred dollars in quarters.

Maybe those noisy kids in the back seat sense that they're in the hands of a driver who will eventually say, "We're lost, but we're making good time!"

oh of course, it could be worse: perhaps there are "sinister" plans afoot....

who the fug knows.....

all, i know is what i sense happening...

Later,
Ken Hausle

SEQUOIABISON above says:

"It was a real pleasure reading comments by intelligent people, who collectively recognized that the republicans have to be stopped at all costs."

1. Has this even come close to happening?
2. Wouldn't you say effective techniques to achieve this to a degree are available yet remain mysteriously unused?

Impeachment is a no-brainer at least in the house, but it apparently makes some feel "uncomfortable" and i guess american's treasure their own comfort over anything else....or at least the congress critter do...

Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC

Great article, if you're a dem hater this is manna from heaven.

I am sure my colleague Daniel David will weigh in on this topic, I know I do not speak for him, he is much more diplomatic with you rock throwers than I am but I would like to offer a response.

The knee jerk reactionary anti-democratic party bomb-throwers are just so predictable and are in all their glory every time they hear news that the dems are not crushing or prosecuting the evildoers, quickly enough.

You guys seem to get easily confused about who are the peace makers trying to stop the war and who are the criminals trying to wage war.

Sorry to take so long to respond but I have been visiting a Hate Republicans website and was enjoying myself too much to leave.

It was a real pleasure reading comments by intelligent people, who collectively recognized that the republicans have to be stopped at all costs.

Regrettably you people keep forgetting who the real evildoers are. I know, I know, they are all the same.

OH, lets get a big letter writing campaign to prod the dems, never thinking we should get a letter writing campaign to prod the evildoers, the psychopaths, the warmongers, the torturers, the republicans.

I am glad that I am not married to any of you anti dem irrational hate mongers.

I have never quite witnessed such impatience and intolerance with the process of taking back our government.

The posters on this website remind of traveling with kids, are we there yet, are we there yet. No, we are not there yet; it will take another election to wrestle back control of our government.

Only when we have a solid majority in the senate and a democrat in the white house will we be there.

Otherwise you guys can shout and scream at the dems all you like, it will not change the fact that the votes for control are just not there yet. Hello.

Karl Rove loves you guys. When he heard Nader was entering the race in 2000 he laughed all the way to the white house, and then again in 2004 he was hysterical laughing when he heard Nader would do it again.

Rove pulled out all the stops to ensure that Republicans helped Nader get on the ballot in every state in the Union, especially in the swing states like FL and OH.

It was republican lawyers that helped Ralph get on the ballot; it was republican corporate money that helped sustain Ralph to Election Day.

Obviously the republicans are not as stupid as the third party pie in the sky delusional, lets wait for the messiah crowd.

Admittedly the dems are guilty of over analyzing the electorate. They want to be sure not to alienate the middle of the road voters who can go either republican or democrat on just about any issue like gays, abortion, the war, supporting or abandoning the troops?

The political situation is very tenuous, which is why Rudy is now polling ahead of any of the dems with his promise to get tough and his support for the Bush war.

With a little more help from you progressive anti dem third party promoters he could go all the way.

DENNIS KUCINICH is our best hope, but if he cannot go all the way, than any democrat over any republican.

Lets cheer the menace on tonight at the Vegas debate.

I haven't checked out the details of Mother Superior Pelosi's alleged "10,000 letter" or 24-hour phone hotline to urge impeachment, but if it's true it's as reprehensible as her previous actions.

First of all, who would trust Pelosi's count? Will it be certified by the Arthur Andersen accounting firm?

Second of all, the idea of Pelosi holding up hoops to "sample" public opinion in this arbitrary manner is simply lame-- a more sophisticated version of holding up her finger to see which way the wind's blowing. As a Democratic Party leader and Speaker of the House, doesn't Pelosi have access to reliable polling data?

There is substantial public sentiment for impeachment, but these methods are more suitable for winning free Hannah Montana concert tickets from a radio station.

PS: I've been wondering about Daniel David too. He's been a true-blue Democratic Party Weeble here up till this week. I notice a few snarly, pissed-off Dem loyalists, it's not the same as DD's patient, broken-record proselytizing.

urthsong says,"It seems that she (Pelosi) said that if she got 10,000 handwritten letters that she would put impeachment on the table".

I heard too that Pelosi is establishing a 24 hour hotline for people to call in that support impeachment, and that if she gets enough calls she will put impeachment "on the table"

I wanted to post the number so that everyone could call but it is unlisted and no one seems to know which 24 hours the line will be open.

Lobo Gris

Newsflash to Urthsong:

Impeachment has been put "on the table" by Presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich. It is now "stewing" in the Judiciary Committee with representatives who had been ignoring it now championing it, such as Rep. Wexler of Florida.

Nancy Pelosi must be livid that Kucinich did an end run around her. Although Conyers says that there are too many other more "important" matters for the Judiciary Committee to handle in this session than the impeachment of Richard Cheney (B.S.), there is the possibility that with enough pressure from their constituents other members of the committee might fold and press Conyers to debate the bill.

I suggest everyone check out those individuals and lobby them in the next week. It looks like they'll all be back after Thanksgiving for more "work" before the Christmas/New Year recess.

I will be dooing whatever I can to help Rahm Emmanueal lose his congressional seat here in Illinois!

What I get out of this is that Conyers and Pelosi wanted to file contempt charges now, and even Hoyer was game, but then along came He Who Controls the Campaign Money, and told them to put it off til December.
Now we know who really holds the gavel; money before justice.

rebelnow - i would like to add to your fine message that for a modest fee you can hire the firm "Ditties in Congress R-US Today" (henceforth referred to as "DC-RUST").

DC-RUST has considerable experience in preparing letters, forms, and even ditties per the stringent DC criteria so eloquently indicated in your 9:20 pm posting (it was a challenge finding the proper Irish Catholic monks, but we tracked them down). Also, for an extra fee DC-RUST will present the ditty in song and verse directly to pelosi (who we would like to proudly add has shown a great affinity for the ditties we have given her in the past).

At DC-RUST we only hire good-looking employees who make sure that the message gets through - one way or the other. If for some reason, we can't get the message through (our employees need to spend considerable time grooming themselves) we will obviously grant a full refund and your next ditty will be for free. Can't beat that can you.

Ken Hausle, temporary one-time spokesperson for "DC-RUST"

* Please note for the purpose of full disclosure DC-RUST, is owned by the spouse of a congress critter and all profits go directly to the critter's vacation paradise located in some far-off island where DC-RUST is incorporated.

** Also, DC-RUST is a wholly owned subsidiary of DC-BUST, Inc. which is in the midst of a corporate takeover, so who knows what is going to happen....

*** Lastly, DC-RUST can be contacted at the following fictional address: DC RUST, Suite one-three Ditty Ditty, 1776 Bust Street, Washington, DC 69696. Please include the necessary currency in your letter (preferably in non-US funds).

since1492 November 14th, 2007 1:09 pm,
You nailed it sir. I even see it at local
level, here in Hawaii. Legislators came
together in a special session to change
enviromental law to allow this huge inter
island ferry to operate while the EIS is done.

That's odious as hell but get this - Linda
Lingle, Govenor of The State of Hawaii told
the principals of the ferry endevour 18 months ago
"oh yeah, don't worry about the enviromental
impact study..."

Fascist police state over here. I fear the batter
ram writing this.

Thanks Mr. Bresnahan,

Great info, hopefully they all get roasted
like pigs, any word on Honorable Congressman
Kucinich's privileged resolution?

rebelnow--thanks for a good laugh----Ramsay----I think maybe DD is scared to post after this latest Dem maneuver. I read both long posts on this thread by John Walsh---very instructive as to the reason so many of us have become disgusted by the behavior of what was supposed to be the opposition party---money talks loudly and Rob Emanual apparently can lay his hands on plenty. It explains in part what has happened to the Party, or at least the extreme obviousness of their betrayal. They are so few progressive Dems left, it has essentially been neutralized.

If the Dems are worried about being caught in the vise of a terrorist attack, well gee! Could that mean they know such a thing can be arranged by this cabal?

So then what makes them think it won't be arranged no matter how well they behave? Gopod excuse to cancel the elections because things would just be too damned chaotic to be " changing horses in mid-scream." The pun was intended.

I'm not buying it. The American people are fed up to their eyeballs with this criminal cabal and there is no way Dems are gonna convince me that they would be blamed if something ugly comes down. It is JUST A BUNCH OF CRAP! More excuses for their collaboration. I'm done with them!

Did Daniel David just take the day off? Or has he finally come to his senses?

Ramsay

I just wrote my letter to Pelosi.

There is no difference between all of you and Republicans. Sean Hannity could have written most of the posts here.

... And come to Denver next August to give the Democrats heck in person. :)

I figured out one thing the dem o rats are good at: TAP DANCING.

Like Gomer Pyle used to say .... Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

Maybe I should just post "Had Enough Yet?" every day.

Don't vote Democrat. They are not on our side.

Fiat justica's tale is fascinating. So the Democrats are planning a big show down with Bush in the three weeks before he leaves office? Wow, what bravery! What do they plan to do with their larger majority? Get bigger group discounts at the local movie theaters? If they're really so worried about another terrorist attack, maybe they should have some highly visible hearings into the Bush administration's actual preparedness measures since 9/11. The obvious point if there is another terrorist attack is that our occupation of Iraq and Bush's torture and lawbreaking aren't protecting us. But I guess they can never do anything because there might always be another terrorist attack.

If enough of us screaming lefty liberal Democrats go Green next year maybe the useless Washington Dems will actually stir slightly on our behalf.

urthsong says,"It seems that she (Pelosi) said that if she got 10,000 handwritten letters that she would put impeachment on the table".

You forgot to mention the rules regarding those handwritten letters.

First they must be written with a quill pen, from a swan, and not with the cheaper goose quill.

The finest ink, imported from India, and sanctioned by the Indian officials, must be used. If analysis shows a substitute was used then the letter will be disallowed.

The paper must be hand crafted parchment and aged according to the traditions handed down by Irish Catholic monks.

Only the most elegant of calligraphy will be accepted.

All i's must be dotted with the utmost in accuracy above the vertical i. T's must be crossed with the horizontal line no longer than 2/3 the height of the vertical.

Special attention may be given to those letters that are embellished with personal calligraphic artistry, as long as it reflects a sophistication acceptable to the higher tastes of San Francisco's elite.

If I treated my dog like the Congress treats Bushco, my dog would take over the household and I would be out on the street. I do believe it is time to demand that Congress get some backbone and stand up to Bushco or we will ALL be on the street. In order to become co-equal, they must act as the Alpha Dog some of the time.

I guess what is interesting is that all the Democratic Politicians are "too busy". I worked for a Hospital most of my working career and 20 hours straight was not unusual. While I am not advocating 20 hours of work from our politicians I truly believe this "too busy" excuse to lame as they are paid many multiples of what my salary was. If you are too busy to do the people's work resign.

I hate to be such a pain in the arse to our wonderful leader, Nancy, and keep bringing up this annoying and tiresome issue of IMPEACHMENT, but since many other patriotic Americans here are:

Certainly the Democratic Party and its leaders have been held in low esteem for their gutlessness on the issue of responsibility for the war, which has now culminated in their failure to hold impeachment hearings.

It is clear that the Democratic Party is viewed as emasculated and having no real influence on Bush and Cheney. In fact, it could be said, without exaggeration, that Barney (the dog) has had more influence on Bush than the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party has had less influence than Barney, but perhaps a similar influence as Barney's poop ---- in that Bush knows it's there, is annoyed by the smell, and simply steps away.

Perhaps the Democratic Party, in deference to the fair advertising doctrine, should really change its name to the Barney Poop Party (or BPP). This name change to BPP would also convey a somewhat foreign party acronym sound (like a Kurdish or Pakistani party) and better reflect the contempt and distain with which the Bush global dictatorship holds the Democrats.

Oops, sorry for getting off-topic ----- let me get back, 'on message'.

Well then, in summary, perhaps the Democrats could actually grow some, impeach Cheney with his own 'one percent' logic, and thereby avoid falling the little bit lower toward being a party named for dog poop.

EF SAWYER: Very interesting data, thank you for posting it.

Is there ANYTHING that bush can do that will provoke action from these spineless weasels in congress?

Maybe if he took away their gold plated medical benefits or other perks they would react with something resembling righteous indignation

"Balk! Balk! Balk!" -- isn't that what chickens say?

Dems: Now, Mr. Bush, if you don't stop that, we will be forced to say "Now please stop that, Mr. Bush" a second time.

Chicken hearted Demos. What else would one expect from the Demos in Congress. They are afraid of our President, shaking in their boots and high heels. There will be no showdown, it's all another show. Turn your news programs off, nothing will change. Our President has them running scared.

Don't be hard on yourself, fiat justica.

Some may be shocked by your inside information, but it's further confirmation of what the Democrats have been transparently doing.

Democratic partisans and supporters often refer to those who are cynical and even bitter towards Democrats as "Dem-haters". That's as may be, but it remains the case that the party is run by top-down technocrats preoccupied, if not obsessed, with money and power. There is no parity between party bosses and its constituency; the latter exists to be manipulated, used, misused, and abused into producing these items to serve the elite's ends. They are no better, or substantially different, from the Republic Party in this regard.

And this is where all of the reprocessed realpolitik and lame pragmatics offered by faithful party soldiers falls on its face. Because this presumes a good-faith reciprocal relationship between the party deciders and We the People. And as fiat justica's information--and so much else-- shows, whatever good faith existed must be buried under all that dry powder.

John Dean, author of "Broken Government", says that the Republicans destroyed the processes in both Houses of Congress. He says that the Democrats are slowly restoring them. Certainly, Pelosi and Reid are not above criticism. But I think anyone who is angry with most of the Democrats, there are right-wing exceptions, aren't understanding the level of destruction wreaked by the Republicans they are up against. I just sent a handwritten letter to Pelosi asking her to go forward with the impeachment of Cheney. It seems that she said that if she got 10,000 handwritten letters that she would put impeachment on the table. I hope she means what she said. Cindy Sheehan is collecting letters to deliver by the end of this week. But I'm late. So I'll just send it directly to her. Please join me.

Emanuel is a DLC, AIPAC whore and will do anything he can to impede any kind of meaningful move on the criminal Bush administration. Probably because he fears he'll be caught in the same net. What a shit.

Time to get rid of Rahm Emanuel and ALL the gutless, enabling DLC democrats. More progressive, LIBERAL democrats would change the balance bar enough to change things. Blue dawgs got to go too.

October 24, 2006
Emanuel's War Plan for Democrats
The Book of Rahm

By JOHN WALSH

Last week in CounterPunch (1), I wrote that the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Congressman Rahm Emanuel, had worked hard to guarantee that Democratic candidates in key toss-up House races were pro-war. In this he was largely successful, because of the money he commands and the celebrity politicians who reliably respond to his call, ensuring that 20 of the 22 Democratic candidates in these districts are pro-war. So the fix is in for the coming elections.

In 2006, no matter which party controls the House, a majority will be committed to pursuing the war on Iraq--despite the fact that the Democratic rank and file and the general voting public oppose the war by large margins. (I hasten to add that this state of affairs can be reversed even after the sham election between the two War Parties.)

What are Emanuel's views on war and peace? Emanuel has just supplied the answer in the form of a scrawny book co-authored with Bruce Reed, modestly entitled: The Plan: Big Ideas for America. The authors obligingly boil each of the eight parts of "The Plan" down to a single paragraph. The section which embraces all of foreign policy is entitled "A New Strategy to End the War on Terror," a heading revealing in itself since "war on terror" is the way the neocons and the Israeli Lobby currently like to frame the discussion of foreign policy. Here is the book's summary paragraph with my comments in parentheses:

"A New Strategy to Win the War on Terror"
("War on Terror," as George Soros points out, is a false metaphor used by those who would drag us into military adventures not in our interest or that of humanity.)

"We need to use all the roots of American power to make our country safe. (He begins by playing on fear.) America must lead the world's fight against the spread of evil and totalitarianism, but we must stop trying to win that battle on our own. (Messianic imperialism.) We should reform and strengthen multilateral institutions for the twenty-first century, not walk away from them. We need to fortify the military's "thin green line" around the world by adding to the U.S. Special Forces and the Marines, and by expanding the U.S. army by 100,000 more troops. (An even bigger military for the world's most powerful armed forces, a very militaristic view of the way to handle the conflicts among nations. What uses does Emanuel have in mind for those troops?) We should give our troops a new GI Bill to come home to. (More material incentives to induce the financially strapped to sign up as cannon fodder.) Finally we must protect our homeland and civil liberties by creating a new domestic counterterrorism force like Britain's MI5. (A new domestic spying operation is an obvious threat to our civil liberties; MI5 holds secret files on one in 160 adults in Britain along with files on 53,000 organizations.)

There it is straight from the horse's mouth.(2)

How does Emanuel, the man who has screened and chosen the 2006 Democratic candidates for Congress, feel specifically about the war on Iraq, the number one issue on voters' minds. Emanuel and Reed do not so much as mention Iraq in their book except in terms of the "war on terror." Nor does Emanuel mention Iraq on his web site as among the important issues facing us, quite amazing omission and one shared by Chuck Schumer who is his equivalent of the Senate side, chairing the DSCC (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee). However a very recent profile in Fortune (9/25/2006), "Rahm Emanuel, Pitbull Politician," by Washington Bureau chief Nina Easton notes: "On Iraq, Emanuel has steered clear of the withdraw-now crowd, preferring to criticize Bush for military failures since the 2003 invasion. 'The war never had to turn out this way,' he told me at one of his campaign stops. In January 2005, when asked by Meet the Press's Tim Russert whether he would have voted to authorize the war-'knowing that there are no weapons of mass destruction'-Emanuel answered yes. (He didn't take office until after the vote.) 'I still believe that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do, okay?' he added."(3)

When Jack Murtha made his proposal for withdrawal from Iraq, Emanuel quickly declared that "Jack Murtha went out and spoke for Jack Murtha." As for Iraq policy, Emanuel added: "At the right time, we will have a position." That was November, 2005. In June, 2006, it was obviously time, and Emanuel finally revealed his policy in a statement on the floor of the House during debate over Iraq, thus: "The debate today is about whether the American people want to stay the course with an administration and a Congress that has walked away from its obligations or pursue a real strategy for success in the war on terror. We cannot achieve the end of victory and continue to sit and watch, stand pat, stay put, status quo and that is the Republican policy. Democrats are determined to take the fight to the enemy." The refrain is familiar; more troops are the means and victory in Iraq is the goal.

The war on Iraq benefited Israel by laying waste a country seen to be one of its major adversaries. Emanuel's commitment to Israel (4) and his Congressional service to it are not in doubt. The most recent evidence was his attack on the U.S. puppet Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri al Maliki, because Maliki had labeled Israel's attack on Lebanon as an act of "aggression." Emanuel called on Maliki to cancel his address to Congress; and he was joined by his close friend and DSCC counterpart, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who asked; "Which side is he (Maliki) on when it comes to the war on terror?" In terms of retired Senator Fritz Holling's statement that Congress is Israeli occupied territory, Rahm Emanuel must be considered one of the occupying troops. And he certainly is a major cog in the Israel Lobby as defined by Mearsheimer and Walt. Nor is the idea that the Lobby exists and has tremendous influence on Middle East policy any longer a taboo in the minds of the general populace. According to a poll just carried out by Zogby International for CNI (5), 39% of the American public "agree" or "somewhat agree" that "the work of the Israel lobby on Congress and the Bush administration has been a key factor for going to war in Iraq and now confronting Iran." A similar number, 40%, "strongly disagreed" or "somewhat disagreed" with this position. Some 20% of the public were not sure.

But in some respects, Emanuel is a mysterious fellow, as evidenced by his biography, which is readily available on Wikipedia and in the piece in Fortune (3). But there are a few things missing or not fully explained. First, as is often pointed out, Emanuel's physician father was an Israeli émigré; but, according to Leon Hadar, he also worked during the 1940s with the notorious Irgun, which was labeled as a terrorist organization by the British authorities.(6) Perhaps Rahm's current interest in terrorism was first kindled at his father's Irgun knee.

Second, during the 1991 Gulf War, Emanuel was a civilian volunteer in Israel, "rust-proofing brakes on an army base in northern Israel." (Wikipedia, New Republic). This is peculiar on two counts. Here the U.S. goes to war with Iraq, but Emanuel, a U.S. citizen, volunteers not for his country, but for Israel. Moreover, here is a well-connected Illinois political figure with a father who had been in the Irgun, but he is assigned to "rust-proof brakes" on "an army base." Maybe.

Third, immediately upon his return from his desert sojourn, Emanuel at once became a major figure in the Clinton campaign "who wowed the team from the start, opening a spigot on needed campaign funds."(3) How did he do that after being isolated overseas, and with no experience in national politics? Fourth, after leaving the Clinton White House, he decided that he needed some accumulated wealth and "security" if he were to stay in politics. So he went to work for Bruce Wasserstein, a major Democratic donor and Wall Street financier.

According to Easton, "Over a 2 1/2-year period he helped broker deals-often using political connections-for Wasserstein Perella. According to congressional financial disclosures, he earned more than $18 million during that period. His deals included Unicom's merger with Peco Energy and venture fund GTCR Golder Rauner's purchase of SBC subsidiary SecurityLink. But friends say his compensation also benefited from two sales of the Wasserstein firm itself, first to Dresdner Bank and then to Allianz AG." Again for a newcomer to haul in $18 million in two years is almost miraculous. How did he do it? Next Emanuel won a seat in Congress in 2002, and by 2006 he was chair of the DCCC. Another near miraculous rise.

But Emanuel and his fellow hawks may yet fail to get their way. Major figures among the rulers of U.S. empire, and their well-compensated advisors, from James Baker to Jimmy Carter to Zbigniew Brzezinski to Mearsheimer and Walt, see disaster looming unless the neocons of both War Parties with their dual loyalties to the U.S. and Israel are brought to heel. Second and more important, the people are fed up with the war on Iraq and wary of other wars the hawks like Emanuel have planned for us. The politicians who win office, whether Rove's Republicans or Emanuel's Democrats, will have to deal with this rising tide of anger or risk losing their sinecures. That risk is offset by the machinations of Emanuel and others to guarantee that there is no genuine opposition party or movement. And that lack of a real opposition is a problem we must solve.

John Walsh can be reached at john.endwar@gmail.com.

(1) http://www.counterpunch.com/walsh10142006.html

(2) Emanuel and Reed also refer approvingly to Peter Beinart, the neocon warrior theoretician for the Democrats, warehoused at Marty Peretz's The New Republic, thus: "In his recent book, The Good Fight, Peter Beinart, explains why a tough new national security policy is as essential to the future of of progressive politics as a united front against totalitarianism and communism was to the New Deal and the Great Society." (This chapter of The Plan is titled: "Who Sunk My Battleship." Needless to say, the battleship in question is not the USS Liberty.) Emanuel and Reed also like Anne-Marie Slaughter's proposal for "a new division of labor in which the United Nations takes on economic and social assistance and an expanded (!) NATO takes over the burden of collective security." In other words the UN can do the charity work while the US-dominated NATO is policeman to the world. Quite a vision. And their call for more troops is shared by the Republican neocons, with William Kristol's Weekly Standard calling for 250,000 more for the army this past week.

(3)http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/17/

(4) http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/jewishp/usa/rahmzion.htm

(5) http://www.cnionline.org/learn/polls/czandlobby/index2.htm

(6) J. Palestine Studies, 23: 84(1994).

A liberal NJ congressman's COS laid out the following picture to a friend of mine who is the COS's son. Many of us disgusted Dem voters have heard all this before. I was asked to convey it, for what it's worth.

Dems are purposely biding time till their expected supermajorities in 2008. They are convinced the only thing that would derail this Dem landslide is for them to be caught in a PR vise, where they are tearing apart Bush and Repugs when suddenly another terrorist hit occurs on the US and the rightwing MSM goes ballistic against them in the name of national security.
The MSM can and will do this, they figure.

These Capitol Dems are convinced their party could loose big time if fate puts them in this vise before the elections. So, since no body can rule out a terrorist attack before then, they're not willing to risk this possible scenario.

They are not very worried about election impacts of defections by party lefties, figuring the Dem party will pick up 75% of independents and lots of moderate Repugs. They think the lefties are 'unrealistic' about what is possible before 2008, and they think 'screaming lefties' are going to be shown-up as political novices by 2009.
They say the know the voters wants big time changes and they're going to bring those changes.

...just sharing what I heard, purportedly from the 'inside.'

Looks like the party bosses see anybody who disagrees with their 'realism' as fools. Nothing new here, really. Sorry I even wrote it, but I promised I would.

Over and Out.

The Democratic "leaders" are pathetic. They are so incredibly remiss in their duties, they should be impeached themselves!
Conyers is appearing at an event with Cindy Sheehan in Detroit this weekend. He should be ashamed to look her in the eye. I'm sure she'll tell him what he needs to hear, but will he act on it? I won't hold my breath.

I guess Congress can't do two things at one time anymore!

The Democrats forget that the Republicans spent more than $50 million to go after "blowbaby" in the last episodic presidency.....

Hoyer needs to resign too....

sierra

October 14-15, 2006
How Rahm Emanuel Has Rigged a Pro-War Congress
Election 2006: The Fix is Already In

By JOHN WALSH

"In 1964 Barry Goldwater declared: 'Elect me president, and I will bomb the cities of Vietnam, defoliate the jungles, herd the population into concentration camps and turn the country into a wasteland.' But Lyndon Johnson said: 'No! No! No! Don't you dare do that. Let ME do it.'"

Characterization (paraphrased) of the 1964 Goldwater/Johnson presidential race by Professor Irwin Corey, "The World's Foremost Authority."

"Democrats Split Over Timetable For Troops; In Close Races, Most Reject Rapid Pullout," the headline atop page one of the Sunday Washington Post informed us as the election season got underway (8/27). Stories like this abound these days, and they should all be prefaced with the single word, "betrayal." Only 17% of rank and file Democrats are for "staying the course," 53% want immediate withdrawal and another 25% are for gradual withdrawal. Among all voters, only 30% want to stay the course, 37% want immediate withdrawal and 26% a "gradual withdrawal (Gallup poll - 9/24/06). According to recent Pew Polls, 52% of voters want a timetable for withdrawal while only 41% oppose setting a timetable.

In contrast to voters' sentiment, 64% of the Democratic candidates in the 45 closely contested House Congressional races oppose a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Note carefully: not only do these Democrat worthies oppose the Murtha or McGovern bills for rapid withdrawal or defunding the war; they oppose so much as a timetable. (The number of Dem candidates supporting the Murtha or McGovern proposals is vanishingly small.) The position of these Dem candidates is indistinguishable from that of George W. Bush. How did this betrayal of the Democratic rank and file come about? Who chose these Democratic candidates that oppose rank and file Dems on the number one question on voters' minds, the war on Iraq? How could such candidates get elected in the primaries? Two primary campaigns, now largely forgotten, give us the answer. They are near perfect case studies, and they deserve some reflection although the Dem establishment would dearly like us to forget them.

The first case is the Democratic primary race between Christine Cegelis and Tammy Duckworth in Illinois's 6th CD, a Republican District, which has elected the disgusting Henry Hyde from time immemorial. Then in 2004 Christine Cegelis, who is only mildly antiwar (1), ran as the Democrat with a grass roots campaign and polled a remarkable 44% against the hideous Hyde in her first run. It was not too long before Hyde decided to retire, and the field seemed to be open for Cegelis in 2006.

Enter Rahm Emanuel, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who dug up a pro-war candidate, Tammy Duckworth. Although she had both her legs blown off in Iraq, she has remained committed to "staying the course" in Iraq (2). Duckworth had no political experience and did not live in the 6th District, but Rahm Emanuel raised a million dollars for her and brought in Dem heavyweights Joe Lieberman, Barak Obama, John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton to support her. Despite all this help and with the Cegelis campaign virtually penniless, Duckworth barely managed to eke out a victory by a measly four percentage points. According to a recent Cook Report, Duckworth is not the smashing success that Rahm Emanuel had dreamed of; she remains tied at 41% of the vote with her rookie Republican Rival, Peter Roskam, the same percentage that Cegelis had against the entrenched Hyde in 2004! Recently (9/30), Duckworth was pushed onto the national scene to help her campaign, providing the "rebuttal" to Bush's weekly Saturday radio address. AP, in its story on the exchange where Duckworth was supposed to differ with W on Iraq, concluded thus: "She offered no proposal for an immediate withdrawal or a timetable for withdrawal."

But in one case, and sadly in only one of the 22 districts, which Emanuel selected for intervention, he did not prevail; but that is also instructive. The second case study is CA's 11th CD Dem primary where Emanuel poured in money, much of it apparently coming from his own district in Illinois, to bankroll Steve Filson, essentially a political unknown, who opposed immediate withdrawal from Iraq. But in this primary battle the grass roots prevailed and the strongly antiwar candidate, Jerry McNemey, who supports the Murtha bill for immediate withdrawal, defeated Emanuel's minion, Filson. It is noteworthy that McNemey, strongly antiwar, won, whereas Cegelis, weakly antiwar, lost. Now in the general election McNemey is pulling ahead of his pro-war Republican opponent by 48 to 46% in the most recent poll even though his opponent has outspent him by $1.6 million to $303,000! McNemey has raised a total of only $452,000 to his opponent's $2.5 million. Some cash from Rahm would ensure McNemey's victory it would appear, but it is not forthcoming. It seems that Rahm Emanuel is stanching the influx of money in this very competitive race.

Meanwhile, even though Duckworth has been the recipient of Rahm's largesse, to the tune of $1.8 million, the same amount as her Republican opponent, her campaign has not taken wing. You get the picture. If you toe the line for Rahm on the war, the money rains on you like manna from heaven and you are elevated to national celebrity status. But if you are anti-war, Rahm cuts you off at the wallet.
Note that in each of these two cases Emanuel did not pick candidates based on a proven ability to raise money. Nor did he pick them for their ability to win. In Duckworth's case she damned near lost despite the cash infusion, and McNirney did win despite the money that Emanuel funneled to his opponent. Emanuel is not choosing proven fundraisers or winning candidates; he is choosing pro-war candidates.

Rahm Emanuel's Stable.

To win the House, the Dems must win 15 seats from the Republicans. Here are the 22 candidates hand picked by Emanuel to run in open districts or districts with Republican incumbents, according to The Hill (4/27/06): Darcy Burner (WA), Phyllis Busansky (FL), Francine Busby (CA), Joe Courtney (CT), John Cranley (OH), Jill Derby (NV), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Diane Farrell (CT), Steve Filson (CA) ­ defeated in primary by Jerry McNirney (see above), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Tessa Hafen (NV), Baron Hill (IN), Mary Jo Kilroy (OH), Ron Klein (FL), Ken Lucas (KY), Patsy Madrid (NM), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Chris Murphy (CT), Lois Murphy (PA), Heath Shuler (NC), Peter Welch (VT).

If we group these 22 candidates by their positions, it is much worse than one might have imagined. Here it is:

U.S, must "win" in Iraq (9): John Cranely(OH); Jill Derby (NV); Tammy Duckworth (IL); Brad Ellsworth (IN): Teresa Hafen (NV); Baron Hill (IN);Ken Lucas (KY); Lois Murphy (PA); Heath Schuler (NC).

More troops should be deployed in Iraq. (1): Diane Farrell (CT);

Bush (or Congress or Bush and Congress or someone other than the candidate) must develop a plan or timetable for exit. This means that the candidate does not offer a timetable or other withdrawal plan and amounts only to a partisan criticism of Bush without a plan offered by the candidate. (6): Francine Busby (CA); Joe Courtney (CT); Kirsten Gillibrand (NY); Mary Jo Kilroy (OH); Patricia Madrid (NM); Harry Mitchell (AZ).

Biden's 3-state solution. (1): Phyllis Busansky (FL).

No position. (1): Chris Murphy (CT).

Not for immediate withdrawal (3): Steve Filson (CA) (He lost Dem primary. See above.); Ron Klein (FL); Harry Mitchell (AZ);

Withdrawal in 2006. (1): Peter Welch (VT). (In VT, you could probably not get elected dog catcher without calling for immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Still it is a bit mysterious why Rahm is backing Welch who for that reason probably deserves a bit of scrutiny. Perhaps something "worse" like a Green is waiting in the wings.)

So only one of Rahm's candidates is for prompt withdrawal from Iraq. And it is notweworthy that Rahm found prowar candidates in both red states and blue, like CT and CA. Check out these candidates for yourself. If you live in their districts, pressure them to change their positions and do so publicly with letters to the editor, withholding of funds and most importantly support for third party antiwar candidates where they are to be found ­ no matter how slight the establishment media regards their prospects. Ask what UFPJ, The Nation and other branches of the peace and justice complex are doing to expose Emanuel's candidates.

The question arises. Who is Congressman Rahm Emanuel? From what does he derive his power? What are his thoughts on the future for the Dems? And where is The Nation in all this. More on that coming shortly.

John Walsh can be reached at john.endwar@gmail.com

Notes

(1.) Cegelis was against the war on Iraq but only in a very timid way. She opposed it before it started, but it was only 4th out of 6 issues on her web site, and she was not for immediate withdrawal. Here is what she said on her web site at the time of the primary. "I have opposed this war from the start. But revisiting what brought us to this disastrous point does not solve the problem. It is time for us to bring our troops home. The Bush Administration must provide a comprehensive timetable for withdrawal of the majority of our combat troops at the earliest possible date. " Notice she does not say "Out Now," like Murtha or Lamont. She leaves it all up to Bush to set a timetable, which is the standard copout for pro-war Dems. Although good enough for PDA (!), it was too much for Rahm Emanuel and company.

(2.) Duckworth says of Iraq on her web site: "The fact is we are in Iraq now and we can't simply pull up stakes and create a security vacuum. It wouldn't be in our national interest to leave Iraq in chaos and risk allowing a country with unlimited oil wealth to become a base for terrorists." Not even a mention of a timetable.

Now IS the time to hold these people in contempt. Let Emanuel, Hoyer and the rest who oppose this measure vote their conscience, but get out of our way. We must do all we can to stop this manhandling of the law and our rights as citizens. Bush is not above the law. Bolten is not above the law. Miers is not above the law.

Any time a co-equal branch of government needs to insist on its prerogatives "as a co-equal branch of government", it is, quite obviously, no longer a co-equal branch of government.

Impeach Rahm Immanuel. :>)

The Rabble rising up and achieving self-determination -- now THERE is idea!

Between global warming and 911 truth, I think it is beginning to --

I have an idea....The Dems can write ANOTHER stearnly worded letter! That should work! OOPS!! Break coming...well maybe when they get back....

Jez Louise.....

Heaven forfend that the Dims should force an ostensibly weakened White House to respond on multiple fronts simultaneously.

The Demoks are helping their Repuk partners-in-crime to ride out the storm. They need each other because they are both weakened by the imperial blowback. They are both genuinely afraid of the rabble rising up and achieving self-determination. They are both genuinely afraid of the slaves rising up and achieving emancipation.

What does Rahm have to do with it!! I didn't vote for him.

I wonder how much money in his bank accounts comes from Bushco backers?

Another shameless act by the idiots.

And this is a surprise??

If these salary paid employees have such a full plate to attend to, then they should stay at the table and clean they're plates. Don't come back home or go island/nation hopping on fact finding tours over Christmas until the job at hand, which you were elected to do, is done.
I would like to see every PAC dime placed in the General fund and used to finance ALL candidates equally. The temple of Washington needs cleansed

Typical Rahm Emanuel. Rule of thumb is, when the Democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, cherchez le Rahm!

when hr333 was sent back to committee, conyers said he has a full plate already, including the contempt of congress charges and an updated fisa. i told the judiciary committee that they have before them NOTHING more important than IMPEACHMENT of BOTH of the executive criminals. given that each thing should be thoroughly done, i can always hope that impeachment is at the top of the list. but i fear not.

to those of you who think all of anything are just alike, you are not paying attention to any of the details.

Maybe a large percentage of Congress is expecting a Presidential Pardon from an outgoing Bush.

Read Morris Berman–Dark Ages America
_________________________________________________

Just finished it. Excellent book, unless you just have to have a happy ending.

Gee, even the usual Sensible Democrats seem to have scaled back their responses, from the urgent pleading to the more common exasperated nastygrams.

It is disappointing when the few seemingly-respectable, nominally progressive Democrats warp, buckle, and fold. I still read hopeful comments declaring that Conyers showed signs of his old form recently, and may be fed up with wearing Mother Superior Pelosi's choke chain.

I wish it were true, but I doubt it. I used to enjoy Conyers' dry, facetious manner of speaking-- he has a certain twinkle in his eye, almost a conspiratorial wink that made you feel that you were in on the joke. Now I see that he's just as capable of blowing smoke, and that wink feels like it's at me instead of with me.

It's obvious that the Enabling Party never seriously considered taking direct action against the criminal cabal in power, or even intended to oppose the maladministration's amoral and malign policies and actions. Instead, they obviously intend to dither, stall, make preposterous excuses, and otherwise coast or "skate" in hopes that they'll benefit from the 2008 elections. Duh.

And yet there are still those who accept this disgraceful and appalling substitution of process for principle, apparently believing that the end justifies the means-- i.e., that even if the Dems are expecting to win by default in 2008, it's OK because they'll finally have sufficient power to do the right thing(s), including undoing the vast destruction wrought domestically and abroad by the reigning criminals.

It's not OK.

It looks like democrats would just as soon wait until we have someone in the White House. Then they can say, "No use crying over spilt milk. Time to move on." If we don't hold republicans accountable, the democrats can continue on as things are; they have already taken the money. The people of this country are crying for accountability, rolling back executive power, restoring the constitution, and with it, some faith in government.

Good job spineless demopublicans! Way to cave! Be sure to cave again when the white house does even more illegal activities, in plain sight, without even trying to cover their tracks.

since 1492----you said it all---thanks for saving my breath. Anyone who follows the dissolution of anything remotely resembling opposition from the Democratic Party has no choice but to turn away with contempt.

There is absolutely no explanation except collaboration when one observes the appointed leaders of this sham party. The scum rises to the top!

Any member of the House and Senate who still have principles should caucus and call a press conference, announcing the formation of The People's Party of Principle. And they should vote as a block forcing Reid, Hoyer and Pelosi to turn to them if they want to get anything done, and object strenuously to things like this going on all the time.

I am beyond disgust, but I have no name for what sits like a rock in my gut today. How much more apparent can it get, my friends? We cannot let things stand as they are any longer. We are the ones we have been waiting for. The Democratic Party is dead. The stench of the rotting corpse travels all across the land.

It looks like Pelosi and Emanuel are playing good cop/bad cop. And Emanuel is too busy to come to the phone, he's out organizing town meetings so constituents can hear how much the Dems have done for us! And just what might that be?

The Dems are a Potemkin opposition. Their opposition to bu$h is fake. They are helping to consolidate the Empire. They are scum of the lowest order.

What a fucking joke our political system has become. These guys are living in the city on the hill and have no concept of the daily lives of Americans. Our elected officials in D.C. are playing their own game while the rest of the country has to deal with fallout from their decisions.
Stop thinking in terms of two parties in the American political system. You can clearly see there is only one party in D.C. It's the Uncle Buck Party and they have kicked Uncle Sam out and have climbed into bed with corporate America. And they gave birth to mainstream media who now act as their PR department. Our Constitution is being rewritten to legalize the spying and arresting and torture that is currently taking place. And the foreign policy that Uncle Buck has devised actually increases the risk of terror attacks on Americans by giving the world more and more reasons to fear and hate us. If Uncles Sam doesn't get back quickly all the legislation these guys can write won't protect us. It might protect them, but our foreign policy makes us human shields in their so called War on Terror.
Hoa binh

Reasons to not vote for another democrat. Nuff said.

George Wallace had one thing right: he called the G. reat O. il P. arty tweedle dee and the dems tweedle dum.

"[Emanuel] has been saying that this week is not the time to do this, that it will step on our message on Iraq and FISA," said a top House Democratic leadership aide.

Rahm Emmanuel should be drawn and quartered for the DCCC's support and funding of conservatives who ran and won under the Democratic banner in the 2006 elections, only to vote as Republicans.

Now IS the time to do this, and if the Democratic leadership can't handle more than two issues at at time, they should get the hell out of there. There are enough Democrats to spread the issue-load among them, enough to be responsible for many issues through individual groups. That's what the committees are FOR. This nation's business cannot be confined to a schedule of convenience for the Democrats.

Jesus Christ, the Democratic leadership is like a bunch of doddering fools at the doorway of a burning building. "Wait, wait, don't push, don't crowd me, and above all, don't HURRY me. I'll go through that door in my own time."

Replace Dems and Rupugs with independent representatives. Start now 'cause it will take several cycles to clean house.

Public finance of presidential, senatorial, and congressional compaigns.

Hey celebrity -

Didn't you get the memo?

Shut up and keep shopping.

:-)

Read Morris Berman--Dark Ages America

"Other top Democrats, including Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), have argued that the House should put off that fight while debates over Iraq funding and electronic eavesdropping dominate the floor."

Why? Right now the U.S. is reeling with the repeated attacks on our rights, a citizenry kept on continuous war footing, lies that attack our senses, sky high prices at the pump, home foreclosures, etc., etc., etc. Why not give as good as we get?

Hey what celeb is being dragged in jail or court today? much more informative than worrying about how corrupt our gov't is and how they are taking our country down better tune into cnn later since they got it covered... p.s. why is oj's court hearing being covered so intensely but D. Kucinich's res.333 was just barely talked about?

I believe you are right, Kivals!

I believe most Americans are too busy watching people eat bugs for money, reading about Hollywood celebrities, checking out the latest "Survivor, Bratislava," searching for porn on the Internet, listening to Christian talk radio, or learning new creative ways to view themselves as victims for them to pay much attention to what is happening in Washington.

These statements from the Dem Congress are so weak it is truly scary. They sound like they are trying to talk themselves into actually wielding the authority they have in our government, but they can't pull the trigger.

It's like the kid whose knees are shaking and he can't make the jump off the high board into the pool. Only, these are adult Congressmen who are trembling and trying to rationalize the exercise of inherent authority where no explanation is necessary.

Heaven forfend that the Dims should force an ostensibly weakened White House to respond on multiple fronts simultaneously. "It will step on our message on Iraq and FISA"?? Give me a break! The Dims don't have a message on Iraq or FISA, at least not one which substantively differs from W's.

It's not about substance, because the Dims have shown no substance. It's not about strategy, because you can't grasp the concept of strategy until you have a handle on tactics, and the Dims' only idea of tactics is to declare capitulation up front in the hope that W won't whip them in public quite so bad. It's about competence, or the lack thereof.

What do I think of the two-party system? I think it's an idea worth trying. Anybody got a spare second party kicking around?

I don't EVER remember a Judiciary Committee being kept this busy investigating wrong doings of the government. My Gawd, if the people weren't so damned asleep, it would be time for a revolution! But, nope, we'll just suck it up and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do." Waa-Waa!

Congress is no longer a coequal partner, it just uselessly goes through the motions like the parliament of a banana republic, in the end doing nothing.