zd

don’t say “loose” and “stool” in the same sentence, please… it’s lunchtime…

second

I read that comment as ‘they’ve got something on us, and will use it if we get too far out of line.’

Is this a correct reading?

The Anthrax attacks are never far from my mind.

Emanuel should be mocked and reviled for a lot of things, but not for being a dancer.

Just call him twinkletoes!

Hey Pach!

I thought Rahm was supposed to have been a fighter?

Rahm scared shitless?

He Depends on our support – wonder what size he wears?

my comment against the bold that follows;

But political fear still hovers over any legislation that touches on the fight against terrorism, which, for Democrats, may be the new third rail of politics.

they haven’t learned yet

we MUST frame it the way it is, that the fighting terrorism MEANS re instituting habeas protection

we MUST show our weapons are greater, more effective when we have habeas protection in place

The mockery is for his macho posturing. It’s his need to compensate for his dancer past that drives a lot of his behavior, his pathological need for macho posturing, in my view.

I’d be happy for him to embrace his dancer past and stop trying to act macho while abetting Bush’s bloodlust.

I don’t even care if he does drag. I just want him to quit betraying progressives.

Can we get Dave Vitter(R)-Chicken Ranch, to donate a diaper to Rahm?

-GSD

brendan @ 5

Emanuel should be mocked and reviled for a lot of things, but not for being a dancer.

It depends on how good he was. I tried to find online reviews of his performances last year and came up with zipola.

Hey Pach
Rahm’s no Nureyev either!

Pach @ 11:

The man certainly has some stamina:

Emanuel trains for and participates in triathlons.[6]

The old Mayor Daley would have taken that column, circled the quote from Rahm, folded the paper into something with lots of pointy corners, and told Rahm where to place it.

I suppose Chicago Machine politicians just ain’t what they used to be.

Should we be aware of what our opponents are doing? Sure. Should we try to anticipate their next moves? Absolutely. Should we let them dictate our actions? I don’t think so.

I’ve had enough. More and better Dems, please.

So if Rahm is sick of fear, is he going to lead the charge in the House to get us out of Iraq? Is he going to jawbone the Blue Dog and Bush Dogs?

Re: Emanuel’s aborted “career” as a dancer:

Emanuel was encouraged by his mother to take ballet lessons as a boy and is a “graduate of the Evanston School of Ballet”. He won “a scholarship to the Joffrey Ballet” but turned this down to attend Sarah Lawrence College, a liberal arts school with a strong dance program.[6][4]

He shoulda gone to the Joffery, like Ron Reagan, son of the “Gipper.’

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

so here’s why the report was leaked….under this kind of pressure [gleamed from think progress]

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said that after reviewing a draft of the Government Accountability Office report — which has not yet been made public — policy officials “made some factual corrections” and “offered some suggestions on a few of the actual grades” assigned by the GAO. … “We have provided the GAO with information which we believe will lead them to conclude that a few of the benchmark grades should be upgraded from ‘not met’ to ‘met,’” Morrell said.

they are juicing the data we’re gonna get, just like the did with the run up to bush’s depraved invasion

It is the CW that Rahm is one of the Democrats “master strategists”.

Couldn’t be further from the truth. Rahm is merely a “tactician”.

He can handle the little moves, but the big picture never interests him/always escapes him.

It is all about rowing the boat in a straight line; not about where the boat is going.

Rahm would be just as happy as a Repug as he is as a Democrat. And sadly, the Democratic leadership finds that appealing.

Even worse, they think we can’t tell the difference.

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

Pachacutec @ 11

The mockery is for his macho posturing. It’s his need to compensate for his dancer past that drives a lot of his behavior, his pathological need for macho posturing, in my view.

I’d be happy for him to embrace his dancer past and stop trying to act macho while abetting Bush’s bloodlust.

I don’t even care if he does drag. I just want him to quit betraying progressives.

You’re confusing the genuine bellicosity of his policies with macho posturing. Some women we know are good at it, too.

And this notion he “feels the need to compensate for his dancer past” is a stretch, so to speak.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 22

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

Oh yes, yes. Go to wiki and read all about that…

And for Emanuel, it is all about money. The fear here is that the Dems will come across as supportive of anti-establishment “peace nics” which would impact on Big Biz corporate funders to the party. I would love it if someone serious would run against him next time around.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 22

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

He was (and is) one of their leading go-to money guys. Picks pockets with the best of them.

Do you think there is a connection between Emanuel and the Israeli government?

“During the 1991 Gulf War, Emanuel was a civilian volunteer in Israel, rust-proofing brakes on an army base in northern Israel.”

Oklahoma kiddo @ 22

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

Does the sun rise in the east?

I don’t think it’s an accident that the preponderance of Bush Dogs are white males, particularly, white Southern males.

I don’t believe it’s an accident either that these are the people apparently most susceptible to fear of GOP macho rhetoric and posturing, nor do I believe it’s an accident that progressive women seem thereby less susceptible.

Mad Dogs @ 21

It is the CW that Rahm is one of the Democrats “master strategists”.

Couldn’t be further from the truth. Rahm is merely a “tactician”.

He can handle the little moves, but the big picture never interests him/always escapes him.

It is all about rowing the boat in a straight line; not about where the boat is going.

Rahm would be just as happy as a Repug as he is as a Democrat. And sadly, the Democratic leadership finds that appealing.

Even worse, they think we can’t tell the difference.

Rahm’s choices about where to spend DCCC money last cycle cost Democrats more seats than they gained. His huge investments in Duckworth and others (while letting people like Burner, Kissell, Brown and Massa run alone) were tactical missteps.

In short, he’s neither a strategist nor a tactician. He just curses a lot, and folks on Capitol Hill think that’s hot.

Richmond @ 19

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

I agree that this is one of the real sticking points. Unfortunately for them, the troops will have to start coming home, as we discussed on the thread below. There’s nothing the representatives of the unnamable middle eastern country can do about it short of pushing for a draft. I don’t think they will do that.

This is going to create a new delicate dance, in which the supporters of the unnamable nation try to get themselves off the hook with an American public finally wiseing up to the big con, and who helped to con them.

Elliott @ 28

Oklahoma kiddo @ 22

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

Does the sun rise in the east?

does a snake drag his balls on the floor?

does senator craig have stall tactics?

The Mighty Rahm Is Scared Shitless?

Is that why he’s loose in the stool?

Hey, Rahm–
This is the least popular president in the history of presidents. There is NO downside to bopping him upside the head. NONE. Anything he wants, anything he asks for, you should act as if the request came from the rotting mouth of Nixon himself. Any request he makes should be greeted with hoots of derisive laughter and a fusillade of subpoenas. Stop being scared of America’s worst politician. If Bush wants something, do the exact goddamned opposite. Loudly. I mean, really, why are you scared of this guy? Why?

First they tell us that terrorists hate us for our freedom. Then they proceed to take apart the elements in our society that made freedom possible. Habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights (one right at a time,) our very Constitution is now at risk, as is our way of life and our form of government. I fail to understand how this is not surrender and defeat at the hands of the terrorists every bit as much or more as a battlefield loss? Call me bewildered.

cleter @ 34

Hey, Rahm–
This is the least popular president in the history of presidents.

is this official?

what are the numbers and who’s in the running?

Pach @ 29:

John Edwards is a southern white male. And he ain’t no blue dog…

The view here is that Rahm is a closet neo-con.

Elliott @ 28

Oklahoma kiddo @ 22

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

Does the sun rise in the east?

Is the Pope Catholic?

Emanuel’s concerns are legitimate. The Public has been so brainwashed, that a Dem misstep will have a huge impact on the ‘08 election. I think the leadership stays awake at night worrying about making the “big-screw” up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election. If we don’t re-take the machinery of govt in ‘08, we will be well and truly screwed.

The Iraq war is going badly and the ending is going to be worse. It’s either “Gallipoli” writ large or Dunkirk; and the public will be looking to punish someone. The Republican Party may be on the ropes but they are very dangerous and they still control the public psychology.

Richmond @ 19

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

I’m surprised to see you of all commenters underestimating the influence of That Lobby here. It’s not necessarily “fear”. Schumer and Clinton represent New York and therefore represent The Lobby; that explains their support for the war, and it least represents some kind of responsiveness to a genuine constituency. Emanuel, meanwhile, has maintained strong personal ties to Israel and, for me, that’s enough explanation for his support (contrary to myth, he wasn’t in the IDF). Hoyer et al have less excuse.

He even stabbed Pelosi and Murtha in the back by leading the fight to pull the Iran language from the recent supplemental.

i don’t know about this one pach. after pulling the iran language from the iraq supplemental bill, speaker pelosi promised we have a stand alone bill, but never followed through. and when defazio submitted it as an amendment to the defense appropriations bill (h.r.1585) – voting no with emanual was murtha (and a total of 99 dems), and pelosi didn’t even vote (roll call vote)

on the iran issue, i think the problem is much bigger than emanual – and it apparently includes pelosi and murtha.

Another tough gal that is sadly missed — today is Molly Ivins birthday (from the Writers Almanac)

It’s the birthday of the late political humorist Molly Ivins, born in Monterey, California (1944), but she grew up in Houston, Texas. She got started as a journalist at the Houston Chronicle in the 1960s, at a time when, she said, “[newspaper offices were] full of spittoons and pictures of naked ladies, and the good old boys sitting around drinking Cutty Sark out of coffee cups with their hats on the backs of their heads. [Journalism] really wasn’t a respectable thing to do. Of course, that made it very attractive to me.”

She went on to become a political columnist at The Dallas Times-Herald. She said, “Politics ought to be covered the way sports is, as a celebration of heroes and villains. It is … the world’s most fascinatin’ p*ker game.” She went on to publish many collections of her columns, including You Got to Dance with Them What Brung You: Politics in the Clinton Years (1998) and Who Let the Dogs In?: Incredible Political Animals I Have Known (2004). She died this past January 31, 2007.

Molly Ivins said, “I dearly love the state of Texas, but I consider that a harmless perversion on my part, and discuss it only with consenting adults.”

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

Rahm is also the leader of the Corporate Caucus, the ones who believe that only the support of cash-rich corporations can enable political parties to exist in this day and age.

Let’s prove him wrong. Back the Clean Elections people — they’re working on a state and local level to take most of the money out of campaigning, and thus relieve politicians of the temptation to sell out.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 38

The view here is that Rahm is a closet neo-con.

Actually, he’s a neo-liberal, like Hillary Clinton.

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

Steve-AR @ 40

Emanuel’s concerns are legitimate. The Public has been so brainwashed, that a Dem misstep will have a huge impact on the ‘08 election. I think the leadership stays awake at night worrying about making the “big-screw” up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election. If we don’t re-take the machinery of govt in ‘08, we will be well and truly screwed.

The Iraq war is going badly and the ending is going to be worse. It’s either “Gallipoli” writ large or Dunkirk; and the public will be looking to punish someone. The Republican Party may be on the ropes but they are very dangerous and they still control the public psychology.

Very true. That’s why I call it “the GOP/Media Complex”, because that’s what it is: A pact between the corporate entities that run our media and the corporate-loving GOP.

women and the black caucus! Without them this country would be in the process of issuing Brown shirts and notifying the citizenry that Permanent ID Tattoos would beging being issued within the next 6 months!

Pach’s post is excellent and timely. And we love Rahm very little here. I hope Howie Klein can update us on Emanuel soon, too. Howie writing about Rahm is as sweet and humorous as Jane Hamsher writing about Joe Lieberman. Howie’s contempt for Rahm Emanuel will never subside.

AIPAC’s role is real and underappreciated, nationally. I agree.

As for the inside bits on the Iran language, my read is Pelosi got blackmailed by Rahm and the Bush Dogs, and assented to the language removal rather than push a vote when she lacked the votes.

We knew that, with Murtha sidelined and Hoyer in place, with Emanuel as a leader, Pelosi would have a split caucus out to get her. Murtha had his own problems but the situation remains Emanuel, Hoyer and the Bush Dogs are holding the party hostage to Bush.

Pelosi has not been perfect in all this but I frankly have a hard time laying all of this at her doorstep.

Biodun @ 44

Oklahoma kiddo @ 38

The view here is that Rahm is a closet neo-con.

Actually, he’s a neo-liberal, like Hillary Clinton.

neo-liberls are not the same as progressive liberals? ;0)

Biodun @ 44

Oklahoma kiddo @ 38

The view here is that Rahm is a closet neo-con.

Actually, he’s a neo-liberal, like Hillary Chinton.

This vaguely academic-sounding “neo”logisms are meant to obscure what “neoconservative” and “neoliberal” mean: advocacy for Israeli expansionism, whether it’s from within the Republican or Democratic parties.

Good diary over at Kos about this:

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/30/7953/06316

Well, there it is. The Democratic Party’s Platform revealed. Everything they do must be weighed against what the Republicans are going to say about them.

Seems the cure is to demonstrate conviction, show some leadership, stand on principle and do the right thing. The Republicans are going to call them sissies no matter what they do.

Habeus Corpus would be a good start. Its going to be hard. First, they’ve got to go on MTP, Chris Mathews, etc. and explain to the public in simple terms what habeus corpus is.

It is to have or give up the (your)body. The public needs to understand that they could be picked up and disappeared (for no reason) with no habeus corpus, innocence til proven guilty, right to an atty, right to trial by jury.

The public needs to learn that we don’t have our American system anymore b/c Bushco took it away under false pretenses.

The public needs to believe that Democrats will stand united to get back our system of government.

Mad Dogs @ 21

It is the CW that Rahm is one of the Democrats “master strategists”.

Couldn’t be further from the truth. Rahm is merely a “tactician”.

He can handle the little moves, but the big picture never interests him/always escapes him.

It is all about rowing the boat in a straight line; not about where the boat is going.

Rahm would be just as happy as a Repug as he is as a Democrat. And sadly, the Democratic leadership finds that appealing.

Even worse, they think we can’t tell the difference.

So are you saying that Rahm and Rove are essentially blood brothers?

perris @ 20

so here’s why the report was leaked….under this kind of pressure [gleamed from think progress]

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said that after reviewing a draft of the Government Accountability Office report — which has not yet been made public — policy officials “made some factual corrections” and “offered some suggestions on a few of the actual grades” assigned by the GAO. … “We have provided the GAO with information which we believe will lead them to conclude that a few of the benchmark grades should be upgraded from ‘not met’ to ‘met,’” Morrell said.

they are juicing the data we’re gonna get, just like the did with the run up to bush’s depraved invasion

There are facts and then there is truth. So I ask you, brother perris, do you believe? Because if you believe, the facts don’t matter. And the truth, the blinding, shining truth shall reveal itself to you. The surge is working! Progress is being made. We shall overcome and be victorious. Hallelujah!

Steve-AR @ 40

Emanuel’s concerns are legitimate. The Public has been so brainwashed, that a Dem misstep will have a huge impact on the ‘08 election. I think the leadership stays awake at night worrying about making the “big-screw” up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election. If we don’t re-take the machinery of govt in ‘08, we will be well and truly screwed.

The Iraq war is going badly and the ending is going to be worse. It’s either “Gallipoli” writ large or Dunkirk; and the public will be looking to punish someone. The Republican Party may be on the ropes but they are very dangerous and they still control the public psychology.

Not only do the Republicans control the public psychology – they are entrenched, powerful, and utterly ruthless. True, there have been some major disappointments from the Dems of late – but the Democrats are up against a formidable opponent.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

Last time it was bagman. If there’s a next time? Why ruin a good thing?

Pachacutec @ 49

A*PAC’s role is real and underappreciated, nationally. I agree.

As for the inside bits on the Iran language, my read is Pelosi got blackmailed by Rahm and the Bush Dogs, and assented to the language removal rather than push a vote when she lacked the votes.

We knew that, with Murtha sidelined and Hoyer in place, with Emanuel as a leader, Pelosi would have a split caucus out to get her. Murtha had his own problems but the situation remains Emanuel, Hoyer and the Bush Dogs are holding the party hostage to Bush.

Pelosi has not been perfect in all this but I frankly have a hard time laying all of this at her doorstep.

This is my take exactly. It was pretty brave of her to try to replace Hoyer with Murtha.

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

I’d have him head up the National Endowment of the Arts in my administration…

Speaking of dem stragedy, the cash spigot in Fla. just got turned off:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com…..?track=rss

Jacksonville trial lawyer Wayne Hogan called DNC Chairman Howard Dean on Tuesday to cancel an event that Hogan had planned to host to raise money for the national party.

“It’s a big mistake what they’ve done to Florida, and I’m not going to assist them,” Hogan said.
(snip)

Central Florida Democratic fundraiser Dick Batchelor said Hogan could be a harbinger of a bigger problem for the DNC. Batchelor said he’s also more likely to give money to the state party instead of the DNC.

“If Wayne Hogan turns off the spigot, other people will follow suit,” he said. “Why would I support the national party when they’re basically vaporizing the influence our delegates would have in the nominating process?”

Ruh-roh. Hopefully, the state party can get its shit together with the windfall.

Knut Wicksell @ 31

Richmond @ 19

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

I agree that this is one of the real sticking points. Unfortunately for them, the troops will have to start coming home, as we discussed on the thread below. There’s nothing the representatives of the unnamable middle eastern country can do about it short of pushing for a draft. I don’t think they will do that.

This is going to create a new delicate dance, in which the supporters of the unnamable nation try to get themselves off the hook with an American public finally wiseing up to the big con, and who helped to con them.

Yup and this is where the pecker hits the pavement (is there such a saying, or did I make that up?). Alas, this is why the bomb Iran thing is so scary, they actually think they can do it with few troops. (Perhaps true, but then as with Iraq, there is that small problem of stabilization).

By the way, since when do the Dems (and the US) get away with calling for the removal of democratically elected individuals (especially thse whose elections the US insisted on????). Yell out to Hillary and others calling for the removal of Maliki and the elected leadership of the Iranians and Palistinians. Makes you think that {”Democracy now”) is only a slogan meant to cover a whole series of nefarious acts. Ditto here at home too often and our election “system.”

perris @ 36

cleter @ 34

Hey, Rahm–
This is the least popular president in the history of presidents.

is this official?

what are the numbers and who’s in the running?

Actually, he’s a point or two above Nixon getting on the helicopter, I think. Anyway, he’s in the twenties. It’s the lowest a president for whom an impeachment inquiry has not already begun has ever gotten. You would have to about double Bush’s numbers to get Nixon’s start-of-investigation numbers. My point is, Bush is not powerful, Landslide-Fresh Nixon. He’s at Crippled Nixon, with oh-god-where-is-my-helicopter numbers. He’s at Nixon impeachment-ready numbers, without even an impeachment inquiry. He’s in the twenties, why are they scared of him? His attorney general just resigned. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Hit him with the chair,don’t back away in fear.

Ann in AZ @ 54

So are you saying that Rahm and Rove are essentially blood brothers?

They are both bought and paid for and believe government should be too.

I personally dislike him for the way he took credit from the grassroots effort to win back Congress. His strategy was horrible and could have cost us the election. The press however portrayed him as the Democratic Rove. I call bullshit.
Edit: I really need to use preview morel

Pachacutec @ 50

A*PAC’s role is real and underappreciated, nationally. I agree.

As for the inside bits on the Iran language, my read is Pelosi got blackmailed by Rahm and the Bush Dogs, and assented to the language removal rather than push a vote when she lacked the votes.

We knew that, with Murtha sidelined and Hoyer in place, with Emanuel as a leader, Pelosi would have a split caucus out to get her. Murtha had his own problems but the situation remains Emanuel, Hoyer and the Bush Dogs are holding the party hostage to Bush.

Pelosi has not been perfect in all this but I frankly have a hard time laying all of this at her doorstep.

i don’t lay it all at pelosi’s door step either. but, she does appear to be have some responsibility for the shitty job the house has been doing wrt iran this year. i should write a diary.

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

Ann in AZ @ 54

Mad Dogs @ 21

It is the CW that Rahm is one of the Democrats “master strategists”.

Couldn’t be further from the truth. Rahm is merely a “tactician”.

He can handle the little moves, but the big picture never interests him/always escapes him.

It is all about rowing the boat in a straight line; not about where the boat is going.

Rahm would be just as happy as a Repug as he is as a Democrat. And sadly, the Democratic leadership finds that appealing.

Even worse, they think we can’t tell the difference.

So are you saying that Rahm and Rove are essentially blood brothers?

Would I say somthing like that? *g*

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

Oh, there ain’t going to be no “Clinton administration.”

Fern @ 57

Steve-AR @ 40

Emanuel’s concerns are legitimate. The Public has been so brainwashed, that a Dem misstep will have a huge impact on the ‘08 election. I think the leadership stays awake at night worrying about making the “big-screw” up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election. If we don’t re-take the machinery of govt in ‘08, we will be well and truly screwed.

The Iraq war is going badly and the ending is going to be worse. It’s either “Gallipoli” writ large or Dunkirk; and the public will be looking to punish someone. The Republican Party may be on the ropes but they are very dangerous and they still control the public psychology.

Not only do the Republicans control the public psychology – they are entrenched, powerful, and utterly ruthless. True, there have been some major disappointments from the Dems of late – but the Democrats are up against a formidable opponent.

The Republics were booted from office in November because the fear gig is up with the American public. (70% ) The dems need to call the republics on it every chance they get. IMO that argument is just another shiny object for braindead pukes.

hackworth @ 55

Well, there it is. The Democratic Party’s Platform revealed. Everything they do must be weighed against what the Republicans are going to say about them.

Seems the cure is to demonstrate conviction, show some leadership, stand on principle and do the right thing. The Republicans are going to call them sissies no matter what they do.

Habeus Corpus would be a good start. Its going to be hard. First, they’ve got to go on MTP, Chris Mathews, etc. and explain to the public in simple terms what habeus corpus is.

It is to have or give up the (your)body. The public needs to understand that they could be picked up and disappeared (for no reason) with no habeus corpus, innocence til proven guilty, right to an atty, right to trial by jury.

The public needs to learn that we don’t have our American system anymore b/c Bushco took it away under false pretenses.

The public needs to believe that Democrats will stand united to get back our system of government.

But if I haven’t done anything wrong, I don’t have anything to worry about, right?
/snark

cleter @ 66

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

Oh, there ain’t going to be no “Clinton administration.”

Boy I would love to see Edwards and Obama come together now with their delegates and numbers and say we will run together as a team.

Ed*ard Teller @ 49

Pach’s post is excellent and timely. And we love Rahm very little here. I hope Howie Klein can update us on Emanuel soon, too. Howie writing about Rahm is as sweet and humorous as Jane Hamsher writing about Joe Lieberman. Howie’s contempt for Rahm Emanuel will never subside.

You mean like this?:

If you donate to the DCCC, how do they divvy up the money? Well, it makes sense that they give a good deal of it to endangered incumbents. I mean take a guy like John Hall in New York. He represents a pretty Republican district and he’s got a very wealthy Republican opponent and Hall has voted his conscience every step of the way since being elected last year. His voting record is one of the best in the entire House and he never sells out Democratic values or principles to curry favor with right-wingers. If the DCCC was giving their donations to true blue Democrats like John Hall, Carol Shea-Porter (NH), Yvette Clark (NY), Mazie Hirono (HI), Peter Welch (VT), John Sarbanes (MD), Keith Ellison (MN), Hank Johnson (GA), Paul Hodes (NH), Dave Loebsack (IA), Steve Cohen (TN), and Betty Sutton (OH), I’d be urging you to donate. But if you look at the DCCC’s Front Line Page what do you find? Well, not a dozen Republicans voting in lockstep with Bush, of course– but more than a dozen Democrats who do!

The DCCC says they want money to elect candidates who will help end the war and who will fight against the abuses of Bush Regime hacks like Alberto Gonzales. But the donations are going to Democrats who vote with the Republicans to prolong the war and to pass execrable legislation like the FISA law. The Frontline List, which is far too embarrassing for the DCCC to include in their e-mail (in case anyone is paying attention) includes these treacherous Democrats who vote with Republicans over and over and over on the most crucial issues and against basic Democratic principles and values (the guys ‘n’ gals with stars next to their names voted with the GOP on giving Alberto Gonzales wiretapping powers):

[emphasis added]

Howie goes on to name the names, of course. Lots of Rahm’s friends on that list . . .

Richmond @62:

Never underestimate Democrats’ eagerness to noisily and messily placate that lobby. Here’s Howard Dean trying to score votes by calling Maliki an anti-Semite last year:

http://archive.newsmax.com/arc…..1805.shtml

Rumors that Cheney plans to roll out Iran attack starting next week:

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/30/111448/373

Richmond @ 71

cleter @ 66

Oh, there ain’t going to be no “Clinton administration.”

Boy I would love to see Edwards and Obama come together now with their delegates and numbers and say we will run together as a team.

Do you see either of them being willing to give up top billing on the ticket? If so which one?

Fern @ 56

Steve-AR @ 40

Emanuel’s concerns are legitimate. The Public has been so brainwashed, that a Dem misstep will have a huge impact on the ‘08 election. I think the leadership stays awake at night worrying about making the “big-screw” up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election. If we don’t re-take the machinery of govt in ‘08, we will be well and truly screwed.

The Iraq war is going badly and the ending is going to be worse. It’s either “Gallipoli” writ large or Dunkirk; and the public will be looking to punish someone. The Republican Party may be on the ropes but they are very dangerous and they still control the public psychology.

Not only do the Republicans control the public psychology – they are entrenched, powerful, and utterly ruthless. True, there have been some major disappointments from the Dems of late – but the Democrats are up against a formidable opponent.

That’s why, at the moment, I can’t beat up on the Dem leadership. The fate of our Constitutional Democracy is on the line and one major screw up; and we are in for a very long night. The ‘06 election was not a mandate or a Dem victory; it was only a “stay” to give time for more appeals. If we win in ‘08, It will just be another “stay”. There is no quick fix, and all of the political risk for the Dems is on the down side.

Ed*ard Teller @ 60

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

I’d have him head up the National Endowment of the Arts in my administration…

Is that an annoucement of your candidacy, ET?

;)

Steve-AR @ 76

That’s why, at the moment, I can’t beat up on the Dem leadership. The fate of our Constitutional Democracy is on the line and one major screw up; and we are in for a very long night. The ‘06 election was not a mandate or a Dem victory; it was only a “stay” to give time for more appeals. If we win in ‘08, It will just be another “stay”. There is no quick fix, and all of the political risk for the Dems is on the down side.

If the Democrats act and vote like Republicans, we are in for the very long night anyway.

Ed*ard Teller @ 58

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

I’d have him head up the National Endowment of the Arts in my administration…

If Clinton becomes Prez, which I fervently hope is not the case, Emanuel will become her Dick Morris in one fashion or the other IMHO.

Pachacutec @ 50

A*PAC’s role is real and underappreciated, nationally. I agree.

As for the inside bits on the Iran language, my read is Pelosi got blackmailed by Rahm and the Bush Dogs, and assented to the language removal rather than push a vote when she lacked the votes.

We knew that, with Murtha sidelined and Hoyer in place, with Emanuel as a leader, Pelosi would have a split caucus out to get her. Murtha had his own problems but the situation remains Emanuel, Hoyer and the Bush Dogs are holding the party hostage to Bush.

Pelosi has not been perfect in all this but I frankly have a hard time laying all of this at her doorstep.

Also, by tradition, the Speaker rarely votes. (Yeah, I know, strange.) Being the Speaker of the entire House, it’s viewed as unseemly for her to vote (Yeah, I know.) So her not voting on a specific issue should not be taken as lack of concern.

When I say San Francisco gave up our representation in Congress, I mean it. No voting, no representation, no impeachment. It’s the price we pay for the grandiosity of having our Congresswoman be the Speaker.

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

Fern @ 75

Do you see either of them being willing to give up top billing on the ticket? If so which one?

Yep. Bottom-heavy ticket either way. And Edwards has been there before and isn’t likely to repeat it.

Question for Brendan at 51

Can you point me to some source, whatever, for the proposition that “neo” as in neocon signifies support for Israeli expansion?

Thanks.

Steve-AR @ 76

Fern @ 56

Not only do the Republicans control the public psychology – they are entrenched, powerful, and utterly ruthless. True, there have been some major disappointments from the Dems of late – but the Democrats are up against a formidable opponent.

That’s why, at the moment, I can’t beat up on the Dem leadership. The fate of our Constitutional Democracy is on the line and one major screw up; and we are in for a very long night. The ‘06 election was not a mandate or a Dem victory; it was only a “stay” to give time for more appeals. If we win in ‘08, It will just be another “stay”. There is no quick fix, and all of the political risk for the Dems is on the down side.

Sorry Steve, but spare me. One “major screw up”??? Even when no wrong is done the Rethugs attack (remmber Swiftboating? and now against Obama). They attack to attack period. Alas, the Dem party is more like a victim of marital abuse (generally but not always female). They fear that whatever step they make, or thing they say will bring down another rain of fists (generally to the belly where it can’t be seen, but will do alot of damage). The victim cowers, apologizes, and winces in the days, months, years ahead as the situation is repeated over and over again. ‘If you leave I will kill you (or the children)’ says the abusive spouse. Yet the main way out is either to leave for good or to attack back in such a way that there is no doubt that the situation has to change.

Lobbying on behalf of another country should be illegal – any other country.

I suppose it’s entirely plausible that Rahm is not so much overtly fearful as he is peddling fear like a right winger for his own purposes.

Nevertheless, as a shrink, I do believe that the fealty to conservative policies when threatened with GOP macho posturing, seen among so many men, including Democratic men, represents a fundamental insecurity of their masculinity, and hence, a posture rooted in fear.

Peterr @ 77

Ed*ard Teller @ 60

I’d have him head up the National Endowment of the Arts in my administration…

Is that an annoucement of your candidacy, ET?

;)

I’d run for County STD Inspector and serve for free for the rest of my life if they’d end this goddam fuckin’ war right now!

Jonathan @ 82

Question for Brendan at 51

Can you point me to some source, whatever, for the proposition that “neo” as in neocon signifies support for Israeli expansion?

Thanks.

I’m not a source?

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

Bit NOLA @ 61

Speaking of dem stragedy, the cash spigot in Fla. just got turned off:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com…..?track=rss

Jacksonville trial lawyer Wayne Hogan called DNC Chairman Howard Dean on Tuesday to cancel an event that Hogan had planned to host to raise money for the national party.

“It’s a big mistake what they’ve done to Florida, and I’m not going to assist them,” Hogan said.
(snip)

Central Florida Democratic fundraiser Dick Batchelor said Hogan could be a harbinger of a bigger problem for the DNC. Batchelor said he’s also more likely to give money to the state party instead of the DNC.

“If Wayne Hogan turns off the spigot, other people will follow suit,” he said. “Why would I support the national party when they’re basically vaporizing the influence our delegates would have in the nominating process?”

Ruh-roh. Hopefully, the state party can get its shit together with the windfall.

I listen to (political consultant)Dick Batchellor(D) and (former congressman)Lou Frey(R) pat each other’s back on NPR’s Orlando affiliate every week. I honestly can’t tell which one is the Democrat and which one is the Republican. For the longest time, I thought they were both Republicans.

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

there’s always been a lot of gas there…

LS @ 84

Lobbying on behalf of another country should be illegal – any other country.

ding, ding, ding, ding. Also accepting money on their behalf.

you guys have to go over to think progress now, the links are flying fast

Gates’ admission of being out of the loop on the funding request coincides with a report by McClatchy that military brass are trying to “distance themselves” from the President on Iraq strategy:

that’s the second lead, the first;

I am pleased that Department of Justice Inspector General Glenn Fine will look into my concerns about potentially false, misleading or inappropriate testimony by the Attorney General. I look forward to the Inspector General’s findings on the unprecedented firings of nine United States Attorneys, the improper political hiring of career officials within the Justice Department, the misuse of National Security Letters, and the efforts to bypass the Department’s finding that a warrantless surveillance program was without legal basis.

These actions have eroded the public’s trust and undermined morale within our justice system, from the top ranks to the cop on the beat. The current Attorney General is leaving, but these questions remain. It is appropriate that the Inspector General will examine whether the Attorney General was honest with this and other Congressional committees about these crucial issues. His investigations can help restore independence and accountability, which have been sorely lacking at the Justice Department.

it’s a good day to be a progressive

brendan @ 5

Emanuel should be mocked and reviled for a lot of things, but not for being a dancer.

amen!

Steve-AR @ 76

Fern @ 56

That’s why, at the moment, I can’t beat up on the Dem leadership. The fate of our Constitutional Democracy is on the line and one major screw up; and we are in for a very long night. The ‘06 election was not a mandate or a Dem victory; it was only a “stay” to give time for more appeals. If we win in ‘08, It will just be another “stay”. There is no quick fix, and all of the political risk for the Dems is on the down side.

I agree that there is no quick fix, I can’t agree that all the risk is on the Dem’s side. I feel that we are on a cusp of our nation’s history and faint hearts will not win the day.

TeddySanFran @ 79

Also, by tradition, the Speaker rarely votes. (Yeah, I know, strange.) Being the Speaker of the entire House, it’s viewed as unseemly for her to vote (Yeah, I know.) So her not voting on a specific issue should not be taken as lack of concern.

i had not heard that. she’s listed as having voted on all these bills.

cleter @ 68

Oklahoma kiddo @ 46

What part will Mr. Emanuel play in a possible Clinton administration?

Oh, there ain’t going to be no “Clinton administration.”

I certainly hope so. But if she gets the nomination I’ll hold my nose and vote for her. I’m definitely not voting for her in the primaries.

OT:
I want Rahm and every other son of a bitch who wants to keep the war going to look at the faces of these parents and people in my community who are readying themselves to bury this family’s second son.
http://www.fresnobee.com/492/gallery/124831.html

LS @ 74

Rumors that Cheney plans to roll out Iran attack starting next week:

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/30/111448/373

fuckwad telegraphed it a few days ago. the train has already left the station. Glenn Greenwald has all of the details (yesterday’s post).

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

i don’t know about Iran but Sadam certainly did. lots of it.

Elliott @ 90

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

there’s always been a lot of gas there…

Ooops, now CNN says they may be from Iraq, and we already launched!

raven @ 87

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

WWI gas? Like the kind Britain used against Iraqis when they occupied it in the twenties?

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

Gulf of UNTonkin

Jonathan @ 82

Can you point me to some source, whatever, for the proposition that “neo” as in neocon signifies support for Israeli expansion?

Can you name me a single politician in our congress who strongly advocates an immediate or immanent future withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from all lands taken since the end of the June, 1967 war?

Not all Neo-cons fully support the continuing expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, but none advocate abandonment of these illegal takings.

terrific post Pach. near perfection. but brendan’s absolutely right at #5.

Dancers are artistic and unbelievably tough physically and mentally.

Emanuel is none of the above.

besides… some of our best friends… ;->

fahrender @ 99

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

i don’t know about Iran but Sadam certainly did. lots of it.

I am sure there is also alot around in the U.S. (remember Anthrax, one of the main theories is that it came from one of our right wing para-military nuts with some access to military armaments). I wouldn’t put this past them to do something like this too all in the name of encouraging public (and UN) approval for the bombing of Iran.

Steve-AR @ 40

Emanuel’s concerns are legitimate. The Public has been so brainwashed, that a Dem misstep will have a huge impact on the ‘08 election. I think the leadership stays awake at night worrying about making the “big-screw” up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election. If we don’t re-take the machinery of govt in ‘08, we will be well and truly screwed.

The Iraq war is going badly and the ending is going to be worse. It’s either “Gallipoli” writ large or Dunkirk; and the public will be looking to punish someone. The Republican Party may be on the ropes but they are very dangerous and they still control the public psychology.

I get very frustrated by the fact that it doesn’t seem to occur to the Dems that “stay(s) awake at night worrying about making the ‘big-screw’ up that will cost the Dems the Presidential election” that votes like the recent FISA redo could just as easily be that screw-up.

But I have a question. At one time about 70% of Americans were for bringing the troops home. Is that now down to 60%?

Let me just say this: The Israeli lobby is very powerful in this country. It is the third rail in American politics.

LS @ 101

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

Gulf of UNTonkin

Deadeye getting his Reichstag jones?

Jonathan @ 82

Question for Brendan at 51

Can you point me to some source, whatever, for the proposition that “neo” as in neocon signifies support for Israeli expansion?

Thanks.

In all seriousness, “neoconservative” and “neoliberal” describe foreign policy agendas, not domestic ones. Both are “interventionist”, i.e. favoring war. What on earth do the “-conservative” and “-liberal” in them have to do with it, unless it’s to allude to the party affiliation of these interventionists?

As for the Israeli-inspired motivation I deduce behind this interventionism, here’s just a source that comes to mind (and goes to my comments above on Clinton and Schumer).

http://www.forward.com/article…..people-pu/

Nerve gas found in the “weapons inspectors” offices. Good grief. There’s even paperwork..
Just some dumb UN people who left the container there and they found it when they were cleaning the offices preparing for a move. It was from 1996 – Iraq.

Biodun @ 107

Let me just say this: The Israeli lobby is very powerful in this country. It is the third rail in American politics.

And alot more open debate and criticism of this (generally monolithic view of what is the interest of Isr*el) is allowed to take place there than here. AIP*C also has been funding major university student groups which it promotes to get their specific message across and counter professors and other students who might have another point of view.

My fax:

Dear Mr. Emanuel:

Grow a pair!
Get our Constitution back.

Sincerely,
(real name)

From the Gavel:

On the Draft GAO Report on Iraq

August 30th, 2007 by Speaker Pelosi

The President is demanding tens of billions more dollars for the war in Iraq despite non-partisan conclusions, such as the draft GAO report and the recent National Intelligence Estimate, that the Iraqi government has failed to achieve required reforms.

As in the past, President Bush stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the facts on the ground about the sectarian civil war in Iraq or the growing bipartisan opposition to his failed policies. He insists that our soldiers sacrifice even more, and taxpayers spend billions more dollars for an Iraqi government incapable or unwilling to institute reforms required by the President himself.

With the President continuing to stay the course in Iraq, Republicans will have to decide whether they will continue to vote with him or join Democrats and the vast majority of Americans who are demanding a new direction in Iraq and refocusing America’s efforts on fighting the real threats of terrorism around the world.

hackworth @ 88

Bit NOLA @ 61

Speaking of dem stragedy, the cash spigot in Fla. just got turned off:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com…..?track=rss

Jacksonville trial lawyer Wayne Hogan called DNC Chairman Howard Dean on Tuesday to cancel an event that Hogan had planned to host to raise money for the national party.

“It’s a big mistake what they’ve done to Florida, and I’m not going to assist them,” Hogan said.
(snip)

Central Florida Democratic fundraiser Dick Batchelor said Hogan could be a harbinger of a bigger problem for the DNC. Batchelor said he’s also more likely to give money to the state party instead of the DNC.

“If Wayne Hogan turns off the spigot, other people will follow suit,” he said. “Why would I support the national party when they’re basically vaporizing the influence our delegates would have in the nominating process?”

Ruh-roh. Hopefully, the state party can get its shit together with the windfall.

I listen to (political consultant)Dick Batchellor(D) and (former congressman)Lou Frey(R) pat each other’s back on NPR’s Orlando affiliate every week. I honestly can’t tell which one is the Democrat and which one is the Republican. For the longest time, I thought they were both Republicans.

Dick Batchelor’s particular brand of strategic electoral genius is the reason he no longer holds an elected position. He’s a loser. His brand of indistinguishable-from-GOP faux centrism is a loser. Boo hoo hoo, he’s going to withhold his loser support from fellow losers. I tremble.

Ed*ard Teller @ 102

Jonathan @ 82

Can you point me to some source, whatever, for the proposition that “neo” as in neocon signifies support for Israeli expansion?

Can you name me a single politician in our congress who strongly advocates an immediate or immanent future withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from all lands taken since the end of the June, 1967 war?

Not all Neo-cons fully support the continuing expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, but none advocate abandonment of these illegal takings.

I don’t disagree.

I’ve just always wondered about the origin and meaning of the word “neocon.”

One thing I’ve learned is not to use words unless I know their definition.

brendan @ 108

In all seriousness, “neoconservative” and “neoliberal” describe foreign policy agendas, not domestic ones. Both are “interventionist”, i.e. favoring war. What on earth do the “-conservative” and “-liberal” in them have to do with it, unless it’s to allude to the party affiliation of these interventionists?

As for the Israeli-inspired motivation I deduce behind this interventionism, here’s just a source that comes to mind (and goes to my comments above on Clinton and Schumer).

http://www.forward.com/article…..people-pu/

i though neo-liberal referred to an economic foreign policy of control via imf, wto and fucked up trade policies called “free trade” – but mostly the imf and the washinton concensus of “shock therapy”

I can see how some think I’m mocking him as a dancer, though in fact I’m not.

I’m mocking him as an insecure macho poseur who feels the need to seed the media with tales of his toughness while in actuality he’s a frantic diva.

He doesn’t want to be seen as a dancer, though I’d think he should be proud of his accomplishments along that line. He wants to be seen as a soldier, or something. The underlying insecurity is his. I feel no compunction about reminding him of who he is.

If he were more true to himself and less afraid, we could actually save some lives, after all.

itwasntme @ 112

My fax:

Dear Mr. Emanuel:

Grow a pair!
Get our Constitution back.

Sincerely,
(real name)

when I called his office, I got the feeling I wasn’t the first one dialing in about this.

Brendan,

Thanks for the follow-up.

selise @ 116

brendan @ 108

In all seriousness, “neoconservative” and “neoliberal” describe foreign policy agendas, not domestic ones. Both are “interventionist”, i.e. favoring war. What on earth do the “-conservative” and “-liberal” in them have to do with it, unless it’s to allude to the party affiliation of these interventionists?

As for the Israeli-inspired motivation I deduce behind this interventionism, here’s just a source that comes to mind (and goes to my comments above on Clinton and Schumer).

http://www.forward.com/article…..people-pu/

i though neo-liberal referred to an economic foreign policy of control via imf, wto and fucked up trade policies called “free trade” – but mostly the imf and the washinton concensus of “shock therapy”

I think you’re right, but I think I’ve also seen it used as a substitute for “liberal hawk”.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 22

Is there a close relationship between Mr. Emanuel and the Clintons?

yep.

brendan @ 109:

Neoconservativism is basically American, while neoliberalism is European. And yes, they have the same ideology.

Jonathan @ 82

Question for Brendan at 51

Can you point me to some source, whatever, for the proposition that “neo” as in neocon signifies support for Israeli expansion?

Thanks.

Neoliberal for me always meant a pro-business, pro-free trade “liberal”.

I don’t know if this will help but here is a PNAC (neocon) letter to Bush from April 3, 2002 which argues for support of Israel and a stop to negotiations with that terrorist Arafat. Such a suspension would leave Israel with the Territories until terrorism had been rooted out, which since this largely involves resistance to occupation means forever.

Here are a few excerpts:

You have declared war on international terrorism, Mr. President. Israel is fighting the same war.

This central truth has important implications for any Middle East peace process. For one spoke of the terrorist network consists of Yasser Arafat and the leadership of the Palestinian Authority. Although your critics in the United States, Europe and the Arab world suggest that you and your administration bear some responsibility for the lack of political progress between Israel and the Palestinians, they are mistaken. As Secretary of State Powell recently stated, the present crisis stems not from “the absence of a political way forward” but from “terrorism…, terrorism in its rawest form.” That terrorism has been aided, abetted, harbored, and in many instances directed by Mr. Arafat and his top lieutenants. Mr. Arafat has demonstrated time and again that he cannot be part of the peaceful solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He demonstrated it in July 2000, when he rejected the most generous Israeli peace offer in history; he demonstrated it in September 2000, when he launched the new intifada against Israel; and he demonstrated it again these past two weeks when, despite the hand you offered him through Vice President Cheney, he gave sanction to some of the worst terrorist violence against Israeli citizens.

Mr. President, it can no longer be the policy of the United States to urge, much less to pressure, Israel to continue negotiating with Arafat, any more than we would be willing to be pressured to negotiate with Osama Bin Laden or Mullah Omar. Nor should the United States provide financial support to a Palestinian Authority that acts as a cog in the machine of Middle East terrorism, any more than we would approve of others providing assistance to Al Qaeda.

Instead, the United States should lend its full support to Israel as it seeks to root out the terrorist network that daily threatens the lives of Israeli citizens.

http://www.newamericancentury……040302.htm

Pachacutec @ 117

I can see how some think I’m mocking him as a dancer, though in fact I’m not.

I’m mocking him as an insecure macho poseur who feels the need to seed the media with tales of his toughness while in actuality he’s a frantic diva.

He doesn’t want to be seen as a dancer, though I’d think he should be proud of his accomplishments along that line. He wants to be seen as a soldier, or something. The underlying insecurity is his. I feel no compunction about reminding him of who he is.

If he were more true to himself and less afraid, we could actually save some lives, after all.

I love guys that dance, nothing wrong with that.

brendan @ 120

selise @ 116

i though neo-liberal referred to an economic foreign policy of control via imf, wto and fucked up trade policies called “free trade” – but mostly the imf and the washinton concensus of “shock therapy”

I think you’re right, but I think I’ve also seen it used as a substitute for “liberal hawk”.

And a hawk particularly for intervention in the middle east.

AZ Matt @ 113

From the Gavel:

On the Draft GAO Report on Iraq

August 30th, 2007 by Speaker Pelosi

The President is demanding tens of billions more dollars for the war in Iraq despite non-partisan conclusions, such as the draft GAO report and the recent National Intelligence Estimate, that the Iraqi government has failed to achieve required reforms.

As in the past, President Bush stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the facts on the ground about the sectarian civil war in Iraq or the growing bipartisan opposition to his failed policies. He insists that our soldiers sacrifice even more, and taxpayers spend billions more dollars for an Iraqi government incapable or unwilling to institute reforms required by the President himself.

With the President continuing to stay the course in Iraq, Republicans will have to decide whether they will continue to vote with him or join Democrats and the vast majority of Americans who are demanding a new direction in Iraq and refocusing America’s efforts on fighting the real threats of terrorism around the world.

Dear Speaker Pelosi: To take a page out of former First Lady Nancy Reagan’s book, “Just say “No”. Simple. Straightforward. To the point. “No” What is it about “no” that you think Bush et al. will not understand?

Biodun @ 122

brendan @ 109:

Neoconservativism is basically American, while neoliberalism is European. And yes, they have the same ideology.

You and selise are right. I used to read French news and “neoliberal” came up all the time, “liberal” being used in the European sense.

Biodun @ 121

brendan @ 109:

Neoconservativism is basically American, while neoliberalism is European. And yes, they have the same ideology.

i don’t think so – president clinton’s policies were bigtime neoliberal.

wikipedia has a pretty good description.

Hugh at 122

I see — pnac implies neocon.

Got it.

selise @ 95

TeddySanFran @ 79

Also, by tradition, the Speaker rarely votes. (Yeah, I know, strange.) Being the Speaker of the entire House, it’s viewed as unseemly for her to vote (Yeah, I know.) So her not voting on a specific issue should not be taken as lack of concern.

i had not heard that. she’s listed as having voted on all these bills.

I think that this is a misreading of the traditions. The nominee for Speaker simply doesn’t vote on their OWN nomination vote. In addition the Speaker does not traditionally take part in DEBATE, instead managing the debate and votes. There may also be some tradition against the Speaker voting in Caucuses or such.

selise @ 42

He even stabbed Pelosi and Murtha in the back by leading the fight to pull the Iran language from the recent supplemental.

i don’t know about this one pach. after pulling the iran language from the iraq supplemental bill, speaker pelosi promised we have a stand alone bill, but never followed through. and when defazio submitted it as an amendment to the defense appropriations bill (h.r.1585) – voting no with emanual was murtha (and a total of 99 dems), and pelosi didn’t even vote (roll call vote)

on the iran issue, i think the problem is much bigger than emanual – and it apparently includes pelosi and murtha.

I think Pelosi is as big a proablem as Rahm.

selise @ 128:

from wiki:

Neoliberalism refers to a political movement that espouses economic liberalism as a means of promoting economic development and securing political liberty. The movement is sometimes described as an effort to revert to the economic policies of the 18th and 19th centuries classical liberalism.[1] Strictly in the context of English-language usage the term is an abbreviation of “neoclassical liberalism”, since in other languages liberalism has more or less retained its classical meaning.

This is pretty much European.

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

Oh my stars. Well, then let the UN attack Iran. But NOT US.

brendan @ 41

Richmond @ 19

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

I’m surprised to see you of all commenters underestimating the influence of That Lobby here. It’s not necessarily “fear”. Schumer and Clinton represent New York and therefore represent The Lobby; that explains their support for the war, and it least represents some kind of responsiveness to a genuine constituency. Emanuel, meanwhile, has maintained strong personal ties to Israel and, for me, that’s enough explanation for his support (contrary to myth, he wasn’t in the IDF). Hoyer et al have less excuse.

Biodun @ 131

selise @ 128:

from wiki:

Neoliberalism refers to a political movement that espouses economic liberalism as a means of promoting economic development and securing political liberty. The movement is sometimes described as an effort to revert to the economic policies of the 18th and 19th centuries classical liberalism.[1] Strictly in the context of English-language usage the term is an abbreviation of “neoclassical liberalism”, since in other languages liberalism has more or less retained its classical meaning.

This is pretty much European.

ah, i see, you were referring to historical origins, and i was thinking about recent policy implementation.

looseheadprop @ 131

selise @ 42

i don’t know about this one pach. after pulling the iran language from the iraq supplemental bill, speaker pelosi promised we have a stand alone bill, but never followed through. and when defazio submitted it as an amendment to the defense appropriations bill (h.r.1585) – voting no with emanual was murtha (and a total of 99 dems), and pelosi didn’t even vote (roll call vote)

on the iran issue, i think the problem is much bigger than emanual – and it apparently includes pelosi and murtha.

I think Pelosi is as big a proablem as Rahm.

In what sense? I’m repeating past comments, but she did three things that indicate she wanted to genuinely push for withdrawal and forestall expansion of the war:

1. Got rid of Harman
2. Tried to install Murtha
3. Went to Syria (reason suggested at TPM: communicating to Syria that the Israelis were not planning to attack it)

The difference between bravery and stupidity is often merely the result produced. Going up against the president is bravery if it accomplishes the goal sought, but if it results in a loss of Congress and/or the Presidency then it is stupidity.

I do not know what will be the result of taking on the President on closing Guantanimo or restoration of Habeas Corpus.

I believe we liberals can win on both of these issues, but to do so will require skillful framing of issues. When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as Columbus Northern is to the New York Yankees.

brendan @ 134
1. and how has reyes been better than harman?
2. murtha was, i think, a matter of loyality and not policy
3. i commend her for her trip to syria – especially as she got a lot a flack for that. good for her. well done.

Alice @ 134

brendan @ 41

I’m surprised to see you of all commenters underestimating the influence of That Lobby here. It’s not necessarily “fear”. Schumer and Clinton represent New York and therefore represent The Lobby; that explains their support for the war, and it least represents some kind of responsiveness to a genuine constituency. Emanuel, meanwhile, has maintained strong personal ties to Israel and, for me, that’s enough explanation for his support (contrary to myth, he wasn’t in the IDF). Hoyer et al have less excuse.

I am not sure if you are addressing Brandon or me, but as I have argued before. On this they are speaking largely for the NYC area folks in NY State. This is NOT an issue in central and northern NY state. But any the issue of being viewed as anti-Is*ael by supporting the withdrawal of troops goes beyond the question of regional affiliation (or “ethnic-relig” identity).

In what sense? I’m repeating past comments, but she did three things that indicate she wanted to genuinely push for withdrawal and forestall expansion of the war:

1. Got rid of Harman
2. Tried to install Murtha
3. Went to Syria (reason suggested at TPM: communicating to Syria that the Israelis were not planning to attack it)

Just so
Pelosi voted against the original Irag War Authorization, she has always been against this war.

She is hemmed in by Hoyer (D-MBNA) and Rahm.

selise @ 134:

ah, i see, you were referring to historical origins, and i was thinking about recent policy implementation.

brendan @ 127 said we were both right. I agree…*g*

BigMitch @ 136

The difference between bravery and stupidity is often merely the result produced. Going up against the president is bravery if it accomplishes the goal sought, but if it results in a loss of Congress and/or the Presidency then it is stupidity.

I do not know what will be the result of taking on the President on closing Guantanimo or restoration of Habeas Corpus.

I believe we liberals can win on both of these issues, but to do so will require skillful framing of issues. When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as Columbus Northern is to the New York Yankees.

in this case we know as a fact every single decision the president makes is at our county’s expense

we know they are stealing our treasure, stealing our freedom, stealing our information

worse then that, we also know they are stealing those things from our children

this is a fight that needs to take place, there is no ducking this fight

BigMitch @ 137

The difference between bravery and stupidity is often merely the result produced. Going up against the president is bravery if it accomplishes the goal sought, but if it results in a loss of Congress and/or the Presidency then it is stupidity.

I do not know what will be the result of taking on the President on closing Guantanamo or restoration of Habeas Corpus.

I believe we liberals can win on both of these issues, but to do so will require skillful framing of issues. When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as Columbus Northern is to the New York Yankees.

Spare me Mitch: Going up against the president is what got us the victory in the last election. By not going up strongly against the war and against the Presnit will leave us open to accusations (justified) that there really is no difference between the Dems and the rethugs, and that basically the Dems are as do-nothing as their predecessors were. This sort of “fear” is what I was talking about earlier in referencing spousal abuse syndrome with respect to the Dems.

Big Mitch @137:

Who needed “framing” when we had a perjurious AG covering up a massive domestic surveillance operation? At the crescendo of this scandal, instead of moving in for the kill, they made it moot by passing that FISA bill.

And you could have said, “When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as the Boston Red Sox are to the New York Yankees.”

I’ve learned in threads like this that most dems are war mongering assholes…this leads to the conclusion that we’re fucked and there’s no remedy.. A bit depressing.

raven @ 88

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

It was apparently from Iraq, not Iran. And it was being stored there from the weapons inspection program.

Not that Buscho won’t try to spin it the way you did, but let’s not do their work for them.

Richmond @ 19

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

Please distinguish between being pro-Israel and “afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el.” The former sounds like a principled political position — it is mine. The latter sounds like crass political expediency. I’m not running for nuttin’.

rwcole @ 145

I’ve learned in threads like this that most dems are war mongering assholes…this leads to the conclusion that we’re fucked and there’s no remedy.. A bit depressing.

Then step aside, because there’s work to be done.

I ain’t quittin’. I see a lot of stuff this far in, it IS bad, and I’m STILL not quittin’.

Got that?

perris @ 142

BigMitch @ 136

The difference between bravery and stupidity is often merely the result produced. Going up against the president is bravery if it accomplishes the goal sought, but if it results in a loss of Congress and/or the Presidency then it is stupidity.

I do not know what will be the result of taking on the President on closing Guantanimo or restoration of Habeas Corpus.

I believe we liberals can win on both of these issues, but to do so will require skillful framing of issues. When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as Columbus Northern is to the New York Yankees.

in this case we know as a fact every single decision the president makes is at our county’s expense

we know they are stealing our treasure, stealing our freedom, stealing our information

worse then that, we also know they are stealing those things from our children

this is a fight that needs to take place, there is no ducking this fight

I agree with you, but you must agree that the stakes are high and victory is far from certain.

selise @ 138

brendan @ 134
1. and how has reyes been better than harman?
2. murtha was, i think, a matter of loyality and not policy
3. i commend her for her trip to syria – especially as she got a lot a flack for that. good for her. well done.

1. I don’t know. You know this stuff a lot, lot better than me. But Harman was a creature of That Lobby.
2. That’s the way it was presented in the media: “loyalty”. Lots of political issues are obscured by this kind of subjective analysis: witness Bush’s supposed “loyalty” to Gonzalez. I concluded she wanted Murtha to end the war because there was immediately footage in the news of his ABSCAM days: they had to stop him from stopping the war.
3. I really have no idea why she went. For all I know she went to threaten them.

rwcole @ 143

I’ve learned in threads like this that most dems are war mongering assholes…this leads to the conclusion that we’re fucked and there’s no remedy.. A bit depressing.

not all the dems.

and besides… there is a remedy. most of the dems want to be seen as the anti-iraq war party (and anti-iran war party). we just have to convince them they don’t get that unless they actually do something about it.

hey, richard nixon gave us the epa. he didn’t do that because he was a big environmentalist – he did it because he thought it was good electoral strategy.

Tula is upstairs!

brendan @ 144

Big Mitch @137:

And you could have said, “When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as the Boston Red Sox are to the New York Yankees.”

This is exactly what I fear. That the Dems are capable of winning all the marbles only once per century.

BigMitch @ 153

brendan @ 144

Big Mitch @137:

And you could have said, “When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as the Boston Red Sox are to the New York Yankees.”

This is exactly what I fear. That the Dems are capable of winning all the marbles only once per century.

the fear will be reaslized unless we do something about consolidated, corporate owned media

selise @ 116

i though neo-liberal referred to an economic foreign policy of control via imf, wto and fucked up trade policies called “free trade” – but mostly the imf and the washinton concensus of “shock therapy”

Yeah, it’s my understanding that the term neo-liberal refers to the economic theories advanced by Milton Friedman from the University of Chicago school of economics.

BTW, Mearsheimer and Walts’ book, _The Israel Lobby_, comes out in hardcover in a few days. The best blog keeping up with the progress of the book and discussion or suppression of discussion of the book’s premises is former NY Observer reporter (recently let go for his passion on this and other related subjects) Philip Weiss’s mondoweiss.

Recently, Weiss has thoroughly discussed the leadership crisis at the ADL. Yesterday he deconstructed David Remnick’s New Yorker review of the M and W book.

BigMitch @ 153

brendan @ 144

Big Mitch @137:

And you could have said, “When it comes to framing issues Democrats are to Republicans as the Boston Red Sox are to the New York Yankees.”

This is exactly what I fear. That the Dems are capable of winning all the marbles only once per century.

No, no. Dems won by landslides and controlled all the marbles in the 30s to mid 40s. They won all the marbles from 60-68. 76-80. 1992. It’s Republican control of all the marbles that is the historical anomaly in modern times.

brendan @ 150 -

harman did suck, but this year she’s been getting much better. and she was positively passionate about not caving on fisa.

i’m not keen on the reyes support (for chair of the house intelligence committee) because of his reported ignorance – that he didn’t know if AQ was sunni or shia.

‘course this report could be wrong…. and it is so hard to figure out what’s going on behind the congressional curtains. so, i freely admit, i could have it all wrong.

Attended a meeting this week with one of the really good Dems on the topic of impeachment. This is one of the first Reps to list all the criminal offenses of the administration. The crowd of about 50 smart, well informed and eloquent citizens made all the right points but the response from the elected was the party line, that is, fear that the Blue Dogs, the Dems in conservative southern, midwestern, eastern slopes of the Rockies, etc. districts might lose their elections. Although the irrationality of these conclusions have been challenged many time here and was also countered skillfully in this meeting it’s clear that it’s not getting through to the leadership.
Suggestions?

A thread like this is important because it shows why the Democrats need us both to help them frame the issues but also to keep the pressure on them and hopefully make them more honest.

Ed*ard Teller @ 156

BTW, Mearsheimer and Walts’ book, _The Israel Lobby_, comes out in hardcover in a few days. The best blog keeping up with the progress of the book and discussion or suppression of discussion of the book’s premises is former NY Observer reporter (recently let go for his passion on this and other related subjects) Philip Weiss’s mondoweiss.

Recently, Weiss has thoroughly discussed the leadership crisis at the ADL. Yesterday he deconstructed David Remnick’s New Yorker review of the M and W book.

thanks for the link. glenn greenwald recently said (in his comments) that he was reading their new book and that, iirc, it was devastaing. presumably, glenn will be reviewing it too (i hope).

Ed*ard Teller @ 156

BTW, Mearsheimer and Walts’ book, _The Israel Lobby_, comes out in hardcover in a few days. The best blog keeping up with the progress of the book and discussion or suppression of discussion of the book’s premises is former NY Observer reporter (recently let go for his passion on this and other related subjects) Philip Weiss’s mondoweiss.

Recently, Weiss has thoroughly discussed the leadership crisis at the ADL. Yesterday he deconstructed David Remnick’s New Yorker review of the M and W book.

Philip Weiss is very good on this and many other issues.

BigMitch @ 147

Richmond @ 19

Emanuel’s fear, I think, is very different than suggested in this post. My sense is that he, Schumer, Hoyer, Clinton and the rest of the DLC are more afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el if they seriously press for (and succeed with) a pull-out. Their greater fear is how to negotiate the balancing act (and here the dancing image is apt) between these interests and the greater Dem (and national popular) interest in safeguardng the troops by bringing them home. Why else would he have pulled the Iran war piece from the legislation?

Please distinguish between being pro-Israel and “afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el.” The former sounds like a principled political position — it is mine. The latter sounds like crass political expediency. I’m not running for nuttin’.

I address Richmond’s comment in @41, but in a way that would probably provoke further argument from you. You could describe “being pro-Israel” as a principled political position, but, at least the way most people use the phrase “pro-Israel”, it’s a really bad political position, particularly right now when their alarmist reports on Iran get more of a hearing in Congress than our own National Intelligence Estimates (to take but an example).

brendan @ 163

BigMitch @ 147

Please distinguish between being pro-Israel and “afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el.” The former sounds like a principled political position — it is mine. The latter sounds like crass political expediency. I’m not running for nuttin’.

I address Richmond’s comment in @41, but in a way that would probably provoke further argument from you. You could describe “being pro-Israel” as a principled political position, but, at least the way most people use the phrase “pro-Israel”, it’s a really bad political position, particularly right now when their alarmist reports on Iran get more of a hearing in Congress than our own National Intelligence Estimates (to take but an example).

I couldn’t have said it better Brandon. Alas, I tried to compose a response and then deleted it before sending because I didn’t want to over inflame :-)

New thread upstairs.

Bob in HI

BigMitch @ 149

perris @ 142

in this case we know as a fact every single decision the president makes is at our county’s expense

we know they are stealing our treasure, stealing our freedom, stealing our information

worse then that, we also know they are stealing those things from our children

this is a fight that needs to take place, there is no ducking this fight

I agree with you, but you must agree that the stakes are high and victory is far from certain.

yes, the stakes are high, and that is exactly why we MUST fight it.

Pachacutec @ 117

I can see how some think I’m mocking him as a dancer, though in fact I’m not.

I’m mocking him as an insecure macho poseur who feels the need to seed the media with tales of his toughness while in actuality he’s a frantic diva.

He doesn’t want to be seen as a dancer, though I’d think he should be proud of his accomplishments along that line. He wants to be seen as a soldier, or something. The underlying insecurity is his. I feel no compunction about reminding him of who he is.

If he were more true to himself and less afraid, we could actually save some lives, after all.

understood and appreciated.

I didn’t even know he was indeed a dancer. So I’ve learned something more at the Lake.

brendan @ 163

BigMitch @ 147

Please distinguish between being pro-Israel and “afraid of being attacked as anti-Isr*el.” The former sounds like a principled political position — it is mine. The latter sounds like crass political expediency. I’m not running for nuttin’.

I address Richmond’s comment in @41, but in a way that would probably provoke further argument from you. You could describe “being pro-Israel” as a principled political position, but, at least the way most people use the phrase “pro-Israel”, it’s a really bad political position, particularly right now when their alarmist reports on Iran get more of a hearing in Congress than our own National Intelligence Estimates (to take but an example).

I don’t get something. If all A*PAC can do to counter criticism is call everyone an anti-Semite, that’s just a weak argument. I know many people of the Jewish faith. They all think A*PAC and Lieberwhore are words not printable. They aren’t fooling people with any brains.

Raaahhhhhhm personally can take full credit for not only the last 12 years of lost elections B.D., (before Dean) but for the emasculation and declining image of the Democratic Party.

We now have a host of Joe Lieberman (I’s) in the party blocking all real Democratic progress and sucking the life out of real Democrats.

Dems! We should stand bold and proud to be REAL Dems!

Make the ‘others’ leave, but don’t allow our role as the ‘opposition’ to be stifled any more.
Get out your stakes AND VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENT (D) IMPOSTORS.

To all Arizoni’s: Help!
Help me put Howard Shanker, a real Dean/Feingold Progressive Dem in Rick Renzi’s seat, quickly, before Raaaahhhhm screws us, again, with another DLC hack.

http://actblue.com/page/az1forshanker

I’m actually with susie and avedon: use it against the GOP.

Joe Klein’s conscience @ 168

brendan @ 163

I address Richmond’s comment in @41, but in a way that would probably provoke further argument from you. You could describe “being pro-Israel” as a principled political position, but, at least the way most people use the phrase “pro-Israel”, it’s a really bad political position, particularly right now when their alarmist reports on Iran get more of a hearing in Congress than our own National Intelligence Estimates (to take but an example).

I don’t get something. If all A*PAC can do to counter criticism is call everyone an anti-Semite, that’s just a weak argument. I know many people of the Jewish faith. They all think A*PAC and Lieberwhore are words not printable. They aren’t fooling people with any brains.

Clearly this is not all that is happening. As in the sponsorship of the video clip “Freedom” being shown on TV and funded and circulated by this group (with Fleischer’s name), they also are attacking opponents to the war as anti-American, anti-Patriotic, anti-moral.

This is in regards to something posted in an earlier thread:

While the poster was right that the Republicans failed to pass the Appropriations bills for FY 2007 (with the exception of the one for Defense), the Democrats didn’t pass them either.

They put a “Continuing Resolution” in place which funded Federal agencies and programs at a percentage of what their full budget would have been.

A Continuing Resolution makes it much easier for the Administration to play with the funds.

Congress should not pass the Supplemental for Iraq. They should rescind the AUMF and any money for the troops in Iraq should be to bring them home.

Congress should force the President to put any money for Iraq in the Defense appropriations bill — no more off-budget finagling.

Thanks for letting me vent.

cleter @ 101

raven @ 87

OT

CNN reporting nerve gas found in the UN. It’s the kind used in WWI and, oh by the way, Iran reportedly used it in the Iran-Iraq war. Hell, that’s good enough for me, saddle up boys!

WWI gas? Like the kind Britain used against Iraqis when they occupied it in the twenties?

If it’s WWI gas, then it’s not nerve gas, which was discovered in Germany in 1936.

The gas was in the property of the Iraq weapons inspectors- the vials of gas were apparently used as a part of a detection procedure.

As for stunning, the argument they present is towering and obvious and about time. The revision of Israeli history is emphatic. The ways that the lobby has diminished the suffering of the Palestinians and enabled the occupation and settlements are starkly and even emotionally described. Most stunning is the argument that Remnick accepts: the authors’ description of the Iraq disaster as arising from the lobby’s pressure. I study this issue, and yet I turned the pages of this chapter with my mouth open, especially the pages dealing with the manipulation of intelligence, and evidence of Israel’s hand in the WMD lies. It is this section that should and must stir national debate, and now.

[snip]

It is here that true insiders need to come forward and explain what befell us. When Thomas Friedman is quoted in the book, from Ha’aretz, amazingly, as saying the Iraq war originated among 25 neocons within a mile or two of his office, and now Remnick accepts Walt and Mearsheimer’s argument re the neocons, well, honey, the pro-Iraq liberal camp is falling apart; and explaining the Jewish rightwing klatch to the world is important journalistic work that awaits this country in the nightmare of the next few years. – Philip Weiss

I’ve been wondering what it is that Nancy Pelosi is afraid that impeachment inquiries directed at the President and Vice President might unearth… [The Israeli involvement in WMD lies may well even encompass the Valerie Plame leak case, potentially, which is one of the most explosive, yet easily “produced” investigations into grounds for impeachment that is available to a lazy Congress.]

So perhaps this is the answer, or at least a big part of it. “That Foreign Lobby” comes before our Constitution in Washington, D.C.

Http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/

P.S. Thanks to Jonathan Weisman for his helpful exploration of the Democratic caucus problems and their recent internal discussions (I’m glad it made the front page of the Post). I wonder if the “explosive” caucus meeting he describes is the one attended by about 20 Democrats on Saturday before the second FISA vote (mentioned by E.J. Dionne as where Blue Dogs Patrick Murphy and Heath Shuler urged unsuccessfully that Pelosi take a stand in defense of the Constitution), or a full-caucus meeting on Friday before the first FISA vote (mentioned by Jonathan Alter as where John Conyers advocated caving to Bush). We have some more names now, at least, to help apply pressure where it’s needed. As to Constitutional sell-outs Allen Boyd and Lincoln Davis, take a gander at the photographs of the Blue Dogs (backing up Pach @ 29):

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/Member Page.html

Upthread implications that Rahm is scared of Bush. He is in bed with them by way of the Clintons and Israel. Bill thinks its o.k. to pal around with pappy since he isn’t up for election. They all want the same thing. fascism and north american union. We are rapidly becoming a service based economy instead of manufacturing. Maybe we are there. Find out about the highway starting up in Texas. There has never been a vote on this but it is going forward full steam ahead. Not democracy.

The Bottom Line GOP Bumper Slogan
.
Finally, I believe that I have cobbled together the ultimate message of Rudi Giuliani and William Kristol as well as their neocon enablers and all Rovian propaganda adherents.

“If you’re not afraid, you’re a coward.”

Labels: 9/11, Terror, Everywhere terror, Rudi Giuliani, William Kristol

# posted by craig johnson, copyright @ 8/27/2007 5 comments links to this post

Fern @ 75

Richmond @ 71

Boy I would love to see Edwards and Obama come together now with their delegates and numbers and say we will run together as a team.

Do you see either of them being willing to give up top billing on the ticket? If so which one?

Patience. It’ll sort itself out in due time.

BTW, did you see where Hillary and Obama had to give back thousands of bucks to a Mr. Norman Hsu? He’s a businessman, of which nationality I’m not sure, though he’s originally from Hong Kong he’s been living in America for some years. He’s apparently been giving money to a lot of Dems for some years now and there’s at least the appearance of money laundering to break FEC law. Whether he’s bringing in illegal Chinese money isn’t yet clear.

http://online.wsj.com/article/…..10677.html

JML @ 159

… The crowd of about 50 smart, well informed and eloquent citizens made all the right points but the response from the elected was the party line, that is, fear that the Blue Dogs, the Dems in conservative southern, midwestern, eastern slopes of the Rockies, etc. districts might lose their elections. …

Suggestions?

I suppose the message at this moment is that things have changed in the last month or two and now it appears there’s a chance, yet to be verified, that we will wipe the Republicans off the map in ‘08 and we can use that as a chip to see if they’ll deal now (especially in the Senate). If they’ll let us take the lead and govern now, then we might be able to pull out of Iraq and stay out of Iran.

That achievement would be worth having some Republicans retain their seats in the next election.

Blue dogs don’t need to fear this issue any more. Holding back might be what gets them beat. Working together to end the war NOW might be the only way to stay in office.

Remember, the public elected Dems in ‘06 to end the war. And, as their frustration mounts they’re going to be LESS likely to re-elect a Blue dog Dem if they keep voting to support Bush.

CREDIT WHERE CREDIT”S DUE
Let’s give Emanueal credit for being such a successful Republikan – succesful at infiltrating the democratic congress and usurping a title as head of an organization with an impressive sounding acronym.

The 3rd rail of politics is the incredible tax-cuts, and advantages of the elite wealthy which has created a wealth-class gap unprecedented in America, the falling of millions of Americans below poverty income levels and marginalized the middle-class.
Its the most significant and on-going destruction of America you Firedoglakes, liberals and nobody else EVER talks about…ever. So America is light-years away from a correction of this trend that would take a simple vote of Congress to correct.
The elite corporate wealthy should be taxed 85% like they were in the 1950s, when America was truly a place of equal rights opportunity and justice.