When the MoveOn controversy first broke and the Republicans were wallowing in mock outrage, Hillary Clinton was the only one of the top-tier 08 Presidentials who didn’t fall for the patented flim-flam, didn’t walk into their trap and play along with plans to distract from the subject of Iraq and at the same time fragment the Democratic party and dis-empower the base.
While Edwards and Obama could not hit their knees fast enough and genuflect before all that Republican bluster, I assumed it was because Hillary had been down that road before, and knew from experience that there was no way to appease the wingnut in high dudgeon. You can grovel and beg and all it will earn you is the opportunity to do more groveling and begging, and it doesn’t make you look either strong or qualified for leadership.
Quite predictably, once the Republicans had bullied the Democrats into denouncing their own (and yes, ladies and gentlemen, with over 3 million members MoveOn is your own, like it or not) they began the process of trying to make the “Democrat” party the party of MoveOn. George Bush did it himself, laying a trail of bread crumbs even the Snickers obsessed and the fashion challenged could follow.
Then Rudy began his jihad, saying that Clinton was “attacking” Petraeus by not denouncing MoveOn. Thanks to the sheer naivete of all the Democrats who have not yet internalized the notion that you just don’t repeat Republican talking points and reinforce a larger narrative that will only be used against you and your party at large, no matter what, Clinton became low hanging fruit.
And yesterday, in a really disappointing moment, she caved:
“I think it’s important that we end these kinds of attacks on the patriotism of those who serve our country,” Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program. “This is not a debate about an ad. This is a debate about the direction we should pursue in Iraq.”
The McCarthy-esque language of Barbara Boxer’s amendment seems to have calcified into conventional wisdom within the party. Just tell everybody to shut up and you can appear “above” partisanship.
The Senators who condemned MoveOn do not seem to realize that it’s their job to protect free speech, not tell people how and when to exercise it.
The only one who got it right was Russ Feingold, who voted “no” on both the Boxer and Cornyn amendments. Everyone else? “F’s” all around.
They need to stay after class and read the Constitution.
Related posts:
- Late Night: Hatin’ on Hillary – Get Over It Already.
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Hillary Rettig, The Lifelong Activist: How to Change the World Without Losing Your Way
- NBC/WSJ Caves; Next Poll Will Restore “Choice” of “Public Plan”
- Remember Iraq or Ray Odierno is Still Wrong
- Will Hillary Clinton’s “Partner Plan” Run Afoul of DOMA?
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Hello Jane…
can someone tell me why Russ Feingold won’t run for president?
Iranian President Ahmadinejad at C-span
http://www.c-span.org/
yeah jane. yea! Russ!
Jane!
selise! this one’s for you.
Hi Jane!
when do you start treating the dem’s with the contempt they deserve by WILLFULLY remaining ignorant and/or silent?
how much longer do you accept the ‘we didn’t know’ excuse?
Well said Jane!
You can say that again!
Great post.
But I think the word you’re looking for is “naivete” rather than “naitive.”
[Mod: fixed, and thanks]
Jane!
Jane:
Yep. We all jumped the gun on that one. Here’s me two threads back:
EPU’d from earlier thread:
Biodun @ 99
selise I believe was the one who first broke the bad news on FDL that Hillary actually voted to condemn the MoveOn.org ad–by voting for the Boxer Amendment.
Yea Jane…..You go girl.
Doesn’t matter, does it?
the orthodoxy of obligatory support for the least worst, no matter what they do or say, has not shifted much over in Left Blogistan, or has it?
HRC can echo Cheney/neo-con talking points all day long, and still count on support from everyone to the left of Lieberman.
Cognitive dissonance will get really bad if she nukes Iran as commander in chief and you supported her.
Elliott @ 6
Yep. See my 11.
one small quibble: it’s naivete’ …..
(i can’t do that one mark right on me computer)
Biodun @ 14
she’s a caring giving soul
Yeah, I’m thinking sitting down and reading the Constitution needs to be required of all government officials.
Gah!
Amen. E-mailed Boxer to tell her what a joke that resolution was – it pointed out the absurdity of Cornyn’s resolution, but conferred a legitimacy on the whole idea of condemning a f*^cking ad. Absolutely disgraceful.
We need to find more Feingolds.
Great post Jane…just got the Bush Dog email and signed the petition…I hope you all got it and signed…It is time that we tell all these disgusting senators..NOT YOU SENATOR FEINGOLD…we have had enough of them and their spineless actions….They did vote against my free speech because I give to move-on and I APPROVE of that ad.
Meanwhile, let’s not get all depressed, things are worse (as they should be) for the other side of the aisle:
Inside-the-Beltway Republicans have grown frustrated with the NRCC for its unrealistically rosy assessments of an ever-eroding landscape for congressional Republicans.
Lawmakers are frustrated with Cole and his top aides for casting their net too wide by targeting Democratic-controlled seats that Republicans have little chance of picking up next year.
Some also gripe that Cole fails to manage expectations on the Hill when he refuses to acknowledge that the GOP’s chances for regaining the majority fade with every retirement or negative news story about President Bush or scandal-plagued Republican lawmakers.
The quoted text is from Drudgico.
Why couldn’t the Dems just say: “When the Republicans denounce Rush Limbaugh, denounce the Swiftboaters, denounce Bill O’Reilly, denounce Fox News Channel, denounce Glenn Beck, denounce Michael Savage, denounce Sean Hannity, denounce Ann Coulter, denounce Bill Kristol…..then, and only then, would we even consider questioning an ad by MoveOn”
Tangentially O/T, but fun.
Wayne Madsen Report – “Lost” Nukes were on the way to Iran
“Lost” B-52 nuke cruise missiles were on way to Middle East for attack on Iran; Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater.
WMR has learned from U.S. and foreign intelligence sources that the B-52 transporting six stealth AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each armed with a W-80-1 nuclear warhead, on August 30, were destined for the Middle East via Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.
However, elements of the Air Force, supported by U.S. intelligence agency personnel, successfully revealed the ultimate destination of the nuclear weapons and the mission was aborted due to internal opposition within the Air Force and U.S. Intelligence Community.
Yesterday, the Washington Post attempted to explain away the fact that America’s nuclear command and control system broke down in an unprecedented manner by reporting that it was the result of “security failures at multiple levels.” It is now apparent that the command and control breakdown, reported as a BENT SPEAR incident to the Secretary of Defense and White House, was not the result of a command and control chain-of-command “failures” but the result of a revolt and push back by various echelons within the Air Force and intelligence agencies against a planned U.S. attack on Iran using nuclear and conventional weapons.
______
Right. Wayne Madsen. LOL!
It’s an advertisement.
In a newspaper.
Big whoopie! Where was our boy in allowing a super majority vote on his or Webbs bill?
The interesting thing for me was that when selise first broke that bad news at FDL on a thread, very few people picked up on it. Some were still praising Hillary on the same thread for voting against Cronyn’s Amendment…
Ish @ 18
Lots and lots of primary challenges. Term limits are starting to make more and more sense. Stay in Washington too long and you disappear into the beltway neverland.
theWalrus @ 21
That would take a spine, and would take real leadership…Not in this senate.
As I said last night:
Now complimented with:
Um, is Hillary *aware* of the right-wing noise machine, and the way *they* question the patriotism and motives of everyone to the left of Joe Lieberman?
Or does she just figure, “Fuck it, I don’t need any Democratic base/left-wing votes to win the primary, and then they’ll *have* to vote for me in the general election”?
I’d suggest someone introduce a bill sarcastically offering to limit the First Amendment (especially in light of the Ahmedinejad-in-America bed-wetting from the right and center), but I’m afraid that it would pass resoundingly.
I don’t quite get Russ Feingold. He is “right” on most issues but doesn’t seem to provide leadership. He is on the SJC but never seems to be there busting the Republican’s balls.
from Out of right field, conservatives gush over Clinton
By Matt Stearns
McClatchy Newspapers
if one wants to oppose neo-con policies that are wrecking this country and the middle east, the least one could do is have the virtue of consistency and not support a neo-con candidate who simply has a (D) after their name.
Ish @ 18
Ditto and ditto. Emailed, too. Told her I didn’t elect her to have her tell me to shut up.
And I say again:
I think it’s a disgrace that the US Senate voted to attack the First Amendment of the US Constitution. And it happened under Chimpy’s administration.
I generally don’t support the “I’m done” or “goodbye cruel word (GBCW)” sentiments, but I’m feeling like I’m doing nothing constructive caring about politics, just wasting my time. Helping to get Amy Klobuchar elected in Minnesota, probably the biggest success for me so far, has been a huge disappointment, considering how she voted to expand Bush’s spying powers (and continues to try and justify it), and now is helping the government dictate appropriate speech.
I’ve always been a dutiful voter, and take care to inform myself. But after the theft of the presidency in 2000 I became more active. Or so I thought. Now I realize I’ve had no effect on anything. Places like FDL are helpful, but all of the contributions from me personally (helping the party, giving money to candidates, etc.) have been fruitless.
Blah. Thanks for your indulgence, I’m just really disgusted.
Bush has announced the HRC will be the nominee. The right is proclaiming HRC the nominee because they are aware that many of us loyal Dems are just not THAT loyal enough to vote for her (she scares me!) and would rather stay home next November.
There is not a sound set of testicles in the entire Democratic Congress.
Hillary was on every fucking show Sunday morning. She isn’t going to get on every show by taking Moveon’s side. They even put Brooks in the lineup for her. Obama is through.
All I can say is Arggghhh.
I fell for it…again.
I specifically noted my happiness in my MoveOn-petition-signing commment that both my senators, Clinton and Schumer, had voted Nay on the Cornyn amendment.
Can we call them the Lucy-crats?
Wondering if anyone caught BillO on Thursday -during a debate over soldiers undergoing a review by an officer named Kearney (sorry, can’t remember rank), BillO criticized Kearney’s integrity & questioned whether is was a villian. Hope KO has this clip.
Chris @ 29
She *should* be! She got a fucking front seat to the noise machine in Bill’s presidencies!
I think as time goes on…Hillary will self destruct…she is getting cocky and he uber advisor wolfson is a dispicable character….they will slip up further…she now thinks she has the primary sewed up..so u will see her triangulating and moving towards LIEbermans views…Observe, it is starting….
She is sooooooo predictable.
BobbyG sorry if I don’t find this quite as amusing.
CEO @ 37
I don’t think the race is over yet.
Chris @ 29
ding-ding!
and until something is done about this, the party of the least-worst will continue to astound its faithful supporters with betrayals and sellouts and ’spinelessness.’
Bobby G @ 23, you need to read Larry Johnson’s take on those nukes.
Elliott @ 43
Me neither, but the media has GOT to stop muzzling all the media-designated “second tier” candidates. How to force that?
I still don’t understand why Harry Reid let that vote get to the floor – anyone heard his reasoning?
Just for the hell of it, I’m just going to repost my #58 from the previous thread, since it fits so well with this subject matter:
The Congressional Dems are triangulating weenies who take the bloggers for granted.
OK, fair enough. We have nowhere else to go.
But in new age media, ignoring an articulate, vocal group that also controls money is stupid.
More ads are coming. More messages that the Congressional Dems don’t control are coming.
They need a strategy to deal with that reality, like, say, standing up to the Reps or taking meaningful steps to end the war.
peanutbutter @ 46
good question,
we soo need to keep hearing the voices of ALL our people running for the office. It’s the only way to get the ultimate candidate to recognize and appreciate what matters to YOU and me.
egregious @ 43
I wouldn’t find it amusing either if I thought it had a microgram of credibility. Way too tinfoil.
My question:
What gives with these Senate Dems? Just what the f*ck gives? As punaise has said: bande de laches…
re sporkovat @32
Exactly. HRC is now the neo-neocon.
Iraq: forever. Realistic universal healthcare: never.
Because “they would never do that”?
BobbyG @ 51
WOULD’NT be too sure of that if I was you!
Diane @ 46
I read it. Having a hard time believing a mutiny like that would simply be covered up. A bit too tinfoil.
When I heard Hillary I was disappointed she didn’t reference our freedom of speech. But what I got from the comments about how we shouldn’t lambast ANYONE who is in the military was a not-to-subtle dig at the swiftboating of Kerry, et.al. She should have mentioned those incidents by name, however.
Now look:
When Chimpy himself says that Hillary will be the Dem nominee, you know we’re getting somewhere.
I keep hoping that someone will step up and be the new “Paul Wellstone”; hasn’t happened and isn’t going to happen with this group of Dems. More Dems and hopefully one leader the the ‘09 class.
LOOK: RANDI RHODES IS RIGHT ON THIS ONE AND THE LIB BLOGGERS WRONG. THE LANGUAGE, THE WORDING OF THE BILL, REQUIRED PASSAGE NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU LIKE MOVE ON AND THINK PETRAUES IS A LIAR.
If a Dem voted against it, the Rethuglicans would say they are against the troops. Which makes sense if you read the actual resolution. I was mad as hell too until I read the resolution. Let’s face it: when it comes to shitty tactics, Republicans are waaaay better at it than Dems.
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate–
(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force–Iraq;
(2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and
(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.
This Mike Thompson editorial cartoon is excellent, pointed, and on-topic.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs…..68/OPINION
BobbyG @ 23
See also Larry Johnson at NoQuarterUSA.net and althespook’s blog Ratiocinations (ratiocinatonsofasavageheart.blogspot.com).
Wayne is behind the curve here. The rest of us figured out where those were going a couple of weeks ago.
Except that the swiftboating of Kerry, and the morphing of Cleland and Daschle into our enemies, was false. The statements MoveOn made about Petraeus were true — and backed by fact-references.
This minor point seems to get lost, especially in the wee head of Barbara Boxer.
C @ 58:
I don’t quite understand what you’re saying here…
Franco @ 56
Look, if you’re gonna put your ass on the line in mutiny of a Bu’ush administration directive ‘cuz you think they’ve gone so beyond the pale, why not go all the way and out them? After all, you’re screwed, and if these cats are that loose cannon — with all that such implies for the future of humanity — outing them would neuter them.
Just doesn’t pass the smell test to me at this point. Merely voicing some skepticism. Y’know, BTW, Madsen is like the proverbial broken clock that is “right” twice a day.
peanutbutter:
@40: Yep. And I think she learned the lesson: It’s a lot easier to make “the left” your enemy in politics than to make “the right” your enemy. So, here she is.
@46: “the media has GOT to stop muzzling all the media-designated ’second tier’ candidates.” Actually, while I agree with that on philosophical grounds, it *does* represent a certain helpful limitation, that may reduce the field to Hillary and an anti-Hillary candidate faster, which may be better for us. I suppose we have a couple problems, though; one is whether we should invest time in fighting that tendency of the media (on general principles, or for a political benefit, or both, or how to decide how to make that choice), and another problem is that the same political-media establishment that wants to coronate Hillary (whether as a ratings wet dream, since it guarantees 4-8 years of Clinton political chatter and attacks, or because she’s most compatible with them) is *not* going to do much to help us get anyone else any traction, whether it’s *eight* non-Hillary candidates or *one*.
Tinfoil or no, I fail to understand how the plane’s crew wouldn’t have known. Pilots are meticulous about weight and its distribution. One thing that nuclear materials are is heavy. Think lead .
Six Heavy nuke tipped cruise missiles is just not a bag of peanuts in the seat-back pocket. Which then leads to, they had to know; which leads to, there was a plan to move them.
why cant we draft russ feingold?? if ever there’s a time for a stand-up man to run THIS IS THAT TIME!! i will not vote for hillary – she doesnt surprise me ever
Albert @ 49
Of course we have somewhere to go… on election day 2008 you can go to your garden and tend it, stir the compost a bit, or go rafting down the green river, or fly a kite, or anything soul-enhancing other than the soul-damaging participation in a debased, de-legitimized, hollow political ritual.
Picking submissively between two neo-cons who want to rule you is bad for one’s self esteem, I would think.
And then one is tainted by their actions in office, if they, as promised, inflict Guernica-like horrors on the people of Iran.
If I were queen of everything my 2008 ticket
Russ Feingold/Barbara Lee
As for Boxer, I am tired of her patronizing attitude toward left Californians that she always knows a better strategy. She is just a shorter version of Difi
I wish the Dems in Congress and those running for president were a little more interested in the 50 percent of the country that’s left fo center and a little less interested in trying to get the votes of the ‘moderate Republicans’ they think are still out there.
(FWIW, I find that Hillary’s views are those of the Republicans of the seventies … and I wouldn’t vote for them, either.)
don’t know if this is linked to yet, haven’t read the comments, but think progress is right on point with this thread here, bold is mine;
when they say they “voted for bush”, I sure hope they didn’t mean the second time around…anyway, a good bit of information for future linkage
katherine Graham Cracker @ 69
No, she actually isn’t. I don’t know why she put this bill in but Barbara has always been a very liberal and progessive person. I don’t agree with everything she does (think Lieberman)but I like her very much.
sporkovat @ 69
Don’t complain about the results you get, then.
thanks so much for this post, jane! once again senator feingold does the right thing (even if it does it alone), and i am very happy to see him get the credit he deserves for it.
and thank you also to elliot and biodun, who had to read so many of my rants here on the moveon vote… it’s just that i had listened to the senate floor debate (yuck!) and it was very clear that the D senators were very happy to condemn moveon (and therefore us), the only question was who else (if anyone) should also be condemned. but the issue seemed important enough to me… even to the point of getting in a bit of a tiff with ian welsh (and i’m a big fan, having followed his writing since bopnews days).
just to once again give the links, so folks can check it out for themselves:
Cornyn Amdt. No. 2934 (roll call vote)
Boxer Amdt. No. 2947 (roll call vote)
and i’ll look for senator boxer’s statement on the senate floor…
In the midst of all this partisan messaging, where is Howard Dean. I don’t recall hearing much from him lately.
So Hillary caved. Again. Big deal.
Hillary doesn’t know squat about Economics, either.
Why listen to this windbag?
Related to the subject of staying home gardening on election day:
As small scale protest that hopefully isn’t isolated: I removed myself from the DNC, DSCC, DCCC distribution lists and made a donation to MoveOn. I’ve accompanied this by emails to the personal accounts of the leaders of these orgs explaining that I’ve done so and why.
Diane @ 45
YES. Good subject for another thread.
theWalrus @ 22
They could have, and should have.
hmmm feingold/lee ticket – i could really get behind that ticket ;o)!
TeddySanFran @ 64
exactly… this is why i think the boxer amendment was possibly even worse than the cornyn amendment.
swiftboating = moveon?
i call BS.
katherine Graham Cracker @ 69
The two of them – my senators – do have a very paternal/patronizing view of the consituents. Every time I e-mail, I get back a canned response which leads me to believe they aren’t even tuned in. They’re dancing around the room to the sound of static.
bellesouth @ 9
KEEP REPEATING THIS AGAIN AND AGAIN!
Ann in AZ @ 79
The last 20 some odd years of being pummeled by the right has left the Dems punch drunk. Pivot and attack seems to be beyond them.
This is one of the many reasons why I’m not voting.
We are not going to get the change we need in this country through a phony election of phony people who are nothign more than copiorate shills whose fealty is to the preservation the status quo at any cost.
There is no reason to continue this charade so much as a nanosecond longer.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Donald Trump has some advice for President Bush if he wants a Republican to win the White House: Hide.
The business mogul and vocal critic of the Bush administration told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Monday that he thinks the president is a “huge liability” for any Republican seeking the White House. Trump went on to say the best thing Bush can do for his party is to go into “hiding.”
“I think President Bush has to go into a corner and hide if a Republican is going to get elected,” he said. “There is no way he is an asset. He is a huge liability, and he is going to have to do a big, big hiding act if a Republican is going to win.”
So has anyone heard a response from Reid on why this amendment was allowed to hit the floor?
please people, don’t talk about not voting.
If we don’t get someone in there who will rein in this out of control Supreme Court, we are gonna be f****d down to our great grand children.
Way OT, but I’m just furious. The headline at abcnews.com reads “GM Workers Strike Trying to Maintain $70 an Hour”. Then you read the article and it’s not mentioned. The bias is sickening.
Steve-AR @ 31
First of all, I think that Russ has tried to provide leadership, but the rest of the Dems think they know better and they refuse to take his lead. It’s a shame, because he is usually the one that turns out right. OTOH, at the Committee hearings with Petraeus last week, I thought Russ did the heaviest lifting. It was his questioning that left both Petraeus and Crocker blithering, saying humina, humina, humina. It was his questioning that provoked the response that Petraeus could not answer the question; he’d have to ask Fallon. Russ is good at what he does, which is more than I can say about the rest of the Senators with few exceptions.
what has happened to america? once a bastion of freedom now sinking into a shell of democracy and the really sad part? – neither dems nor repugs gives a damn!! amazing to see………
raven @ 88
trump really knows marketing, that’s his stuff and he is certainly strutting it with that quote
right there he is baiting bush and trying to bring him out…I think it will work but trunp will get incredible air time for it if bush bites
and if bush does bite, trump can begin his political career, he could even run as a republican and get some of our swing voters
I think this is one shrewd bussiness move on his part and it is very well done
now to eat some popcorn and watch to see if bush and the wing nuts take trumps bait
Sparkatus @ 39
I love it.
Diane @ 87
Tsk, tsk! Pshaw! Like we’d ever get the courtesy of an answer on that!
What the Senate Dems did with the MoveOn.org ad:
It’s kabuki dressed up as jiu jitsu…
PJ Evans @74:
I think a lot of folks here and elsewhere are feeling a little bit betrayed after working hard last cycle and the one before that…to get what? The Sense of the Democratic Senate that the MoveOn ad went too far?
I just passed one of my 2003 anti-war protesting haunts (where I was repeatedly told by staff that I could not flyer on the sidewalk outside of a major metropolitan museum of art)…and it reminded me of how fragile is the freedom of speech. I felt threatened using mine.
These Senators need to grow a pair (Ladies included), stop feeding the R frames, and launch their own attacks as proud liberals.
They could take a lesson from Jane, Christy,…in that regard.
friends… i know it’s depressing to face that we may only have one true ally in the senate… but it’s better to know what is true than what is comfortable.
and actually, i have more hope now… because when we do our oversight of our senators and representatives, then at the very least, they can’t get away with their kabuki bs. and i think they’ve gotten used to being able to kabuki us. but that’s happening less and less. when they fuck up (think fisa), they’re now getting publically called on it (thank you jane!).
if we do a good job of oversight, it’s possible that at some point they may decide they have to actually do something for us instead of giving us kabuki.
don’t forget nixon gave us the epa – not because he thought it was a good idea, but because he thought he had to… it’s not impossible that we can get our congress to start to shape up. sunlight is a wonderful thing.
oddmommy @ 89
I’m afraid were already there, no matter who is elected in 08 – Dem or Repub. I see very little signs of life from either Party.
Petraeus is a self-confessed presidential aspirant. He is therefore “fair game.”
Petraeus is a sychophant who has been reporting “significant progress” since 2004. He is therefore “fair game.”
Petraeus injected himself into the 2004 election cycls as a Bush partisan. He is therefore “fair game.”
Petraeus has gone participated in diverting resources from the war on terror to the occupation of Iraq against the strategic judgement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in order to facilitate Bush’s neocon political agenda. Petraeus is therefore “fair game.”
Michael Kinsley in Time had a fun take on the Move-on controversy.
How Dare You
Lots of Pearl Clutching
oddmommy @ 89
Thank you! As futile as it feels sometimes, its the most power I can wield. Move On should be doing one of these ads every week — in the NYT, WaPoo, Trib, Strib, Inky, etc. They also need more company. A lot more company. I give money to groups that support an equal and opposite force to the Right-wing noise machine.
Biodun @ 97
exactly. some of them don’t care what we think and most of the others care enough about what we think to do the kabuki.
but we’re not going to let them get away with it. we’re gonna provide some fucking oversight and call bs every time we see through their kabkuki.
As one of my friends says:
‘Until I can afford to buy my own Congresspeople, voting is the only voice I have. And I’m going to use it.’
Every one of us who doesn’t vote next year means one of their votes is worth more.
P J Evans @ 104
Amen.
I also feel like it’s pointless to vote, but then I make myself vote anyway. I figure no vote, no complaining.
puppethead @ 35
I know exactly how you feel, because I feel that way too. Except that the person I worked to support lost his race and Kyl remains my Senator. So, as you can see, things could be worse.
oddmommy @ 89:
Yep. People should realize that: There have been only two Democratic nominees to SCOTUS in the last 40 years.
From Digby
I was going to take Dianne Feinstein downtown today, but I see that Glenn Greenwald has already done a fine job of it. She truly is one of the most egregious Village Elders, shockingly uninterested in the views or desires of her constituents or the country at large.
***
Of course, as Greenwald points out, Dianne and the other elders don’t really even care about that. They care about the Village. And the outsider DFH Democrats are hooligans who must be taught that their role is to write checks, vote and STFU. The only way we will learn our lesson is if the Elders make it very clear that if we exert ourselves in any way, they will do exactly the opposite: the word from some of the gasbags today is that the “far left” has forced the congressional Democrats to give up on trying to stop the war.
I’m learning my lesson, all right, but it’s not exactly the one they think it is.
Ann in AZ @ 107
When I came home from Vietnam I was 19, 2 months shy of my 20th. I could not vote for over a year. I vote EVERY time I get a chance, it’s a personal thing for me.
wigwam @ 101
I read somewhere (sorry, can’t recall where) that Petraeus had received two more stars since he started shilling for the administration. If true, it shows that Bush simply promoted a general who told him what he wanted to hear.
oddmommy @ 37
Somebody should tell them, no guts, no glory!
I think it’s less about the voting in the general, than in the organizing and campaigning and the primaries.
I have no interest, and will not, vote for HRC. I will, however, put in time on other worthy campaigns down the ticket and in the primaries to help ensure the choices next november aren’t Tweedle dum and Tweedle dumMeToo
theWalrus @ 100
with all due respect, that is a cop out response, at least with respect to this one particular issue. Regardless of how disappointed we are with our field of candidates, the fact is that 3 of the 4 remaining rational justices on the Supreme Court are likely to retire or die in the next 5 years, whoever’s president is going to pick their replacement, and if it’s a rethug we are, I repeat, fucked beyond hope. This will not happen if a Democrat is president, no matter which one it is.
This issue is very simple, It transcends politics, principle, hope and despair. It is a matter of self-preservation for all of us.
And this:
Ahem.
Ann in AZ @ 92
Its lonely in the Senate being one of two(BYRD the other) that has read the oath and the Constitution as well.
In law we talk of contractual duties, where the hell are the Dems behind Feingold who has been right on everything
re: my 76, here are some senate floor statements:
— barbara boxer (9/20/07 on the senate floor)
— dick durbin (9/20/07 on the senate floor)
— barbara boxer (9/20/07 on the senate floor)
— barbara boxer (9/20/07 on the senate floor)
— carl levin (9/20/07 on the senate floor)
all quotes are from the congressional record.
Biodun @ 115
Priceless.
OT, New Froomkin up What has Bush done to the government?
Oh my. Is this OT?
That little speech is scheduled to begin any minute, and the networks are in an absolute tizzy.
All of a sudden, some prisoners have escaped in Miami – fear not. the tv heli is in the air with live…
There’s a big warehouse fire somewhere or other, fine. they’re on it & we’ll get updates.
Annnnnd, what else could it be? … a lady’s apparently gone missing in somewhere-or-other.
All the networks have their special-effects bling turned on high too, so soundtracks sound like vases falling off the shelf every place I turn. Goodgawd media. Just do yer jobs!?!
I think i’m gonna be sick.
oddmommy @ 2
Russ is too smart. God please forbid they pull a Wellstone on Russ. Like they did with JFK,MLK,Bobby K and many many more.
Jane, I love the way you write. You probably get a lot of that.
OM @ 114
Bravo! You are spot on! Even if one is forced to choose between to the lesser of two evils, it is still of paramount importance that we exercise our right to do so. The prospect of Rudy or Fred Thompson selecting a couple of Justices makes my blood run cold.
The Court packed with Federalists would completely ruin everything we have accomplished, even more so than the current bunch…
Biodun @ 115
From “The Tonight Show” last week: “Achme-Imanutjob — I think that’s his name — said he wants to visit Ground Zero. How ’bout we bring Ground Zero to him?”
egregious @ 43
You don’t? Not yet? Well, try this one on for size: I wonder how the commotion that the Petraeus ad stirred up, and Hillary’s decision to cave were affected by her decision to make Wesley Clark her
bitchVP nominee, and visa-versa.Further to my 107 (SCOTUS nominees):
1993: Ruth Bader Ginsberg–Clinton
1994: Stephen Breyer–Clinton
The last time a Dem nominated a Justice was in 1967:
Thurgood Marshall–Lyndon Johnson
So think about that one, folks who’re thinking of not voting in ‘08.
Feingold is the leader of the Constitutional Wing of the Democratic Party. The only wing worth supporting.
Compare to the corporate wing, typified by Diane Feinstein. See Greenwald.
selise @ 117
Did Durbin cry again?
selise @ 116:
Thanks. You’re quite a gem. I mean that…
Honestly, can these people tell the difference between criticism of policy and of personality? Which is more disgraceful to you — commanding forces and providing White House spin for a report, or buying an ad in a major newspaper pointing that out?
The really sad thing is that Hillary and Co. are rushing to cuddle up to Bush right as Rudy and Co. are doing their best to (publicly) distance themselves from him, even as they vote for his policies.
Ish @ 109
Dianne Feinstein is also a fucking war profiteer! She’s grown even more wealthy than she was before the war, making money on the deaths of our troops and of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
Dianne Feinstein makes me proud to have such honest representatives in Washington DC as Ted Stevens and Don Young. At least they’re just plain crooks. She’s a crooked war profiteer with a tremendous amount of blood on her hands.
musicsleuth @ 93
Use it early and often, maybe it’ll have an impact someday.
selise @ 117
Quote from the peanut gallery:
I think you’re all a bunch of disgraceful excuses for elected representatives. I have personally, and I feel very personal about it, condemned each and every one of your attacks on Moveon as the act of a pathetic pandering pussy.
Reading Larry Johnson’s take on the Minot to Barksdale attempt at nuclear theft or whatever, makes me wonder why Congress isn’t demanding a thorough inventory of all our nuclear stores. Has one been done since this incident?
Glen Greenwald focused on the visit from Iranian President Ahmadinejad and the spin.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..feinstein/
Will be so interesting to watch how the cakewalk zealots will spin his visit.
Biodun @ 127 –
probablyh more like an asshole pain in the neck. but thanks… *g*
Biodun @ 124
Exactly. The righties get this, many of us don’t.
Just look at 2000: Nader poached seven times more Democratic votes than Buchanan poached Republican ones. The ultra-cons might not have trusted Bush (being that his daddy was an East Coast Rockefeller Republican), but they voted for him rather than see a Democrat in the White House.
That being said, it doesn’t mean that we can’t:
a) do primary challenges (one of Tom DeLay’s favorite ways to enforce lockstep loyalty to the GOP’s conservative base, especially as, with his ties to wealthy Religious Right figures, he could guarantee the cutoff of funds to misbehaving Republicans, and the proper care and feeding of primary challengers) and:
b) back the fine folks at http://www.PublicCampaign.org, who are working to take the money (and the Feinsteins and Giulianis) out of politics, so candidates don’t have to sell their souls to afford to win (or keep) their seats.
Scarecrow @ 125
Glenn is awesome.
So we’re stuck with Feinstein until 2012, and Boxer until 2010. Looking forward to some of our better back-benchers stepping up – George Miller? Barbara Lee? Lynn Woolsey?
Edwards is possibly the only one who can stop the Hillary juggernaut. But he’s got to get going. He’s got to get his sh*t together. Fast. Like yesterday.
MayDaze @ 111
I know that Petraeus got his fourth star when he took over command of the surge in January. BTW, at the time he stated that the surge had a one-in-four chance of succeeding.
Ed*ard Teller @ 133
another hearing i want to be able to put on my list – and watch!
ET @ 129:
Where would you situate Hillary in this respect? A neocon in progressive clothing?
Great series on Senator Feinstein
considered one of the most underreported stories of the year
http://www.peterbyrne.info/
Helpless Dancer @ 27
Problem with term limits is they would also get rid of the few shining lights, like Feingold.
sporkovat @ 14
To paraphrase one of our illustrious Secretaries of Defence, you have to work with the politicians you have, not the politicians you’d like to have. You think voting for Nader in 2000 was a good idea?
In the short run we have no real choice but to go with the least bad; in the long run its different, if we aren’t all dead by then. The long run is a long haul. There are no short cuts. If you want a progressive party, you have to start at the bottom and work up, to the point where the people at the top pay attention. It takes time.
Jim Clausen @ 114
My take? They’re too full of themselves to see it!
The best term limit: vote against the incumbent. Use it on the ones that aren’t doing their jobs, and keep the ones that are doing it well.
Silver threatens Columbia
“But what is new, and what most certainly is worth commenting upon, is this extremely disturbing report from The New York Sun regarding the threats made by Democratic State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver to use state power to punish Columbia for inviting a speaker whom Silver dislikes. Silver — who, among other things, has long been a leader in efforts to free convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard from prison — did not even bother to disguise the threats he was making:
As the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, prepares to address Columbia University today amid a storm of student protest, state and city lawmakers say they are considering withholding public funds from the school to protest its decision to invite the leader to campus.
In an interview with The New York Sun, the speaker of the Assembly, Sheldon Silver, said lawmakers, outraged over Columbia’s insistence on allowing the Iranian president to speak at its World Leaders Forum, would consider reducing capital aid and other financial assistance to the school.
Lawmakers warned about other consequences for Columbia and its president, Lee Bollinger, who has resisted campus and public pressure to cancel Mr. Ahmadinejad’s appearance today, arguing that Columbia’s commitment to scholarship requires the school to directly confront offensive ideas.
“There are issues that Columbia may have before us that obviously this cavalier attitude would be something that people would recall,” Mr. Silver said. “Obviously, there’s some degree of capital support that has been provided to Columbia in the past. These are things people might take a different view of . . . knowing that this is that kind of an institution” “. .
But what is new, and what most certainly is worth commenting upon, is this extremely disturbing report from The New York Sun regarding the threats made by Democratic State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver to use state power to punish Columbia for inviting a speaker whom Silver dislikes. Silver — who, among other things, has long been a leader in efforts to free convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard from prison — did not even bother to disguise the threats he was making:
As the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, prepares to address Columbia University today amid a storm of student protest, state and city lawmakers say they are considering withholding public funds from the school to protest its decision to invite the leader to campus.
In an interview with The New York Sun, the speaker of the Assembly, Sheldon Silver, said lawmakers, outraged over Columbia’s insistence on allowing the Iranian president to speak at its World Leaders Forum, would consider reducing capital aid and other financial assistance to the school.
Lawmakers warned about other consequences for Columbia and its president, Lee Bollinger, who has resisted campus and public pressure to cancel Mr. Ahmadinejad’s appearance today, arguing that Columbia’s commitment to scholarship requires the school to directly confront offensive ideas.
“There are issues that Columbia may have before us that obviously this cavalier attitude would be something that people would recall,” Mr. Silver said. “Obviously, there’s some degree of capital support that has been provided to Columbia in the past. These are things people might take a different view of . . . knowing that this is that kind of an institution”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..adinejad/. . .
.
I’m not sure I understand what Hillary Clinton did wrong, so apparently, it’s too subtle for me. OTOH, what 72 other Senators did wrong, including 22 Democrats, is something I understand. Expressing opinions is one thing, and Senators are allowed to express them just like anyone else. Passing laws telling us how we can speak and how we can’t isn’t something they’re allowed to do, IMHO.
I thought the MoveOn ad was offensive, but it was a minor offense compared to what the Senate did last week. For that matter, it’s much less offensive than much of what the Senate has done these past seven years.
Ann in AZ @ 123
What does he bring to the table? I don’t see it…
HRC displeases me.
katherine Graham Cracker @ 142
Feinstein’s “conflict of interest” issues in regard to the war in Iraq certainly deserve investigation.
Meanwhile, Chimpy continues to
browbeatbitch-slap Congress Dems:You think he’s grateful you guys attacked the MoveOn.org ad? Think again.
Sparkatus @ 113
Absolutely correct! That’s what I’m doing.
Fern @ 143
Yeah, you see it here in California.
The translation of “term limits” is this: “We’re too fucking lazy to vote, so we’ll get around it this way.”
Problem is, it doesn’t work. You exchange one set of problems for another.
The term limits problem here, btw, is why I vote anyway.
Biodun @ 152
I would like to think he’s furious about the funding frenzy this generated for MoveOn. Or at least annoyed. As much as his chimp brain can be.
It’s the DLC. Stupid.
Cujo359 @ 148
Cujo359 – there were TWO amendments condemning moveon. clinton voted against one and FOR one. neither amendment makes the moveon ad illegal.
Biodun @ 139
Biodun,
To what extent is $ involved as well as the MSM bias ala the $400 haircut. He resonates in Iowa with the Two America theme.
Ed*ard Teller @ 134
My concern about all this is that after all this time of not being concerned about MAD and nuclear winter that they may be getting sloppy with how they handle nukes. Of course, there are other possible explanations, but most make far less sense to me than plain stupidity and apathy. Being in charge of nuke storage in the Dakotas can’t be a plum assignment these days.
I’d have to think that they do regular audits of nuclear weapons. Most DoD agencies regularly do property audits, even those that don’t have weapons of any kind. If the AF isn’t auditing their nukes then that really would be mind-boggling.
Russ! Is the only one who faced the Big Betrayal and did not back down or distract from the importance of the question, BetrayUs?
Any senator who is so afraid of the betrayal that they will turn around and stomp and dance upon the first amendment in order to distract from the lies and betrayal in our Executive and Legislative branches are simply cowards at best. Hillary cannot face the betrayal that she is a part of, no way.
Just look at the last two weeks at the Clinton School in Little Rock, during the celebration of the 50th anniversary Central High School crisis. The paid invited guest speakers at the Clinton School during this time.. John Yoo and Harold Ford.
Hillary in particular, after yesterdays network appearances, should be considered the anti-left candidate in America.. She and the DLC will work to screw up our work here in every way possible when it comes down to brass tack time, every time.
Biodun @ 142
I think the term neo-neocon, used above, is close. Watching Josh Marshall’s veracifier video of her Sunday appearances is an eye opener. She has more charisma than any of the leading candidates from either party, and – as we discovered in the YouTube CNN debate – she seems to enjoy flaunting her ease in handling tricky audience situations.
I mistrust her a lot, but she’s far less a crook than the politicians I referenced above – Feinstein, Stevens and Don Young. I wouldn’t hesitate for a minute to pull the lever for her as president in a final between her and any of the GOP losers.
Biodun @ 152
I’m sure no one bothered to mention that the rethugs failed to even pass a budget for FY07 last year and left that little detail to the incoming Dems…
peanutbutter @ 147
A uniform! Or, at least, a memory of a uniform. That would give her administration military stategy creds and would almost certainly imbue it with a certain military expertise with no requirement to further earn that portion of her reputation.
ot – Reid up on CSPAN2
P J Evans @ 75
The problem with refusing to vote for the least-worst, unappetizing as that mey be, is that you may get stuck with the worst-worst. With which we are now very well acquainted.
Scarecrow @ 125
For additional perspective, see the assessment by Progressive Punch. Feinstein scores worst on Labor Rights (69.12), and Environment (75.81). Overall, her rating is 84.77, placing her 30th out of the 100 senators, a score nearly identical to Joe Biden, and more progressive than Harry Reid and one of my Senators, Sen. Inouye.
I think the Progressive Punch system needs to “weight” votes differently according to which votes are most critical– but that might make their extensive system too complicated, and open to dispute.
Bob in HI
selise @ 158
Correct. Nevertheless, it’s in the law. In my opinion, the government doesn’t get to tell its citizens to shut up about something they have a right to criticize, even if it’s not a binding piece of legislation.
Hi Jane – Thanks for speaking my mind. I’m still pissed over the Democrats caving. That was an easy one and no brainer to say no to regardless of the Republicans name-calling. And they couldn’t even do that.
I ask, are they just too lazy to put on a thinking cap? Or, just say NO? Or, take a free-speech stand? Russ gets it and the rest stand dumbfounded like a deer in the headlights. Huh? Are they all on something? How can you have group-dumb?
I just made another donation to MoveOn. They are small but I can do without a piece of dark chocolate for the cause.
Lee Bollinger President of Columbia giving a speech instead of asking a question of the Iranian President. This sure looks like a set-up to me. No one would get away with going on like this. This looks like the talk at Columbia was set up for Lee Bollinger to address the world.
Bollinger has the nerve to ask the President why
he will not honor the Iaea agreements. All the while Israel sits on Nuclear stockpiles that go unchecked and not declared.
BOLLINGER’S SPEECH PROVES WHAT THIS COLUMBIA EVENT WAS ABOUT. IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE I-LOBBY TO USE THIS FORUM TO REPEAT THEIR LIES ABOUT IRAN.
What a clear and obnoxious set up!
selise @ 158
And Hilary can slip and slide either way. “I voted against it until I voted for it….”
QuakerGirl @ 171
True, I suppose. The difference between the Cornyn amendment and the Boxer amendment is that the latter covered “swiftboating” like the kind that happened to some of the retired generals who criticized the Iraq war or Bush’s handling of it. It also, I suppose, would have covered John Kerry. Yes, it would have. It mentions “any individual who is currently serving or has served honorably”. I don’t agree with the Boxer amendment for the same reason I don’t agree with the Cornyn amendment – it’s not the government’s place to criticize its citizens for criticizing it. But I think Boxer was making a subtle point there, which is that if this sort of thing can apply to David Petraeus, then it should apply to John Kerry as well.
A Hillary-Wesley Clark ticket? I don’t see it. Too stacked. The Arkansas connection. Hillary might be from IL and a Senator of NY, but she’s closely identified with AR–for obvious reasons.
Diane @ 48
In fact the ammendment required unanimous consent to get to the floor. I was brought up without notice and without a copy provided to the majority ahead of time as required by rules. Any present Senator could have blocked it. When are we going to learn to play hardball?
After listening to the rant and rage by the Republicans on Ahmadinejad, Senator Byrd comes through with his stalk naked truth-telling on the floor of the Senate, exposing so many Bush lies and selling the American people a bill of goods. Senator Byrd has a long unimpaired memory.
Byrd slamming the Petraus plan in the Senate now.
puppethead @ 35
puppethead, I share your sense of complete helplessness to have any impact on the dems.
Forest protection – given away by Clinton
Health care – given away by HRC to Big Insurance (x2)
Constitution – given away by Boxer, et al.
Impeachement – given away by Pelosi
Taxpayer-owned water – DiFi has secret meetings to give away $40 Billion in US Taxpayer owned water to 500 families in the Westlands Water DIstrict – to settle the half-billion dollars in damages caused by the same families.
Oh – and the single-payer health care passed by the CA dems – Kuehl’s 840? Ahhnuld threatens to veto it, so the Sate Dmes are working with Ahhnuld to make health care safe for Big Insurance.
My congressperson? Pelosi
My senators? Boxer and Feinstein.
I’m represented by the Money Party.
I feel good about what FDL does and Blue America does…
and totally hopeless that my Federal elected reps will ever care about anything beyond the Money Party and the Beltway chatter.
What a sad end for our Republic – a Congress unwilling to honor the Constitution, if that’s what they need to keep the donations flowing.
realworld @ 174
Or read the rule book and play ball by the rules. They could have rejected it on those grounds but didn’t. Were they part of the plan to move against MoveOn because the people are getting too powerful? They created a strong voice for themselves through MoveOn. They can assemble in large mass and put pressure on Democrats. I think they are scared of so much power being in the hands of the people.
Does this constitute edwards on his knees?
09.21.07 — 4:52PM // link
How would John Edwards have voted on the resolution condemning the MoveOn ad were he still in the Senate? We have the answer.
Talking Points Memo
* TPM
* TPMMuckraker
* TPMElection Central
* TPMCafé
* TPMHorse’sMouth
* Archive
* Advertise
* Contribute
* RSS
Send Comments and News Tips
Edwards: I Would Have Voted Against Resolution Condemning MoveOn
By Greg Sargent – September 21, 2007, 4:52PM
A bunch of people have been asking today whether John Edwards would have voted against the resolution condemning MoveOn if he’d still be in the Senate.
Well, here’s the answer: He would have voted No.
The Edwards campaign has just sent me the following statement from Edwards himself:
“I respect and honor General Petraeus’ service, but I would have opposed the Cornyn amendment as an irresponsible waste of time — the Senate should be working on ending the war, not dithering over newspaper ads.”
So there you have it.
–D
realworld @ 176
I love this guy. “A little more time – bargain for a little more time….” “The only way to get them home is to restrict the funds to bring them home from this terrible war, terrible war.”
Bless him…..and may he continue to have a long life!
E- mailed my Pa. senators with two questions:
Are we no longer allowed to question what the military tells us?
What specfic content of the ad was wrong? waiting…waiting…waiting…..
Here comes Liberman right after Senator Byrd. What a contrast! Joe, you could learn from him. Get on your knees and become a lowly student to this man.
Now condemning Columbia University. Help me, somebody! What a stupid fool!
eventually people are going to start doing crazy things to get what they want. a hungry man is an angry man.
A lot of people are getting angry: I think a lot of them don’t even know WHY they’re angry, but they see their lot getting worse and worse every day.
personally, I was hoping the in-coming democrat congress (they have now earned the moniker “Democrat Party” IMHO, because that’s what you call someone who stabs his friends in the back: a RAT) would give me less reason to seethe, but unfortunately, they’ve been even more maddening.
and I certainly believe more that the democrats are simply the kindler gentler face of raw abuse of power: that’s why they won’t reinstate habeas or repeal the wiretapping: they want that power for themselves.
I love Russ Feingold.
Way EPU’d and way off topic
But about the missing nukes: It was no mistake
The acronym of the day is SOP = Standard Operating Procedure.
For one to believe the story of the “mistake,” one must ignore the most rigorous procedures in the military with respect to the most dangerous weapons in the history of man.
DoD Directive 4540.5
That they were accidentally loaded without orders doesn’t pass the smell test
the problem with voting for the least worst is, you end up in the year 2007 with no opposition party, and with the party to which you are so faithful the indispensible enabler of the crimes of the Bush regime.
They are complicit, they are down with the program. read:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html
or
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html
voting for the least worst is an affirmative endorsement of
1) the legitimacy of the political system
2) your support for that candidate to rule you.
The major (D) candidates all echo Dick Cheney that “all options are on the table” in regards to another country that poses no threat to the USA. One such option pointedly not ruled out is a pre-emptive nuclear attack … so how can you say ‘yes ok, the candidate I support might use nukes for the first time since Nagasaki, but s/he will probably appoint better Supreme Court Justices’ ???
they can’t be held accountable in the slightest if there is not a credible likelyhood of the withdrawal of support, and for non-millionaires, that means in the voting booth in even numbered years.
I’m sorry folks but I’M NOT VOTING
and I will speak about that fact LONG AND LOUD.
I refuse to be a bttered hosuewife, arguing with the cops about taking the hubster down to the station.
Cause that’s what we voters are.
We have a choce of voting for people who want to kill as all actively –
and people who want to kill us all passively.
That is no0t a “choice.”
That is not a politics worthy of anyone’s attention.
We can do nothing less than tear it all down and start again from scratch. Anything less is useless.
I disagree, Jane. She voted correctly, IMHO. It is absolutely true that we shouldn’t be using character assassination techniques on people in uniform, no matter who it is. So the first vote was right.
But then she voted no on Cornyn’s because she wasn’t going to be forced to single anyone out.
It was the REPUBLICANS who voted like f%^&*ing hypocrites.
To be honest, I didn’t think there was anything wrong with the Petraeus ad. On a Scoville unit scale, it was about as incendiary as a red bell pepper. The GOP ads are always scotch bonnets but they refused to take any responsibility for their misbehavior.
I know that a lot of people want to find reasons to dislike Hillary. There’s quite a bit of cognitive dissonance going on because she’s starting to soften people up and they are troubled by it. But this is not the issue to do it on because she was on the right side of it. If it was good enough for Boxer, it was good enough. Now, she wants to move on.
I saw her appearance on This Week and she didn’t pass up the opportunity to slam the GOP for the Kerry and Cleland ads. Maybe we should keep the distraction going since it’s only going to end up hurting Republicans but if she wants to try to usher in a new age of civility, sure, why not?
I’m sure she’s itchin’ for a fight and the Bushies will get one if they start messin’ with her.
Why can’t we vote for Feingold?
Almost no one in the country thinks as clearly as Feingold. He is the most principled politician in the country.
I wonder what was like for her to remove her balls.
now none of these people is worth voting for. no choice worth a damn.
I am beginning to wonder if we on the left should not start throwing our support elsewhere. I am sick of seeing how they continue their rightward movement since we voted them into power. Particularly since they have not accopmplished anything of substance regarding the Iraq war.