From Reid’s statement:
Even with all this hard work on our side, the commitments the administration made to me before August break were not met.
In the almost three months since that break, we have received no Democratic nominees to full-time commission positions.
For some, in fact, absolutely no discernable progress has been made.
With Thanksgiving break looming, the administration informed me that they would make several recess appointments.
I indicated I would be willing to confirm various appointments if the administration would agree to move on Democratic appointments.
They would not make that commitment.
As a result, I am keeping the Senate in pro-forma to prevent recess appointments until we get this process back on track.
Oh Junya’s gonna put his foot through the floor on that one, ain’t he?
Related posts:
- Will Reid Lose His Senate Seat to Take the Hit on Health Care?
- Rockefeller, Brown, Boxer to Push Reid on Including Public Option in Senate Bill Today
- The Guns of August: Health Care Reform Battle Heads to Recess
- Rahm Meets Reid, Will Discuss Merging Senate Bills
- BREAKING: Reid Puts Public Option in the Senate Bill
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
1
2
This one is a mystery to me … White House fills State position
3
Reid is finally catching on that Bush doesn’t want to play fair. Now how long did that take to sink in?
cboldt @ 3
So Bush doesn’t even want to work with Lugar? These guys are pretty far gone.
Reid has serious codependency issues. The whining about being abused by Bush and then Reid rolls over again.
What does “pro-forma” mean?
What’s the next step in getting the RNC emails out of the DOJ? Can Waxman just send another letter reminding Mukasey that there’s an outstanding order for those?
Is this the same Harry Reid I know and loathe?
Can’t be, can it?
I’m not sure that will stop the lawless dictator occupying the White House. I can easily see a scenario where Bush puts them in place anyway figuring what are the Democrats going to do about it? It’ll be squatter appointments, but the Bush government has been operating illegally for years and nobody seems to stop him.
George Simian @ 8
(from dictionary.com)
Has Harry Reid been watching TBS lately(or is it TNT)?
EPU’d but the this young woman has been getting serious ridicule on the net
Very Interesting…..
Maria Luisa, the UNLV student who asked Hillary Clinton whether she preferred “diamonds or pearls” at last night’s debate wrote on her MySpace page this morning that CNN forced her to ask the frilly question instead of a pre-approved query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.
“Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN,” Luisa writes. “I was asked to submit questions including “lighthearted/fun” questions. I submitted more than five questions on issues important to me. I did a policy memo on Yucca Mountain a year ago and was the finalist for the Truman Scholarship. For sure, I thought I would get to ask the Yucca question that was APPROVED by CNN days in advance.”
http://atrios.blogspot.com/
as great as everyone is calling and writing to gin up the heat, let’s take a few seconds to call or fax a thank you. Harry did good. Let him know we notice the good stuff, too.
cboldt @ 3
See he’s an “acting” Undersecretary, meaning he’s just there till the committee acts on the real appointee. The problem is, of course, that there is no real appointee.
George Simian @ 8
For form’s sake
Basically, Reid is saying he’s keeping the Senate in session–(pro-forma) but not doing anything, not considering any legislation…
Nice to know that our Congress critters will actually have to work for aliving this year!
jeffxandra @ 10
time will tell.
puppethead @ 11
At the very least, make W do it in the lowest possible way.
Biodun @ 18
So they can go home, but still be “in session”? You mean, nobody bangs the gavel, so to speak, and declares the recess?
cboldt @ 3
As I read this, Rood is in for 120 days unless the Senate fails to act on an appointment. But there is no appontment pending to act on, so then what? The law apparently does not contemplate this manuever.
looseheadprop @ 17
Aside from definitions, in practical terms, I believe this means that every three days someone shows up to work, hence the Senate is not technically in recess. And presto, no recess appointments for King George.
Good on you Senator Reid. I didn’t think you had it in you. I am only too happy to have you change my opinion of your leadership.
George Simian @ 8
It means opening the Senate with the prayer and the pledge, appointing the president pro tem to preside, and then having the president adjourn the Senate for the day. It takes about 10 minutes, and it’s been done repeatedly on Fridays under Harry Reid in order to get a “legislative day” counted on the calendar even though all but one or two Senators had fled town the night before for another 3-4 day weekend.
(from wiki)
George Simian @ 22
The way I heard it, one member has to go to the podium, bang the gavel, and declare the session open, and then closed. He/she must do that every three days.
Unfortunately, this move by Reid will do nothing to slow down Bush from putting loyalists in key positions…from Think Progress today…
“The installation of “loyalist” Rood is only the latest chapter in the Bush administration’s efforts to avoid Senate confirmation for positions that require it. In June, the Washington Post reported that Bush used recess appointments to place 105 people in full-time positions and 66 in part-time slots, which is more than Bill Clinton installed in his entire presidency. The New York Times notes:
With only 15 months left in office, President Bush has left whole agencies of the executive branch to be run largely by acting or interim appointees — jobs that would normally be filled by people whose nominations would have been reviewed and confirmed by the Senate.
In many cases, there is no obvious sign of movement at the White House to find permanent nominees, suggesting that many important jobs will not be filled by Senate-confirmed officials for the remainder of the Bush administration.”
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 13
More likely Bill Maher. On his show recently Maher asked Dems to “grow just one ball” which it looks like Reid may have done.
I’ll believe he has a pair if there is no telecom immunity in the Senate FISA bill.
Not holding my breath.
eCAHNomics @ 21
Unfortunately, i agree.
when will our national nightmare end?
Steve-AR @ 14
Well, they picked the right student for their purposes IMO, because according to my daughter, she would have prefaced the diamonds/pearls ? very quickly with, “CNN doesn’t want me to ask you about Yucca Mtn., so here’s a question they would let me ask.”
I’m betting Ms. Luisa would have then been lauded both @ the debate & in the blogs. Honestly, what would she have had to lose?
Since C Augustus has been appointing ‘acting’ under-secretaries without ever appointing anyone for advise and consent of the Senate, what is to keep him from making a ‘recess appointment’ when the Senate is still in session?
What to do then, go to a Bush-sympathetic judge with the argument that the Senate was really in session when Reid has already declared it to be just a ‘pro-forma’ session?
Bush will do whatever he wants to do. If you do not fight it out for every inch of territory, and put impeachment back on the table, you concede every fight with him.
Marie Roget @ 30
Wonder if there was any delay in the broadcast?
i’d love to know what commitments were made on both sides – what was the deal?
It sure seems the Dems have been growing some these last few weeks. Kucinich last night taking Wolfie to task for his questions; Reid, whining or no, with the recess thing, DiFi. I’m sure someone can find more. What’s the best Rogaine for balls? Phone calls!
lhp, or any other lawyer, is there anything to be made of something John Dean raises in his recent book: The legal wacky opinions they have used in court over the years to bolster their positions turn out to have been written and placed in (non-peer reviewed) Law Reviews by their minions specifically for the purpose of bolstering their positions in court.
Is there anything to be done about this? Is it all down the rabbit hole now? This just struck me as a key piece of information as to how they have turned everything upside-down.
Too bad he didn’t think of that in August before they rushed through the ludicrous FISA bill.
Susan in Iowa @ 23
Well, in 120 days Rood is out. Then Junya appoints Rood as acting Undersect’y for another 120 days. Iterate to January 20, 2009.
The law assumes reasonable people behaving in a reasonable manner. If the past 6 years have taught us anything, it should be that Bush is not a reasonable person and doesn’t operate in a reasonable manner.
BC
OT: Has anyone mentioned it yet? I just got word from Democracy for Texas that Netroots Nation will be in Austin next summer, July 17-20. Earlybird registration $175 thru Nov 30, then it goes up to $250.
http://www.netrootsnation.org/register
For me, not such a great date. I live in Austin and am scheduled to finish healing school in California on July 19th. Arrgh! For me. Great for the rest of the Central Texas pups. I’ve sent them a separate email.
raven @ 32
Perhaps. But, once again, as I added to my post, what would she have had to lose?
George Simian @ 22
It’s kinda like the fillibuster. In this case, Senatos willtake turns showing up in DC (I think they have to be on the floor at least once every three days) to essentially announce that they are insession and give a little staus report.
The senators can take this duty in shifts
you know, I was under the impression the democrats and the president came to some understanding that there would be no recess appointments, I see no such agreement was made
in addition, why WOULD an agreement be made, all it takes is a one minute “congress in session” gavel, “congress out of session” gavel
and I am CERTAIN there are criters ITCHING for the oportunity to swing teh gavel
this should have been declared long ago
The Senate Judiciary Committee FISA mark-up meeting from yesterday (they met from 10 a.m. to noon, recessed, and then reconvened from 2:30 p.m. to about 4:30 p.m., all on FISA) is re-airing now on C-SPAN 3, streaming on-line:
http://c-span.org/watch/cs_csp…..p;Code=CS3
This re-airing started at about noon, and should run until about 4 p.m., Eastern.
I watched it last night, but missed the last five minutes, when the actual vote on sending Title I to the floor presumably was held – so I didn’t hear the exact wording of that vote (although it was clear it was pending, and it seemed to be in the form of a “substitute” for the Intelligence Committee bill). So tuning in shortly before 4 p.m. will allow you to hear the short debate about Title II (the immunity provision), and to see how Leahy moved to close down that discussion, if C-SPAN doesn’t cut it off this time.
I posted a quick summary of the meeting, after watching it last night, here:
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..nt-1099889
Marie Roget @ 38
I dunno, just that they simply would not have show it? I still can’t figure out why the came back late on the abortion question tpo Biden?
RevDeb @ 20
Not holding my breath!
I seem to recall that early in his first term Bush made some offhand crack about how things would be so much easier for him if he were a dictator.
He wasn’t joking. It’s like a pathological aversion to even the idea that anyone has the authority to tell him No You Can’t Do That. His is a personality type that should never be put in a position of power, least of all in a constitutional republic based on rule of law, with a limited government composed of dispersed centers of authority meant to check and balance each other.
Because everything he does is only meant to increase his own power, continuing to let him have his way just does yet more damage to the foundations of our liberty.
The thing is, you’d think this would be blazingly obvious to every Democrat in Congress, and yet…
I recall reading a New Yorker profile about Harry Reid some years back.
IIRC, both his parents were alcoholic, he’s completely self-made, and had to work his way through law school as a young father. (He and his wife evidently converted to Mormonism b/c they felt it would be supportive for them and their family, but I grew up in the American West with some very fine folks who are Mormon, so I tend to cut him tons of slack on this point.)
The life stories of both Bill Clinton and Harry Reid suggest that both had to face down really irresponsible, abusive parents, and both seem to have taken that toughness into politics. More power to them; Reid’s clearly up against a dry drunk, so maybe he has some insights that someone of us onlookers lack.
Sometimes kids who did have to face down shitty, unreliable parents turn out to be possess genuine talent for recognizing and facing down assholes. That seems to be true of Bill Clinton, and also of Harry Reid. Seems like they took the right lessons from whatever sh*t life dealt hout to them.
Damn, this is a breath of fresh air.
lhp, or any other lawyer, is there anything to be made of something John Dean raises in his recent book: The legal wacky opinions they have used in court over the years to bolster their positions turn out to have been written and placed in (non-peer reviewed) Law Reviews by their minions specifically for the purpose of bolstering their positions in court.
If I were arguing in court against a brief which relied exclusively on such bogus articles, I would ream the other side out. I would put the Judge on notice that if he relies on any such articles that he will get some unpleasant scrutiny by the appeals court.
Good judges don’t mind the appeals process, but they really hate to be made to look stupid.
cboldt @ 3
I agree about the mistery. The article doesn’t say how they did it; what the “gambit” was. It’s probably no more complicated than just announcing that they’re doing it, regardless of the law.
I’m on hold for Harry Reid’s office. Appears others are calling him too! :)
(gonna say thanks)
readerOfTeaLeaves @ 46
I left him a nice message of thanks, but also that I hoped he realized from his recent experience that President Bush would do whatever it took to get his way and that Democratic voters expected Congressional Democratic leaders to stand up to him.
I managed to avoid all references to Charlie Brown, Lucy, & footballs.
Bargain Countertenor @ 37
It also assumes that Congress will impeach a criminal president.
readerOfTeaLeaves @ 46
I don’t know. We are 7 years into the Bush Presidency and there has been remarkably little facing down. Quite a bit of enabling though.
Got through. The aide said they will stay in session At Least for the weekend, that it hadn’t been determined yet if they will recess for the Holiday. I asked to her please tell Senator Reid that I would urge for him to stay in session for as long as it takes.
She told me she’d pass that along.
I’ll believe it when I seez it!
Mommybrain @ 35
In the end, the job of the blogosphere (since the MSM won’t do it) will be to expose such “Law Reviews” so that their citation value becmes nil.
In the DOJ Motion (to take away NYS’s right to pick its own voting machines) that I blogged about last week, I was struck by the crazy things the AUSA was citing as “evidence”. He was using position papers by advocacy groups–clearly opinion testimony with no foundation that the opinion giver qualifes as an expert.
So, the “evidence” he was relying on for his motion was mostly inadmissable. I expect the judge to exclude it. The AUSA in question really doesn’t seem to have his heart in what he is doing, and I suspect is the victim of some serious arm twisting from above. He is reported by others who have been in court with him to be a much better lawyer than his performance in this case would indicate.
My point is, some things have more value as citations than others. If there are crappy “law reviews” in sheeps clothing out there, that needs to be made VERY public, so that judges and their law clerks will know which ones they are
On Reid: It’s all just words right now. If he actually carries it out, I’ll allow that he’ll have grown at least one elfin-sized ball.
Bargain Countertenor @ 37
Under the Administrative Procedures act (IIRC) you can’t have those kind of successive appointments. If I’m wrong, somebody correct this statement
The Senate will have to be in session pro-forma for the whole holiday break to have any effect–not just for the weekend…
And also: Harry Reid trained as a boxer, add that to what readerOfTeaLeaves says in 45 above.
Throwing a fake punch?
Calling a bluff?
Now that wasn’t so hard, was it, Harry? Good for him — glad to see someone is at least starting to grow a spine.
So, the “evidence” he was relying on for his motion was mostly inadmissable. I expect the judge to exclude it. The AUSA in question really doesn’t seem to have his heart in what he is doing, and I suspect is the victim of some serious arm twisting from above. He is reported by others who have been in court with him to be a much better lawyer than his performance in this case would indicate.
Keep us posted, lhp. Especially if you see him not throwing out the inadmissable evidence. For some reason, though IANAL, this particular point is the one I carried away from Dean’s book thinking We sgould do something about his.
A.Citizen @ 44
While I agree, I do think we should flood his office applauding the pro forma session. Becasue I want him to keep this up… Gotta reward the good stuff to (I learned that in dog training ;-) )
Or drawing a poorly aimed one from the other (dry) guy?
OK, I have got to ask. What is the etymology and derivation for “Junya”?
I recognize it as a reference to Bush, probably from Dubya, in turn from his middle initial, but…but…don’t understand the morphing of those consonants…HELP!
peanutbutter @ 63
It’s southern for Junior..or possibly jejeune.
peanutbutter @ 63
Junior
Hey W, how is that relevancy thing coming along for you? I have not seen anything in today’s press but I thought I saw a WH statement on a CNN or MSNBC scroll criticizing the Restore act out of the House. It said something to the effect that congress has now removed vital tools for the US to use in the war on terror. Did I just dream that? It sounds like a WH talking point. I have not seen anything further on it. I guess their fear campaign may have lost some of it’s lustre.
Marie Roget @ 39
That would have been a difficult position for anyone to be in. I wonder why CNN picked a young woman to ask the “air head” sexist question. Why not a boy asking the guys,”Ferrari or Lambo?”
With all do respect to those who says they would have done it differently, until a person is faced with a similar situation, it is “the courage of the non-combatant” or Monday morning QB. It would be nice if KO had her on to show what pieces of crap Wolfie and CNN are.
looseheadprop @ 19
I thought that “pro forma” in regard to the Congressional session meant more like “in name only” in that only one member has to be present and then only one day out of every three days. I could be wrong about the numbers that have to be present, or for that matter, about the every three days, but I’d sure like to see this clarified. I’ll go back and finish reading the comments that I haven’t gotten to yet and hope.
This is great news…..slightly off topic, did you read this 1st hand account from last night;
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/16/32040/765
Steve-AR @ 68
Yes, I agree. She needs to be on Countdown to tell the story from her pov. MySpace postings don’t cut it when it comes to something like this, frankly. KO would be a great idea.
Have to drive in to work finally. Read you all later.
pow wow @ 42
thanks! the archive isn’t up yet (i hope they post it today), so i can’t tell if they have the last 5 min to show. will try to catch the stream at 4 pm.
‘Bout time, and laudable.
Could they not have done this before Muck-asy?
Also been talking about this on the ‘dog for what 1 year ?
Hmmmmmm..I wonder why?
Army desertion rate highest since 1980
Statistic: Army Desertion Rates Up 80 Percent Since Invasion of Iraq in 2003
Raw
Do I sense a small amount of spine developing?
Franco @ 69
That is interesting and puts a whole new perspective on the critism of Obama and Edwards being too hard on Hillary as well as on those inexplicable boos that popped up during the debate. Good catch.
Your Most Trusted Name In News
from Eschaton by Atrios
CNN: http://marcambinder.theatlanti…..asts_1.php
Maria Luisa, the UNLV student who asked Hillary Clinton whether she preferred “diamonds or pearls” at last night’s debate wrote on her MySpace page this morning that CNN forced her to ask the frilly question instead of a pre-approved query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.
“Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN,” Luisa writes. “I was asked to submit questions including “lighthearted/fun” questions. I submitted more than five questions on issues important to me. I did a policy memo on Yucca Mountain a year ago and was the finalist for the Truman Scholarship. For sure, I thought I would get to ask the Yucca question that was APPROVED by CNN days in advance.”
Now we have SECDEF Gates fucking lying
about the budget impact of the War. He said earlier that they have money to fund the Army through Feb/Mar.
Now, we have to lay off civilians at Army bases?
Those lying fucking bastards.
looseheadprop @ 55
lhp;
When (and if) the judge excludes these bogus citations, what substantive merit will the remainder reflect? Beyond the frivolous, what actual purpose has the AUSA in mind? The import of the AUSA’s ‘case’ appears to be simply to embarrass and impede. Perhaps you have another ‘take’ on this? I simply do not see the AUSA as being ‘helpful’ and this administration can make few claims for supporting respect for law .
Is it true, by the way, that NY state is considering changing the state motto to read: “Live free or Diebold!”?
Hugh @ 52
I agree.
In one respect, it’s taken 7 years.
In another — equally valid — respect, it’s taken 11 months for Reid to get his ‘ducks in a row’, all while Scooter Libby was pardoned, the DoJ USAG firings were revealed, we discovered that Blackwater was undercutting the US military in Iraq, and Hunt Oil further subverted the US military by inking oil deals with Kurdistan.
I completely agree that this this comes far too late. But it’s finally happening.
And I can’t see Reid backing off for one instant; I hope he is throughly p*ssed.
C-SPAN3 is ( now 12:46 CST)playing the Thursday SJC hearing on FISA.
Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) is speaking.
Now Feinstein.
Bumper sticker: Picture of man with top hat & cane. Caption-Woodrow Wilson, no longer our worst president.
Bargain Countertenor @ 37
Then perhaps Harry should introduce legislation that counteracts this flaw in the law – the reasonable people act. Something simple, like:
if the President does not present a candidate after the 120 days of occupation of a recess appointment, then the committee can nominate their own candidate. Additionally, a recess appointment of an assistant position which is holding deferred responsibility due to an unfilled post/an acting director and/or recess appointment must become the posted candidate to vote for approval in committee after the 120 days recess appointment. No “acting” positions allowed in continuance of additional 120 days. If the President views the candidate good enough for recess and or “acting” appointment, then they are viable for committee vote as a candidate should no candidate be presented to the committee. No consecutive appointments of acting director proceeded or preceded by a recess appointment with the same individual or different individuals.
Christy or LHP could draft the wording much better…
readerOfTeaLeaves @ 79
I’m in the camp that will start believing in Reid when he starts delivering results. He doesn’t have to win the votes but he does have to mount a real and sustained opposition.
Hugh @ 76
Great Catch. I recommended. I speculated this was the case this morning in the comments of Scarecrows post. I was summarily dismissed and smacked down by SC. I wish I would have had this link earlier!
OT…From DWT
The Smithsonian is back in the news, subordinating science to the crackpot ideology and thieving rapacity of the Bush regime and its cronies
DWT
It is truly amazing the extent to which the Government infrastructure has been subverted and perverted by the Republican Party. This is further evidence that Bush is a sockpuppet for the coup that was decades in planning and preparation.
OT:
Would be an intersting analogy to compare the dictators Bush & Musharif and their disasterous shared/imposed policies. With a slant toward the fact that Bush went off to play cowboy in Iraq rather than deal with Afganistan and Pakistan like a “real” man/woman would have done.
Real men don’t go to Iran to cause WWII they prevent it by making sure the 50 nukes in Pakistan don’t get into the wrong hands.looseheadprop @ 55
The problem here is they have appointed what – 1000’s of judges, 2 SCOTUS judges, etc etc. Its deep and its vile.
If a Republican wins in 2008 its time to move on out since that will mean at least 4 more years of these insider judges and minions.
Also a question of who to elect as the DEM, what sort of judges they will apppoint.
I am very much of the fear that the DEMs (or one or two of them) would appoint the same pro-biz judges and only differ a bit on the “emotional” issues that are important but don’t stack up when it comes to health/safety/money.
Per my #83
I do think some kind of wording on consecutive appointments stands as LHP noted…
Hugh @ 76
Well then this should be her gaffe and put that with the planted question and a pattern seems to be developing.
This is getting me very angry.
Steve-AR @ 74
Why won’t anyone from the Bush family serve?
Why won’t the media ask Bush why his family won’t serve?
Why won’t the media ask the Administration why his family won’t serve?
It’s Bush’s war, but he only sacrifices the lives of others.
Badwater @ 90
Any young Cheney’s or Rumsfeld’s serving?
eCAHNomics @ 82
Interesting comparison. Wilson, other than being a racist, tried very hard to subvert the Constitution and install the mechanisms of a police state.
jeffxandra @ 16
Time for the “power of the purse” to suspend paychecks for “acting”s.
Steve-AR @ 74
Raw numbers (9/1000) are still minuscule. Would have to be a lot higher than that to influence anybody.
Hugh @ 84
;-)))
Agree again.
But it’s still progress.
Plus, Harry’s the guy who shut down the Senate when the Rethugs were hammering things through two years ago, about the same time that Murtha started to speak out. I thought it was rather creative of Harry, and I admit that given the Senate’s reputation for ‘gentlemen’s agreements’, I get a real kick out of watching Harry Reid pull this kind of sh*t ;-))
Cause the ‘gentlemen’s agreements’ have contributed far too much toward the enabling of the criminal cabal known as Bu$hCo, IMHO. Very seldom does anyone seem to use the rules creatively, so when they do, I’m intrigued. I get a kick out of watching Harry use the rules to do toss a smiley-faced ‘F*ck you” to creeps like Junya ;-)
Now that’s political artistry ;-)
More, please…!!!
Steve-AR @ 92
The most important comparison is that Wilson is the founding father & role model for the neocons.
Ugly: I just heard a portion of the SJC meeting broadcast that I missed last time. Russ Feingold made very clear in debate with Kyl that in the Senate Intelligence Committee “mark-up” of the FISA bill, they were presented with a “fait accompli” – a done deal – by Jay Rockefeller and Kit Bond. Those two (Jay and Kit) agreed to a “bipartisan” compromise bill and language (read: White House bill) privately, in advance, to present to the committee as a whole as a “bipartisan” bill, and further agreed not to vote for any amendments to their two-man deal… Which is why Rockefeller didn’t vote for the Wyden/Feingold amendment (to protect our privacy rights when we travel) which nevertheless somehow managed to get a full hearing in the committee (which little else did, apparently), and which two Republicans ended up voting for.
So there was actually very little real debate on the provisions of this bill in the Senate Intelligence committee, and the 13 Senators who voted in favor of that FISA bill irresponsibly acquiesced to a ramrodded, undemocratic process that avoided thorough debate and careful analysis by the committee membership (who are the handful of Senators in the Senate fully briefed on the TOP SECRET spying operations at issue) of a vitally important and dangerous piece of legislation. [I had thought I heard (so maybe I really did) Whitehouse make some similar reference near the end of the SJC meeting, as well, that the Title II immunity provisions were barely discussed in the Intelligence Committee as a whole, before final passage.]
Unreal.
Prairie Sunshine @ 93
bada BING
can we do that?
do the democrats know they can do that?
if so, let’s MAKE them do that
There’s a report hitting the wires that a court has ruled that the government can use ’state secret’ as an excuse to not reveal wiretapping information.
Thank you ever so much, George. [/snark]
Steve-AR @ 86
I suppose the mutated cold virus that’s killed 10 so far will be handled by prayer. Since Sonny Purdue prayed away the drought in GA, maybe he could pray away the virus. Who needs science?
eCAHNomics @ 94
I agree..but who knows..everything the Gov’t says is a lie..why 1980 and not 1972?
As pleased as I am to see Reid finally sprouting a pair, I can’t help but notice that it took a direct insult to his position for him to pay attention. Had he grasped a year ago what we all knew at the time – that the Bush Administration is an untrustworthy conniving criminal enterprise that cannot be trusted with anything – then maybe Congress could have stayed in session for the entire past year. And maybe the Democrats could have actually prevented the appointment of criminal thugs like Mukasey and Gonzalez and actually, I dunno, protected the Constitution.
Whatever, welcome back to the Real World Harry, you know, the one where interests outside the Beltway have some value?
TexBetsy @ 91
They also serve,
who profit from
the blood and
sacrifice of
others.
Someone has to
make a ‘killin”.
Don’t tax their
patriotism . . .
perris @ 98
No Congress can’t legislate the suspending of individual paychecks. Budgets for Cabinet level departments funds ALL of the department, paychecks/benefits to employees, supplies, travel and so on.
That’s why, when there is no appropriation bill or continuing resolution passed, the Departments that have no funds must shut down.
Congress has two whips — funding and impeachment and is only using one of them, and that not too well.
I’m more anti-forma. No, wait, antipasta. Is that right? No, pasta al forno. That’s it.
There probably isn’t a machine made yet made that can measure how little Bu$hler is likely to care. So much for government work.
the lines to Sen Reid’s office are busy, busy, busy. The voice mail is full.
But I finally spoke to a staff member who sounded pleased and also sounded as if mine was one of many they had received today voicing appreciation for the pro-forma move.
You can reach his office toll-free using these numbers (thanks to katymine)
1 (800) 828 – 0498
1 (800) 614 – 2803
1 (866) 340 – 9281
1 (866) 338 – 1015
1 (877) 851 – 6437
alank @ 105
Must you forno-cate in public?
EvilDrPuma @ 107
Way to give him a pizza your mind, EDP.
readerOfTeaLeaves @ 46
funny you came to that conclusion. i would have come to the opposite conclusion. that the reason why reid has be so UNWILLING to confront the “dry drunk” is because he’s constantly trying to please that drunk in the hopes of some sort of approval or sanity, but none comes, but still he keeps trying… the conclusion comes from the record of caves, and not the 2 times he’s actually shown any backbone to bushite. but hey, if this is the beginning, then let’s turn over a new leaf, and i’m on board the reid bandwagon.
IrishJim @ 85
i skipped that thread altogether.. i didn’t want be “bash HRC, all the time”… i heard the boos, and was disappointed- edwards was not going on about hillary’s hair, or blowjob, or the state of BillHill’s marriage- he was having a legitimate disagreement with her statements and positions. the whole point of a DEBATE. this was not fluff. people booing that are ignorant.
THANK GOD!
Now this is what we elected you to do, Harry!
Hugh @ 108
I remember the cat Dr. from smirkingchimp.com part the first. Howdy doodily, neighbor!
Marie Roget @ 39
Nothing. But she may have frozen, or not wanted to rock the boat–or maybe she was just too nervous and disconcerted to think of it.
Well All Right Harry!
We can be very supportive when you mean up.
Progressives have to get tougher.
Kucinich gets it right the first time (sometimes at least).
WHERE’s the Cheney impeachment in committee?
What’s next!
TGIF!
I thought this was funny in 2002, and I still think it’s funny.
My pro forma life.
looseheadprop @ 55
If Loosehead is still out there, IANAL but am a historian who has well-tried and road tested sleuthing skills in the bibliographic and credential areas. So if I can help, let me know. I check in to Late-nite early every morning: leave me a message there.
CJ @ 36
So why was Mukasey confirmed again?
It’s time to intimidate the scabs who accept these recess appointments. How about if a Democrat got on the House or Senate floor (or a candidate said on the stump): “We are putting you on notice now, that if you take one of these unauthorized jobs, we will scrutinize every action you take. We will ensure that a clean Justice Department prosecutes any hint of favoritism or impropriety, and we will make every effort to ensure that you never work in government again, and that any firm or company you work for never gets another government contract. We will blacken your reputation forever.”
Maybe some of these sleazeballs might think twice about servicing Lord Fauntleroy for his remaining 14 months.
raven @ 43
They do send this stuff going on during commercial breaks over the satellites, and it is available to lots of people who have access to the direct satelite transmission. It would have come out that she was censored AND it would have given those responding to comment upon her real question. Hard to pare out 4-5 minutes of responses.
It just may have encouraged one of the candidates to point out how “fixed” the debates were in terms of corporate control and restricting time to the major candidates rather than allowing others to join in with their positions. If this had happened it would have indicated that Edwards, Obama and Clinton were actually closer to one another than say, Kucinich or Gravel were on many issues.
Xenos @ 47
How is using the legal justifications of idiots likeViet Dinh or John Yoo very much different.John Yoo