The bill. EFF doesn’t like it. The ACLU doesn’t like it. Greenwald has more round-up. Kagro X games it out. The Dodd is opposed; Feingold is opposed; Dodd and Feingold are opposed (we do note that the word ‘filibuster’ does not appear); while Barack Obama, #1 Democrat, is silent.
The point of telecom immunity is to protect the Bush administration – and those in Congress who enabled them – from having to answer for what they have done. There’s no other good reason for it.
June 19, 2008 at 6:36 pm
You’re appealing when you’re terse.
June 19, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Off with thier heads
June 19, 2008 at 8:01 pm
…Thanks you for the opportunity to listen in on yr cell calls.
June 19, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Reid can still block the legislation.
If it gets past Reid though, I fully expect every “change” and “experience” candidate to filibuster, and in the mean time put some pressure on Reid.
June 19, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Also, what’s it take to get a new banner around here? It’s always screwing with the site tag line.
June 19, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Dear Teh Editors:
You’re cute when you’re shrill.
But next time, could you speak a little closer to my flag pin?
June 20, 2008 at 8:00 am
Well that’s no problem, Dodd takes checks, charge, or mortgage points. Ten years free cable and Dodd will give you his famous “dirty sanchez amendment.”
June 20, 2008 at 10:03 am
Posturing aside, does anybody know who’s opposing the éminence grise on this one, Hoyer? Because if the Rethuglicans show any intelligence (for once) they’d put up a moderate with a history of activism against the violation of privacy laws, and run ads about Hoyer shepherding this bill along.
Personally, I’d rather have a moderate Rep to a conservative Dem or in this case, a sleazy Dem like Hoyer who loves him that telecom campaign money. Of course, then we could try to push in a progressive Dem the next time around, by my way of thinking.
June 20, 2008 at 10:23 am
Balakirev:
I’d like a “moderate” Republican too, if they gave a shit about civil liberties. Problem is, they don’t.
While Democratic leadership is wholly corrupt, stupid, ineffectual, sleazy and/or awful — and to a person should be tried, sentenced and hanged for treason — it’s only Democrats who are fighting against this travesty on the Hill.
Every single Republican is in lockstep support of the measure. This is, in no small part, the problem. A majority of Democrats in the house are against this “compromise”. A good number are in the Senate as well. If there were even a handful of Republicans who thought “hey, you know what, this sucks” they could help kill it.
But they don’t. I fucking hate the Democrats who have enabled this atrocity to happen. But, at the same time, there is literally no one else, unless a libertarian could win a conservative district or two, who votes the right way on civil liberties.
Moderate Republicans don’t exist anymore. And if they do, they’re Democrats.
Fuckers. I hate these bastards. I hope Hoyer gets eaten by baboons.
June 20, 2008 at 11:00 am
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/bush1.jpg
El Ultimo Presidente Arbusto Menos
June 20, 2008 at 11:10 am
Two words for Steny:
amoebic dysntery.
June 20, 2008 at 11:23 am
they are all fscking scum, not just the administration. The Repugs and the Democrats are all on the take. Sure, the Dems are less likely to be completely fscking evil with things like the environment, abortion rights, schooling and health care, but other than that they are pond scum just like their buddies across the aisle. There is no such thing as a left wing in Washington, everyone in the Democratic party is now somewhere right of Nixon, except maybe for Dennis Kucinich. Fuck the repugs goes without saying. But something has to be done about the goddamn democrats too.
June 20, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Jay B, gotta say, I like your passion. And I tend to agree, under Gingrich, the Rethugs drove all the liberals and nearly all the moderates out of their party. Are you sure, though, that every Rethug voted for the FISA telecom-love-in bill?
And how do we get to someone like Hoyer, who thinks Democratic voters are pretty will stuck with him, if not by voting in some kind of Rethug, instead? I’m all for discussion of any other method, short of physical threats. After all, I’m not a Rethug, so torture is out of the question.
June 20, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Ron Paul was not present so he didn’t vote. But I am pretty sure he would have voted against it.
Tim Johnson(R) of Illinois voted against it as well.
June 20, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Johnson was the only Republican to vote no. 123 Democrats voted no, 108 voted yes.
10 Republicans didn’t vote (also, what is up with Paul not voting—shouldn’t this have been sort of an important one for him?)
—- NOT VOTING 13 —
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cannon
Gilchrest
Gohmert
Jones (NC)
Paul
Peterson (PA)
Reynolds
Rush (D)
Stark (D)
Tiahrt
Visclosky (D)
Weller
Full roll call:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll437.xml
June 20, 2008 at 1:31 pm
And how do we get to someone like Hoyer, who thinks Democratic voters are pretty will stuck with him, if not by voting in some kind of Rethug, instead?
Primaries. We got Al Wynn out, and while Steny’s got more juice, Hoyer’s in an increasingly african-american district in MD. There can’t be a shortage of great black candidates there — it’s a big issue with the Black Caucus as it is, as they correctly cite the illegal wiretapping on King as an analogous issue — and that’s a better option than hoping there’s a Republican that will vote against his or her party.
Ron Paul was not present so he didn’t vote. But I am pretty sure he would have voted against it.
For a guy that one would figure this is central to his belief system — where the fuck was he?
Tim Johnson(R) of Illinois voted against it as well.
I stand corrected. A single Republican. One must be tempted to check if he voted against it because he thought it was too much of a compromise.
June 20, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Obama supports the bill. Lovely – the inevitable consequence of lesser evilism. He clearly knows he can count on teh liberals no matter how far to the right he moves, as long as he’s still better than McCain on at least on issue. So why not screw them over?
June 20, 2008 at 3:54 pm
While Democratic leadership is wholly corrupt, stupid, ineffectual, sleazy and/or awful — and to a person should be tried, sentenced and hanged for treason — it’s only Democrats who are fighting against this travesty on the Hill.
Thanks for the reminder, Jay. Onward. Sigh.
June 20, 2008 at 5:30 pm
What we really need is a proportionate election system for Congress, so that minority parties matter far more. And perhaps a single term presidency. Or no presidency, at all. Nobody should have that much power. I’ve been saying that for decades, and Junior’s been kind enough to prove it.
June 20, 2008 at 7:12 pm
I came here for teh funny, and this ain’t it.
…
sigh.
Where’s that “two dirts” post archived at?
June 20, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Rarely is the question asked, “Are them Dems a bunch of corporate cocksuckers, too?”
June 20, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Mix the two dirts. Mix them.
June 21, 2008 at 6:57 am
Every animal in the zoo is different. It isn’t so simple as, they all suck. They all suck in so many different ways,
June 21, 2008 at 11:02 am
Yesterday’s “yes” votes are here, along with home page links.
June 21, 2008 at 10:59 pm
come on. why do you listen to this guy? he’ll only get you in trouble.