« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Reid Chooses Admin-Friendly Measure as Basis for Surveillance Bill
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) is taking an enormous amount of criticism from the left -- see Glenn Greenwald and Christy Hardin Smith, for starters -- for putting the Senate intelligence committee's version of the surveillance bill on the floor as the "base text" for a vote on Monday and offering the Senate Judiciary Committee's version as a standing amendment. In a nutshell, Judiciary's version doesn't provide retroactive telecom immunity and offers more civil-liberties protections. (TPMm homie Julian Sanchez has a good rundown of the differences at Ars Technica.)
Reid spokesman Jim Manley tells us that Reid wants both bills to contend, doesn't intend to favor one over the other, and the reason why the intelligence committee's version is the base text owes to "the order in which they considered the bill." (Intelligence marked it up before Judiciary.)
In a floor statement today, Reid said that he "personally favor[s] many of the additional protections included in the Judiciary Committee bill, and I oppose the concept of retroactive immunity in the Intelligence bill." But it would "be wrong of me to simply choose one committee's bill over the other." He added that the "consensus" emerged between himself, Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT) and Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) that using intelligence's bill as the base text was the right way to go. Reid's full statement is after the jump.
But that decision certainly hasn't satisfied critics of the intelligence bill. Says Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies:
"As leader, Senator Reid chooses what bill to bring to the floor and under what procedures; he could choose to bring to the floor the bill as reported out of the Judiciary committee with much improved privacy protections and no immunity....
He could also choose to bring a compromise, of the kind that he introduced on Monday, for example including the improvements made by Judiciary and the immunity provision from the Intelligence committee. Because of the way the rules in the Senate operate and the narrow margin, it matters what bill is brought to the floor as the 'base bill.' We are very disappointed that he is apparently starting with the bill approved by the Republicans and the administration , instead of the bill that the Judiciary committee approved. Doing so will make it much more difficult for the Senate to pass a bill which contains meaningful privacy protections to replace the Protect America Act. We hoped that the Majority Leader instead would exert his leadership to restore constitutional protections."
Here's Reid's statement, in full:
“I will shortly move to proceed to S. 2248, the FISA Improvement Act of 2007. I spoke briefly on this subject earlier, but I want to provide a more complete explanation of the process by which the Senate will consider this important bill. Earlier this year, the Director of National Intelligence came to Congress and alerted us to what he described as a significant gap that had emerged in our nation’s foreign intelligence gathering capacity.“Members on both sides of the aisle – and from all sides of this important debate – became convinced that this problem was real, and that we had an obligation to address it. Although we may differ on the solutions required, all Senators – both Democrats and Republicans – want to ensure that intelligence professionals have the tools they need to keep our country as safe as possible. We worked in good faith with the Administration through July and August to provide those tools in a way that protects the privacy and liberties of law-abiding Americans. Unfortunately, the final bill signed by President Bush fell well short of that goal.
“Many other Democrats and I opposed the so-called Protect America Act. That’s why we made sure that it had a six-month sunset so that we could come back to do a better job of ensuring judicial and congressional oversight of these sensitive activities. As my colleagues know, the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees share jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Both Committees have worked diligently over the past few months, this hard work has resulted in two different versions of legislation to improve FISA – S. 2248 – reported out of the Committees. I consulted extensively with Chairman Rockefeller and Chairman Leahy about the best way for the Senate to consider this subject.
“I have determined that in this situation, it would be wrong of me to simply choose one committee’s bill over the other. I personally favor many of the additional protections included in the Judiciary Committee bill, and I oppose the concept of retroactive immunity in the Intelligence bill. But I cannot ignore the fact that the Intelligence bill was reported favorably by a vote of 13-2, with most Democrats on the committee supporting that approach. I explored the possibility of putting before the Senate a bill that included elements of both two committee bills. Earlier this week, I used Senate Rule 14 to place two bills on the calendar.
“The first – S. 2440 – consists of Titles I and III of the Intelligence bill, but did not include Title II on retroactive immunity. The second bill – S. 2441 – consists of Title I of the Intelligence bill and Titles II and III of the Judiciary bill. But after consulting further with Chairman Rockefeller and Chairman Leahy, a consensus emerged among the three of us that the best way to proceed would be by regular order. Both Chairmen agreed with this approach.
“Under regular order, and the rules of the Senate governing sequential referral, I will move to proceed to S. 2248 – the bill reported by each committee. When that motion to proceed is adopted, the work of both committees will be before the Senate. Because of the order in which they considered the bill, the Intelligence Committee version will be the base text, and the Judiciary Committee version will be automatically pending as a substitute amendment.
“In the weeks since the two committees acted, Senators Rockefeller and Leahy have been working hard to narrow the difference between their two versions of the bill. The ranking Republicans, Senators Bond and Specter, have been included in many of these conversations. I expect that when we begin debate on the bill, there will be amendments to incorporate many of the Judiciary Committee provisions into the Intelligence Committee text.
“In my view, that will make the final product stronger. There is one issue that cannot be resolved through informal negotiation. As some are aware, the Intelligence Committee’s bill provides the telephone companies with retroactive immunity from lawsuits filed by their customers for privacy violations. Many members, myself included, believe that such a grant of immunity is unwise. I expect there will be a full debate on this subject next week.
“Senators Specter, Feinstein, Whitehouse and others are working to craft a compromise that might give the phone companies some relief – but allow the lawsuits to go forward in a manner that would preserve accountability. In one way or another, we must ensure that President Bush is held accountable for his actions. It is important for the Senate to complete work on this bill next week to allow time for the Senate and House to produce a final bill. Our ultimate goal is a bill that commands broad bipartisan support in the Congress and in the country. The process I just outlined offers us the best opportunity to do so.”
Comments (51)
BlueInTexas wrote on December 14, 2007 5:37 PM:Busy, Busy, Busy
That's all I get when I called Reid's Senate Office. Hope some of y'all made it through.
chisholm wrote on December 14, 2007 5:47 PM:You know what's amazing? Karl Rove was right: the Republicans didn't lose in 2006.
ProDem wrote on December 14, 2007 5:52 PM:What a Piece of Shit!! Can't we get rid of this guy? - Is there some way to do that?
Anonymous wrote on December 14, 2007 5:54 PM:Senator Reid has broken his oath of office.
He is a disgrace.
PJ wrote on December 14, 2007 5:58 PM:I am the prophet PJ-oracle. I foresee the intelligence bill passing by one vote and the judiciary version not getting a chance to be considered. If I'm right, I will post my e-mail on here and someone can take me with them to Vegas where we will clean up. C'mon, I'm predicting 1 vote! I gotta be good!
Peace!!
ConcernedCitizen wrote on December 14, 2007 6:05 PM:PJ
Where, when, and by who does this end?
This is why Bloomberg will launch an independent run for the white house. He will have my vote.
Hey you, Nevada voters, replace this mother fucker Harry Reid. Obviously his magic underwear is not working.
lib4 wrote on December 14, 2007 6:11 PM:What exactly has Harry Reid done to prove he is actually a Democrat....ohh yeah I forgot...he crawls into a corner when ever he sees his shadow or whenever someone on Fox News says something mean about him....
Grandpa Harry go home....I am sick sick of this capitulating nonsense from Dem "Leadership"
Can we just have one just one Dem with the balls to put this man in his plave along with the outher useless might as well be Republican Presidential Enablers....
F'in A F@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!!
ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!@!!!!!!
Official A wrote on December 14, 2007 6:16 PM:Sad to say the Democratic Party itself is DINO. Soon it will go the way of the Whigs, thanks to Feinstein, Schumer, Pelosi, Clinton, this bastard Reid, and the rest of the Bush-enablers. The lobbyists might want to expense those campaign contributions, they're going to amortize far too quickly to be considered capital investments.
selise wrote on December 14, 2007 6:23 PM:that's only the first part of the reid's statement. he did something very strange when he submitted the cloture petition - after submitting the motion, he asked for unanimous consent to waive something (i'm going to have to go to my recording to figure out what, unless tpm has the full transcript). once that was agreed to, he withdrew the motion.
Zoyd Wheeler wrote on December 14, 2007 6:35 PM:Okay, some of you still seem mystified by the collaboration of top Democrats with this administration. It has been going on for 7 years now and you can't blame it on being the minority party anymore. This is just more proof of the reality that we effectively, and some say actually, live in a ONE PARTY STATE. This country is governed by ONE cohesive group of privilidged people.
Remember the cry about giving into the terrorists, and giving up our freedoms, and changing our way of life. Well open your eyes it has happened with the blessing of both parties. But one thing is clear, defeating terrorism means defeating al queda the Republicans and the Democrats! (ship them all to Saudi)
Patrick wrote on December 14, 2007 6:36 PM:This is further proof that the Democrats don't dislike the idea of spying on Americans. They just want that power for themselves. It doesn't matter what party is in the White House in 2008, as long as Congress is in the hands of the other party to limit damage. If the Democrats control Congress and the White House we will be just where we are now.
JimBob wrote on December 14, 2007 6:37 PM:Does Reid think for a minute that the Reps would stand on senatorial procedural niceties if they wanted their bill brought to the floor first? Come on, Harry, you gotta learn to play rough ONCE in a while!
Thrackazog wrote on December 14, 2007 6:44 PM:“Senators Specter, Feinstein, Whitehouse and others are working to craft a compromise that might give the phone companies some relief – but allow the lawsuits to go forward in a manner that would preserve accountability." Ooh, Arlen and DiFi collaborating on a bill. I'm sure it'll go to every length 'preserve accountability'. I'm also sure they'll slip Whitehouse a mickey to prevent him from saying anything during the collaboration.
Wake me after the revolution.
starwheel wrote on December 14, 2007 7:48 PM:I'm tired of being an abused spouse of the Democrats.
Anonymous wrote on December 14, 2007 7:53 PM:Thers a long list of Democratics that need to be thrown out..Reid, Pelosi, Feinstein, Schumer, Hoyer to name a few...and almost all of the Republicans, starting with Arlen Specter, McConnel, etc....you guys paying attention..?
MNPundit wrote on December 14, 2007 7:54 PM:Somebody really needs to cover his house in toilet paper or eggs.
Nothing else will get these idiots' attention.
johnyblue wrote on December 14, 2007 8:00 PM:Harry Ried I hereby charge you with high treason. Treason to nullify the constitution of the United states and using a pug Trojan horse as a disingenuous mode of transport.
DallasNE wrote on December 14, 2007 8:07 PM:I'm going to go the other way on this one.
If Reid plays his cards right (and that is a big if), then this could be a great political move.
Reid has set the stage by saying he prefers the second bill meaning he will vote against the first bill. This gives the Democrats the advantage of making the Republicans vote for torture and vote for giving the telecoms a get out of jail free card. It also gives the Democrats a chance to say they stood up against torture and against giving anybody a get out of jail free card.
The risk is that Reid can't hold the Democrats together and the damn thing actually passes. I believe with Reid doing it this way he takes the filibuster off the table. The second vote should be pretty much the opposite of the first vote. Will Bush then veto that bill? Probably, but who cares at that point.
MNPundit wrote on December 14, 2007 8:40 PM:The flaw in your reasoning is that Republicans only need 50 votes* to pass something, while Democrats require 60.
*Perhaps less if more of our presidential candidates don't return to vote
Michael Stevens wrote on December 14, 2007 8:56 PM:I've just read 10 different articles on this and NOT ONE even beings to explain Reid's true rationale for pushing this through.
It seems that Reid has even refused to respect Chris Dodd's hold on this bill! Further, it seems Reid has told Dodd that any filibuster will have to be done this weekend. 10 days before Christmas, while the political press is shopping or in Iowa. While all the Democratic presidential nominees are focused anywhere but Washington.
So why is Reid doing this? Don't get me wrong, I understand politically machiavellian tactics. I just don't understand Reid's underlying motivation.
There is obviously an underlying political agenda here, so what the hell is it?
Possibilities:
1 Fear of being blamed for a terror incident. This "might" have some relevance if the current bill was going to expire during the recess, it isn't. The current bill doesn't expire for over two months. That means that there can be no fear, so this explanation doesn't wash.
2 Reid wants to help Bush. As much as I find Reid to be horribly ineffective, I cannot honestly believe he would do anything to help the Bush Administration.
3. Pressure and money from the telecoms.
Absent any other motivation, I can only surmise that Reid and our Democrats have been bought out by the big telecoms.
If this is the case, then Reid probably IS telling the truth when he says he is being pressured by his fellow Democrats to let telecom immunity come up for a vote. The big telecoms may have threatened to withhold support of all Democrats in 2008 if they don't receive immunity.
Why is Reid doing it now? Because it's two weeks from Christmas and three weeks from the Iowa primaries. This bill's top senatorial objectors are immersed in Iowa politics and cannot afford to spend time filibustering. The political media celebrate the holidays like everyone else. And right now, the media's attention focused everywhere but Washington.
It's 10 days before Christmas and 3 weeks before the most important presidential primary vote. In other words, the perfect time to slip a very unpopular bill under the media radar.
Michael Stevens wrote on December 14, 2007 9:20 PM:>DallasNE said: "If Reid plays his cards right (and that is a big if), then this could be a great political move."
I hate to say it, but your scenario is a fantasy.
Were your scenario accurate, Reid wouldn't be pushing this through on "take out the trash day", 10 days before Christmas and 3 weeks before the Iowa primary. (And really, because of the holidays, this may as well be 1 week before the primary)
In any event, we only have a 1 vote majority in the Senate. Joe Lieberman will definitely vote for this bill, making it a tie vote. That's assuming ALL of our Democrats return from Iowa and ALL of our Democratic Senators vote against it.
Even if all of the Democratic Senators show up for the vote and all of them vote against it, because of Lieberman, Cheney will get to make the call.
This is a CON. Plain an simple, the Democratic Senate is Conning us. We Democrats need 60 votes to get things through the Senate, but the telecoms only need 50. Everyone inside DC knows that simply allowing this to achieve cloture and come up for a vote guarantees its passage.
And because of the underhanded way this is being put forward, every Senatorial Democrat will retain political cover because they will vote against the actual bill. In reality, this is nothing less than a complete sell-out to the telecoms. Of course, the telecoms know the political reality and will certainly reward our Democrats for their complicity.
If this comes up for a vote, it WILL pass. I believe Reid is just doing what his fellow Democratic Senators are asking of him. I suspect the only way to stop it now is to convince Hillary, Obama, and Biden to come back to DC, revive press interest in the story, and assist with the filibuster.
KM wrote on December 14, 2007 9:41 PM:I see a man. A man with tears running down his cheeks. His face is glowing red, but it's not with the accompaniment of hate. Common thought says he is angry, but all senses elude to the representation of embodied composure; a quixotic smile visibly tucked in the corner of his mind.
He is standing on the lawn of the Capitol building in Washington D.C.
In front of him, a fire rages and its heat lashes out at his body. The dancing sparks are reflected in his eyes--steady as glass--their performance echoing Revere's blazing sprint through the countryside. He is in love... in love with his country for what it was meant to be. And he wants his hero back. Ignoring the pandemic of public immobility, he has taken it into his own hands to rescue her. He wants his liberty, and he wants her brought home safely.
Standing tall and with the flag of freedom flowing steadily around his neck, he gazes upon the blazing wreckage of dishonesty and immorality which were once majestic tributes to justice--built by visionaries of a different time. The steadiness of his thoughts creates a time warp--a bubble of pristine silence--as millions of patriots celebrate with ferocious happiness, like savages, amongst the phoenix rising from the ashes.
He is smiling, but beyond the present. He is smiling for the past, and the coming future.
Crust wrote on December 14, 2007 10:19 PM:What a lame excuse from Senator Majority Leader Reid. In favoring the Intelligence Committee version he is ignoring Senator Dodd's hold. This by a leader who has previously considered holds sacrosanct even when it was a single Republican Senator opposing very popular measures.
efinnpissed wrote on December 14, 2007 10:29 PM:I really want to say something intelligent and thoughtful to express my hopelessness over this dickhead's continuing inaction, but I just can't stop thinking about punching him in his goddamned face and knocking his fucking teeth down his throat. There, I said it.
I am seriously tired of getting kicked in the balls by these candy asses on almost a daily basis now!
I pray for Jim Webb to chase Reid down in the Hart Building hallway and cave-in his sternum with a well placed side kick (GOD that would be GREAT!!).
...while he's at it, McConnell needs his greasy-plastic face smashed-in, too!
PJ wrote on December 14, 2007 11:12 PM:KM... WOW!!! That's me! PJ-oracle! Are you a prophet too?
Peace!
KM wrote on December 15, 2007 12:01 AM:God Bless America before it's too late!
PJ
PJ, it's you, and me, and everyone else who believes. I will die for liberty.
A prophet is a kind label that I'm not sure I deserve. A son of liberty is more likely the accurate.
lambert strether wrote on December 15, 2007 12:02 AM:Please, just kill me.
Reid's whole statement is nothing but The Process Dodge:
http://correntewire.com/the_democratic_party_and_the_process_dodge
Thucydides Junior wrote on December 15, 2007 12:31 AM:I do not understand this gentlemanly approach Reid seems to be taking. The Repubs chose bills from different committees over another ALL THE TIME. It makes me think he is using procedures as a smokescreen for other pressures.
If he is talking with Leahy and Rockefeller, then I beleive that yes, the telecomms are pulling out all the stop son this one.
Who knows what the telcomms are doing?
Josh - can you and your excellent crew find out? Can you publicize their behind the scenes actions over this weekend?
CranialRectalLoopback wrote on December 15, 2007 1:18 AM:Waterboard the Mormon bastard in his fucking Magic Underwear.
PJ wrote on December 15, 2007 1:20 AM:KM, did you get that statement from somewhere? Is that your heartfelt emotion? If it is, oh what the heck, if it isn't, you and Patrick Henry need to talk. Such is the spoken word of a true patriot. I love my country. I just want it back!
God Bless the United States, before it's too late!
Peace, and most of all LOVE! (yeah, I stole that line from Paul, not McCartney.)
Please read only the red words in the Bible. You'll be progressive too.
PJ
CranialRectalLoopback wrote on December 15, 2007 1:26 AM:The right-wing nut jobs have always stated that it is better to fight the terrorists there rather than fight them here. Well, my friends, the terrorists ARE here. Perhaps it is time we fight them.
Arabflora wrote on December 15, 2007 1:31 AM:It's not even a close call. If Reid had any balls whatsoever he would have moved the no-immunity bill and forced the Rethugs to defeat it. Instead of arguing process, he damn-well should have argued principle.
Anyone looking for Uncle Harry to pull a rabbit out of his hat and make this right is just not paying attention.
Our constitutional democracy, our representative form of government... just like long summer evenings and stable weather patterns, they're gone, baby, long gone.
It's time to reap the whirlwind.
Michael Stevens wrote on December 15, 2007 1:33 AM:@ Thucydides Junior
Reid isn't taking a gentlemanly approach. He is actively trying to sneak through a bill while the media's attention is elsewhere.
Gentlemanly bills aren't introduced on a Friday afternoon, 10 days before Christmas, 3 weeks before the most wide-open Iowa Presidential Primary in at past 50 years, for a vote to be held the following Monday.
Quite simply, our Democratic Senators have caved to the telecom lobby and are using an underhanded method to get this passed without actually having to vote for it.
Reid cannot be solely to blame for this. He is obviously under heavy pressure from many Senate Democrats to SNEAK this bill through the Senate. And even though each of our fine Democratic Senators will give themselves plausible deniability by voting Against the actual bill, each knows that the bill is guaranteed to pass if it reaches cloture. 49 Republicans, Leiberman, and Cheney will be enough to see it through.
Bills the Democrats hold dear are continually denied the 60 votes of cloture. Yet Reid seems intent to deliver this Republican bill with 50 or fewer votes.
Our only real hope is Obama, Hillary, and Biden. Each of them have pledged support for Chris Dodd's filibuster of this bill. If each simply announced "plans" to come to Washington and assist in the filibuster, Reid would be almost guaranteed to cancel the vote.
There's a reason this bill has been introduced on a Friday to be passed on a Monday a week before Christmas and Iowa.
Bills like this don't do well under a media spotlight. If all Four Democratic Presidential candidates simply announce their "intent" to abandon Iowa in order to filibuster this bill, the bill's Democratic supporters will fold like a cheap card table. Reid and the other Democratic Senators who have caved to the telecom lobby won't dare risk the MASSIVE media spotlight of a joint filibuster by Obama, Hillary, Biden, and Dodd. (Realistically, Hillary and Obama would probably be enough).
The only hope we have of stopping this lies with Obama, Hillary, and Biden. Reid will hide from the press this weekend, Obama, Hillary, and Biden cannot. We can only hope that the press can get each of them on the record before the vote. Each have pledged to support the filibuster. If either Hillary or Obama actually announce plans to actually filibuster, the others are bound to follow.
Obama and/or Hillary will have to announce plans to filibuster soon, the vote is scheduled for noon Monday.
pointus wrote on December 15, 2007 3:04 AM:Reid, that eunuch, that timid, corrupt old piece of shit, is selling us all down the river. He is taking a dump on the Constitution, and spitting in the faces of all of those who worked our asses off to return congress to a Democratic majority. What a useless pile of trash to have as leader of the majority party.
parrot wrote on December 15, 2007 3:59 AM:Harry, ever read "Fall of the Third Republic"? No, I guess you haven't...
In any case, when will the FISA laws that were broken be enforced? Never? If not, what is the point of Congress in the first place?
jimbo92107 wrote on December 15, 2007 4:00 AM:Time to make that correction by Reid's name. It should be (R-NV).
gleeindc wrote on December 15, 2007 8:18 AM:I used to try to be nonsexist and just use the word spineless, now my vocabulary runs to words like "impotent." I have been a Democrat since 1971, when I registered to vote (with a brief hiatus to protest the local party's choice of Marion Barry to run for mayor again). If I didn't fear the fundie right so much, I would gladly leave the pusillanimous Democrats in a snap.
Desider wrote on December 15, 2007 9:13 AM:They probably have Reid by the cojones over some land deal in Vegas, so either he continues to cooperate on blocking Dems and pushing forth crap Republican bills, or he goes to the clinker.
Funny how Republicans stopped complaining about Reid's land deals quite some time ago.
Doc--the pissed off-vet wrote on December 15, 2007 9:14 AM:Fuck all these SUCKASS bush bitches.They need to be taken out back an SHOT in the heaD.That gos for all the gop--bush asslickers.
Anonymous wrote on December 15, 2007 10:18 AM:This is just additional evidence to support the conclusion that I should vote for Kucinich or Paul. Seriously, everybody but the so-called "fringe candidates" have consistently shown a mixture of poor judgment and hunger for power.
Bullsmith wrote on December 15, 2007 10:18 AM:I have never been so disappointed in the Democrats. The MCA was an abomination, but this is just so craven and disgusting.
Why do Democrats spend more time appeasing the Republican base than they do representing those who actually voted for them.
If there is any justice in the world, Harry Reid's political career is finished. But there is no justice anymore, congress got rid of it.
improper wrote on December 15, 2007 10:23 AM:One party two faces.
If no else has mentioned it, Harry Reid is a coward and a pussy.
po wrote on December 15, 2007 11:23 AM:I just sent this to the DSCC
"To Whom it may concern (if anyone): Please remove my name from your mailing list and telephone solicitation list. Harry Reid's decision to introduce telecom immunity as the FISA "fix" bill is the last straw. I cannot support a party that will not support the nation. It's a shame it had to come to this but I expected much more from the Demoratic Senate leadership. So much more."
I urge everyone else to do something similar. Doubt it'll do anything, but it might spare some porr intern or volunteer from my anger the next time they call.
po wrote on December 15, 2007 11:25 AM:Note to Harry: Providing protection to the telecoms is not part of your job description. Upholding and protecting the Constitution, however, is. Just thought you might want to know since it seems as if you, and many others, D and R, have forgotten.
KM wrote on December 15, 2007 12:18 PM:PJ, it's mine.
Goldspinner wrote on December 15, 2007 2:54 PM:And it's just the tip of the iceberg..
Reid's compromised. What's up with the filter?
anon wrote on December 15, 2007 5:53 PM:A few weeks ago I got a fund raising call from the DNC and then short thereafter a call from the DSCC.
The callers knew about some of my contributions, the call seemed targeted at mid-level contributors. They both used a line about the "important work going on right now in Congress to fight Bush." I said "No, I will continue to give to Democrats on an individual basis, based largely on how effectively they are standing up to the administration but I will not give to the leadership or the party in general until they stop caving in on important issues. I understand compromise but I'm really angry about telcom immunity, the FISA courts, Mukasey, the war budget, the ineffective investigations, and so on. I'm specifically mad at Reid and Pelosi. They may be in a tough spot but they are not using their bully pulpit, Congressional procedure, or anything else to fight Bush and turn things around. They are short sighted and/or in league with Bush. No. Money. Period. Until they are gone."
There was a long pause and then the person on the phone, both times, said "We are getting a lot of that. People are really mad about Mukasey and FISA. But, you know, they are doing a lot of other important work." I asked what this other important work might be but both times I was told "Well, it's important. You don't like Bush right? And we are working for families and health care and important domestic issues." They were utterly unconvincing and, no, I did not contribute. I'll probably end up giving slightly more than I did last year, not a lot but more than any other contribution I make during the year, and I'm sticking the recommended Kos and Atrios candidates and/or giving to NGOs like Human Rights Watch, my state ACLU, and EFF. No $500 to the DNC.
I don't get it. Has this kind of disconnect been there all along and I just didn't notice? I'm not sure how the Dems can continue as a party if they really are no different from the Republicans and the leadership works to keep it that way? I never had high hopes for Pelosi or Reid but I never thought of them as the enemy. Now, I'd contribute to any candidate running against the, probably even a Republican and I think I've given to, oh, two Republicans (both local elections) in my life.
Just venting but...: Bastards!
pointus wrote on December 15, 2007 6:58 PM:Taking a tip from Po, I sent the following to DLCC@dlcc.org and cc'd it to info@dscc.org --
To the DLCC & DSCC,
Please remove my name from your fundraising lists.
As long as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the rest of the Democratic "leadership" continue to aid and abet the Bush administration by procedurally advancing telecom immunity and torture (among other hideous things) while funding Bush's illegal war, I will not give one more dime to your party. It's time to grow a pair, folks.
Sincerely,
john ryan wrote on December 16, 2007 11:32 PM:(my name & address)
Didn't some sage utter not a dimes worth of difference between those so called opposition parties? Now we are reminded why Gore didn't win by enough to avoid a Supreme intervention. Democrats do not have any respect for their voters, only fear of those who will never vote for them. Time to break out the Yippie ploy of campaiging for Nixon on the theory it has to get alot worse before it gets any better. How can anyone support these capitulators ever again? I am proud i voted for Nader and would do it again. Ralph would never pull a harry.
dave wrote on December 17, 2007 11:44 AM:This is simply unforgivable. Reid has to go!
Anonymous wrote on December 19, 2007 2:06 PM:"We worked in good faith with the Administration through July and August..".
The democratic "leadership" worked in good faith with the people who Big Lied this nation into unleashing war.
A four year old might fairly ask, "Why"?