Chris Dodd on FISA: Gives a shout out to Glenn Greenwald
By John Amato Monday Feb 11, 2008 8:31am
Sen. Chris Dodd spoke out against immunity for the telecoms on the Senate floor Monday night as they prepare to vote on the new FISA bill today and quoted our pal, Glenn Greenwald. (rough transcript)
Dodd: And the idea that this body would grant retroactive immunity in the face of these challenges and deny the courts an opportunity to determine at the mere request of a president....the major companies for years on end can sweep up---vacuum up to use the Church committees language, every telephone conversation, every fax , every email of millions and millions of Americans is a precedent I don't think we would want to have left as part of our heritage in coming generations. And believe me they will look back to us...Constitutional lawyer and author Glenn Greenwald expressed the high stakes this way, Mr. President and I quote:
'The Bush administration will be gone in eleven months, but in the absence of some meaning accountability all of this will remain. If these theories remain undisturbed and unchallenged. And all of these crimes go un-investigated and unpunished, that will have a profound impact on changing our national character and further transforming the type of country we are.'
Login or Register to post comments.
Cool
"...further transforming the type of country we are."
Maybe it will just further change the perception of the type of country we are. Many used to believe this country stood for justice and democracy even though then (as now) that was a big lie.
Considering Dodd's relevance in the presidential primaries, it's not surprising at all to see him turning to the blogosphere for his material.
Watched Dodd speak on FISA amnesty for 2 and half hrs last night. Our Senate is using unity and will vote today to allow w to break the law again and give everyone involved amnesty.
So far, he has admitted torture, spying on Americans without a warrant and punked on WMD's in Iraq.
The Dems have decided to not hold them accountable to win elections instead. Hope for the Dems to do the right thing, will be ended today.
If this is not broken government, what is?
Can ONE Senator make aa difference?
Way to go Glenn!
Senator Dodd: Just Do It.
Say it with me folks... "Fascist Dictatorship".
Ruling by 'whatever the hell the presidunce feels like' is NOT acceptable. Bring back the rule of law and arrest the war criminals NOW.
Yup, yup...two words...DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. If the Bush Administration is left unchallenged and unaccountable for their eight year nightmare, how much farther will the next Administration go? We have already lost our right to privacy, the protections of Habeas Corpus, corporations are operating practically tax-free and are allowed to have major role in dictating Federal Law and Policy.
This man is the ONLY congress-critter who is really working hard to preserve our constitution and save our country from corporatism.
And if you remember your history, corporatism IS fascism, according to Il Duce himself.
I think that since Dodd was able to get out of the bubble while campaigning for President he was able to actually talk to real people. Only a few know that this government is broken and that this administration has sent this country back years, both morally and physically. The GOP IS BANKRUPT and they don't care who they take with them as long as it isn't a BUSH. Loyalty of party over country has ruined the GOP. We can't count on Reid he is empty and Nancy is one of them.
Thank you Senator Dodd for keeping your word one of the few people whom you can still trust what they say.
I want to see the senate ditch Harry Reid and put Dodd in his place.
Otay @ 12:
They'd never do it. I get the feeling real leadership scares the hell out of them. They're afraid the bullies might threaten to send them a nasty note again.
Dangerous precedent set by a dangerous president.
You have to admire Chris Dodd. He's got the courage to not only talk about preserving our democracy and Constitution but to actually attempt to do it.
I really like the things Barrack Obama has to say and I want desperately to believe that change for the better will happen. At the same time, though, I don't believe he can or will effect that change. Does anybody know if Obama and Clinton are there to support Dodd or are they on the campaign trail? If they're not, what change do they really represent?
I love Chris Dodd. I'm sorry he dropped out of the race. He does a good job in the Senate though and is better able to serve there.
Our government is broken, plain and simple. That will be proved out today. It is hard to stay hopeful of real, positive change. Nothing will ever be uncovered and nobody will ever be held to account. Sad and devastating for our country.
This immunity deal strikes at the very heart of our democracy.
It eviscerates the Rule of Law.
It undermines the checks and balances that are the very lifeblood of our government.
It sends the unambiguous message:
Congress will serve corporations, not the people.
Shame on you, Congress. For shame!
Congress today is plunging a knife into the very heart of Democracy.
Yes, sir, Mr. President, whatever you say, sir. Protection for you and your lawbreaking allies is more important than the oath I took to defend the Constitution.
I just did a cursory look through both Clinton and Obama's websites. Niether appears to mention FISA or Americans' Constitutional rights. Maybe I need to take more time with each site to find their stand on this topic.
Right the freaking Dems will save us. Just like they ended this war when the voters put them back in the game in Congress.
Right, sure, uh huh.
xpj1000 @ 15:
Unlike Edwards, Hillary and Obama can't even be bothered to speak out forcefully against telecom immunity. It's too frightening to take on leadership skills, I imagine.
Have no doubt... the next Democratic president that has a GOP-controlled congress WILL BE IMPEACHED. They will do it, they are already planning to do it. It doesn't matter what it will be about - maybe the price of a haircut.
If it was a republican leadership, they would find a way to get their way, even if they had to bribe everyone. I have to wonder how many of the Dems were wiretapped and are being blackmailed.
Ron @ 22:
Probably all of them. And none of them want to have their cozy jobs-free rides yanked out from underneath them.
Hi folks....
They're voting for the Feinstein amendment right now...Cspan2...let's see how it goes...
"further transforming the type of country we are." is putting it pretty damn mildly! If they pass this we won't have phones anymore and there will be all those nasty former telecom CEOs on the street corners begging. The ones that survive that is.
The anti-war sentiment seems to be pretty strong from my perspective in both the street and right here on C&L. It's also pretty clear, that most if not all the ills this country currently faces, stem directly from the Iraq War.
So why did the 4 strongest antiwar candidates (Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel and Ron Paul) suffer thru such anemic support in the primaries ?
I suppose the answer lies in the very same criticism we place on Congress for talking a good game, but not showing up where the rubber meets the road.
xpj1000 @ 15:
They won't be there.
xpj1000 @ 15:
I leave that to you.
ticktock @ 24:
Bush usually just signs a statement on any legislation that passes that doesn't benefit the agenda.
"Null and Void due to National Security" . . . . GWB
L.A. Confidential @ 28:
And the Dems know it. Their just raking in our money and accomplishing NOTHING.
L.A. Confidential @ 23:
This is how EVERYONE in Washington is manipulated. They threaten them with their livelihood and all their worldly possessions. It's also why the entire establishment hated Ross Perot, it would have been impossible to make him conform by threatening to take away his goodies, he already had plenty of toys and the resources to buy a hundred times as many.
L.A. Confidential @ 28:
Was just hoping the Senate wasn't going to assist with his agenda...all we can hope for right now is that there is not enough votes for cloture...knew that this amendment wasn't going to pass...
Chico @ 30:
Yes Indeed. They hold the wealth, we hold the debt.
They don't want to join the ranks of us lowly debt holders either.
It would be very surprising if cloture doesn't sail through, given that the debate is already under the control of a UC agreement.
Your hope (and letters & phone-calls) should be aimed at the House.
It's a sad commentary on our country when we judge our leaders by the most incompetent, as opposed to the best and brightest.
"Not as bad as Bush."
And judge the standards for impeachment in a similar way - multiple instances of lying to Congress, breaking the law ... but no action. Of course, when a Democratic president steps wrong, the Republicans will be there in force.
(Egads. The CBS Early Show just ran a tease for a story about super siblings, and whether it's a case of nature or nurture ... and showed Peyton & Eli Manning, Venus & Serena Williams, and Jeb & George Bush.)
Chico @ 26:
If I had a nickel for every bedbug letter I got from Feinstein and Pelosi ...
Yes call your Senators... but remember this day and when it comes time to donate to his senate race... Contribute!
Screw giving to the DCCC... give to candidates who vote responsibly like Senator Dodd, a true American hero!
Shadowgm @ 34:
Jeb and Geo. Bush, super siblings? GIVE ME A F**KING BREAK.
Rasputin @ 36:
Frankly I'm tired of donating money and getting shafted in the end.
I am wondering when GW will grant a complete pardon to the communications companies of this country. After charges are filed? After a conviction?
Ford granted Nixon a complete and unconditional pardon to Nixon the minute he got in the oval office - after stating to the confirmation committe "the public wouldn't stand for it." Well, the public didn't. He served out his term and even though he was a sitting president - ran for re-election - he did not win.
I don't think the public will stand for immunity from prosecution with the communications company.
Remember when we were kids and we made a telephone out of string and tin cans? We can do it again.
OT, but boosh and FOX are at it again
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330415,00.html
FEAR! FEAR! FEAR! FEAR!
With today's FISA vote, the Rule Of Lawlessness reigns, thanks to our Senate Dems. Don't worry everybody. When a Dem is elected Prez later this year the "Rule Of Law" will come back with a vengeance. If he/she so much as sneezes the Repubs will begin impeachment hearings. The sad part is, many Senate/House Dems would probably support it, you know, so as to appear fair and bipartisan. It's called "self-destruction".
Otay @ 20:
Not true, Edwards did speak out against Telcom Immunity. Nobody is our corporate media was listening though (or you either obviously). He asked both sitting Senators campaigning against him to do the right thing and stand with Dodd.
Pelosi seemed especially broken up about having to surrender on Iraq, sounding like an NFL coach in a postgame presser, trying with a straight face to explain why he punted on first-and-goal. "We just didn't have any plays we liked down there," said the coach of the 0-15 Dems. "Sometimes you just have to play the field-position game...." ©Copyright 2008 Rolling Stone
the feingold/webb amendment is up on vote right now...cspan2...this is it kids....
Are Clinton and Obama there to vote today? If not, why not? If this fails by only two votes, we have some calling and writing to do..
pissed off patricia @ 45:
With the Potomac Primary today, doubtful.
rain @ 39:
You don't seem to get this.
The telecoms are being sued, not prosecuted. A pardon is irrelevant. A pardon would not stop the suits, so it would not prevent disclosure of the acts. Only immunity would do this.
pissed off patricia @ 45:
Why bother when Bush will just null and void it.
The next one is the Dodd amendment, that's the big one.
I understand Hillary will not be in any of the states voting today, so she could be there, but I see neither she nor Obama are there.
Shadowgm @ 46:
Also, not really relevant, since one is in Texas and the other is in Wisconsin.
L.A. Confidential @ 48:
Let him do it and that'll tell Americans that he is more concerned with covering the telecoms asses than "protecting Americans" Let the damned thing expire on his dime.
News from out of country:
In the sight of most of the world America has already lost it's Moral Compass. It is a ship in rough waters, with storms approaching and a fool at the helm. Eleven months of this type of sailing (as any sailor knows) will take this Ship of State to either a rocky shoal or right to the bottom of the Sea of World opinion, where it will lay as a rotting hulk of a once great ship.
bush may think he is "King of the World" but he is driving the Titanic.
Let me get this straight.
This administration simply asks and suggests that for unspecified reasons, possibly related to some unspecified aspect of national security, the telecoms allow them to monitor for some unspecified amount of time some unspecified numbers of persons in some unspecified ways. And all but one telecoms said: 'sure, why not'.
German soldiers were convicted of war crimes when their excuse of 'just following orders' failed to protect them from their crimes.
If 'just following orders' offers no protection how much protection should a claim of 'just following polite suggestions offered without any threat of coercion or penalty' provide? As I understand it Verison simply said: No, not without an order signed by a judge'. And the national security boys quietly slithered back under their rock.
These are large, well funded corporations that certainly have lawyers on staff to answer any legal questions. Demanding documentation and the legal protections offered by a signed judges order would certainly protect them and the FISA courts had essentially a standing policy of granting a temporary warrant for a number of days. So there was no need for this administration to skirt the law. Or any reason to offer any legal protections to the telecoms that betrayed the privacy rights of their costumers when a nebulous claim of national security was whispered in their ear.
FISA, the law, was created exactly to provide these protections to the citizens and complying telecoms. If it wasn't important enough for this administration to follow the letter of the law then it obviously wasn't important enough for the telecoms that rolled over so compliantly to have any legal protection.
Shadowgm @ 46:
So the excuse would be: "I can't vote on this important measure because I'm busy campaigning a few miles away"?
Turning off our TeeVees is the ultimate act of protest. It denies access to our minds by corporate interests, and denies media monoliths that all important sea of eyeballs.
the failure of the dems to affect any substantial change in regard to FISA legislation, despite the efforts of Dodd and Feingold and the like, is the reason I am voting Obama.
this is just a good ol boys country club in DC
Rockefeller and Feinstein are voting with the likes of Mcconnell and Inhoffe...and Lieberman
truly pathetic.
Obama is the only hope for change, if for no other reason than he's only been in that corrupting swamp for a couple years...they simply haven't had time to buy his votes.
OBAMA IS THERE
Barack Obama was THERE! I just saw him vote "Aye" on Feingold/Webb amendment.
YES! Obama is there and voting. He didn't let us down.
"If it wasn’t important enough for this administration to follow the letter of the law..."
When has this administration EVER followed the letter of the law or the law itself?
They break the law and then get their own Justice Department to write a tortured (pun intended) document absolving the lawbreaking.
Vote fails dramatically.
SWEET! I'm so glad he has his priorities right today
So many democrats voting against the Feingold Amendment... Just sad. I hope Sen. Dodd has better luck.
VERY exciting to see Barack on the floor, voting with the good guys.
Joementum @ 54:
Something like that. Or, more correctly, it would require devoting all day to the debate/vote (gosh, what a concept - showing up to do your job!) since it's unlikely you could drop everything and rush to the chamber for the vote in time.
I believe that the problem is that Reid treats all bills exactly the same way. To him, the FISA bill is exactly the same as a farm price support bill for rutabegas- they're both bills that have to get through the senate. The fact that one destroys the constitution and the rule of law and the other doesn't is a matter of total irrelevance to him.
BabushkaBlue @ 58:
YES! Good man!
We should all be angry and ashamed of our Dems senators who are voting against these amendments today. What could they possibly be thinking?
Voting now on Dodd's bill. Mrs. Clinton is not present to vote. She's in Texas, right?
I haven't seen or heard Clinton at all.
Ryan @ 62:
thank goodness he at least acknowledges the significance of this legislation
but it doesn't make it any more palatable to watch democrats like rockefeller and feinstein voting with thugs like dominici and mcconnell and brownback...
wow what a sad state the party is in...
this is why Obama has my vote...
you spend too much time in DC, and you start to believe that the nonsense bush puts forth as necessary-- retroactive immunity-- makes sense and is appropriate...
truly astonishing
Go OBAMA
Has Bill Nelson (FL) voted yet? Anyone know?
Except for this web site you wouldn't even know this vote is happening.
Celebrity cleavage of the day is getting monster amounts of eyeballs though.
Go Dodd!
Go Nuremberg!
Go Peace!
WTF? Why did Webb vote no on the Dodd amendment?
This is going to hurt Hillary.
Oh look! Obama vote "Aye" on Dodd's Amendment and then walked over to shake Mr. Dodd's hand.
IgnoranceIsNotBliss @ 70:
I'm guessing he's voting no on everything, but I don't know for sure. He better not be.
BabushkaBlue @ 75:
That's what two gentlemen look like.
Obama/Dodd '08!
Ron @ 74:
Maybe. But I'm sure she did the political calculus before she made her decision.
Shadowgm @ 46:
Hillary's in TEXAS. She's given up on today's Potomac Primaries because Obama is kicking her ass in those places.
Pathetic, isn't it, that 2 sitting senators running for the highest office in the land can not be bothered to show up for such an important vote?! Today's primaries are, basically, local events.
Dr. Acula @ 80:
WRONG-- OBAMA is in DC, and VOTED
Dr. Acula @ 80:
They are two busy building their fortresses because they see whats coming.
Damn! The telecoms' immunity seems more important to many in the senate than the privacy of Americans. When did they get to be the sheriffs of our rights? Bush stomps his foot and demands and they obey.
My interpertation is 49 lapdogs and 18 blackmails and the 32 they couldn't find anything on and 1 no show.
I voted for Dodd last week even though he'd dropped out.
Dr. Acula @ 80:
We've discovered that Obama is indeed there and voting on the floor. Look upward a few comments and you'll see what I mean. He did the right thing!
Dr. Acula @ 80:
One of the sitting senators WAS THERE, darlin'. Obama was there.
Okay folks - I'm glad to see that Obama did indeed show up to vote! Shame on you, Shillary! Is the TX primary that important to miss today's vote???
Chris Dodd, American hero!
So I suppose we'll begin hearing soon. . . "Obama voted against allowing the federal government to listen to conversations of individuals who enjoy blowing up innocents and flying jet airplanes into American landmarks."
Alex @ 89:
He was doing Bianca Jagger, Erin Carter, and Carrie Fisher at one time also.
The definition of hip.
L.A. Confidential @ 90:
Damned if you do, damned if you don't by the damned right wing MSM.
L.A. Confidential @ 90:
I'm wondering if that old saw will work this time. Hopefully Americans have crawled out from under their beds by now and see things as they really are.
Ron @ 92:
MSM isn't even promoting this vote. Not a single peep. It's stealth and under the radar.
Why would they promote it when the media, rich and powerful all own a stake in the Telecoms for that matter?
L.A. Confidential @ 94:
They will always spin it to their benefit.
Sad to say, it was an expected outcome on this FISA heartbreak...
Aloha....
If Clinton would have been there, with her strong influence, maybe she could have swung some votes. Not!
So what happened. Are we free. Or are we still supervised zombies?
Judging from the response I assume the bill didn't pass.
Okay on to the next disorder of business.
L.A. Confidential @ 98:
We haven't been free since 2001.
Senate Votes to Give Retroactive Immunity for Telecoms
L.A. Confidential @ 98:
I don't think anyone can answer that question. In fact, I suspect you're no longer allowed to ask it.
Ron @ 100:
I know I remember election night 2000 with perfect recall when Rather said. . . "Folks there seems to be some hangup in Florida" . . .
Right then I went oh sh*t here we go. Sure enough next day James Baker was in the newz bites videos toting big black briefcase around.
It's too bad that corporations have more rights than man.
Joementum @ 102:
Exactly. It's the 1950's all over. Shut up, pay your bills, don't question authority, pay your taxes. Work hard and maybe you can get rich like us someday.
Ron @ 104:
Look at the bright side. Life here on earth is only temporary.
Well there is always this thought.
"If you bring forth the genius within you, it will free you. If you do not bring forth the genius within you, it will destroy you."
I best get busy!
Later!
justabill @ 101:
So, if I understand the voting process, had Hillary been in attendance and vote "Aye"
there would have been only 38 "yes" votes; and 41 were needed, so tell me please,
which of the three above listed Dems would have voted "correctly" in order for bill
to be considered?
The CORPORATE CONTROLED MEDIA side lined Chriss Dodd just as they did John Edwards and the rest that were running all that they would talk about was H. Clinton and Obama, John McCain. It makes me mad that WE the PEOPLE did not have a choice that we should have had, Dodd would made a fine PRESIDENT. But then again he is back in the SENATE where he is still standing up for we the PEOPLE. I hope he will replace Guttles REID.
Ron @ 57:
Yes! I apologize for the earlier comments which were based on his stated plans. I should have waited to see.
As to Clinton.... NEVER, EVER, give Obama a hard time about his voting record again.
WTF is up with the "democrats" who voted nay? And the 2 not voting -- Shillary and Graham.
ANOTHER sad day in 'murkan history.
Doggiebobo @ 108:
If Clinton would have been there with her strong leadership, I'm sure she would have swung some votees to the ayes. NOT!
I thought Shillary was smarter than giving Obama MORE ammunition to use against her!
Ron @ 112:
Exactly...and I'm as disappointed in the "Nay" votes by Webb and Feinstein as a
"no show" by Hillary.
We should all be angry and ashamed of our Dems senators who are voting against these amendments today. What could they possibly be thinking?
Maybe they'll rethink their vote when it comes to election time. I doubt if we will.
Doggiebobo @ 114:
Agreed and the others.
Dodd is right. This is going to be looked back upon as a Day of Infamy for the Senate.
Shame. On. You. All.
L.A. Confidential @ 90:
Unquestionably. And it's ironic that the people who would cast stones about someone 'surrendering' to the people who 'want to destroy our way of life' are the ones who seem to have nightmares about waking up in an Islamic state, and think nothing of living in a surveillance state.
It's the people who understand how critical our freedoms are to independent thought and the healthy continuation of a democracy that also understand this 'freedom agenda' being sold by the Bush Administration is nothing of the sort - they literally don't understand freedom or democracy. (And the sad thing is, I thought that's why we had required Civics and American History classes in high school and college.)
And who speaks out the loudest? The brigadiers of bombast known as conservative talk radio. Rush, O'Reilly, Coulter, Hannity - they're all shortcuts for having to think; they'll tell you how to vote, where to stand on the issues, when our founding fathers intended an informed populace. If they'd wanted servile obedience to a distant, removed leadership, we'd still be colonies of the British Crown.
The Fairness Doctrine was not about artificially securing the 'marketplace of ideas' - it was to protect us against a very human failing, the tyranny of the right answer ... to which we can all fall prey.
nwmuse @ 16:
I'd like to see Dodd as Obama's VP... in comparison to Cheny as GW's... I believe the country would be so much better off after 4 years.
blackjack @ 109:
what about VP to Obama? thoughts?
even the democrats are rats ! sad ! the enemy withins the real menace!
Shadowgm @ 118:
People like us who see through the smoke and mirrors suffer the most. Out of our compassion for humanity.
Not an easy path to travel. The most difficult because we are not welcome to begin with.
CalGeorge @ 117:
How true. I vaguely recall something occuring back in Nov. 06...As I recall, the Dems
took control of both the U.S. Senate and U.S. House, however, I must be mistaken and
was just dreaming. Not only did "We the People" select and elect Dems into office for
the purpose of getting the hell out of Iraq, but equally(if not more so) of importance,
"they" were elected to protect our civil liberties. But, oh No, they once again have
let us all down. WTF is this country coming to? Oh, I know...a Dictatorship by
the Exceutive Branch and the Leg. branch is sitting w/their thumbs up their asses.
truthseeker @ 120:
I still think Obam/Edwards. We have to have democrats for at least 16 years to clean up the mess.
What we expect from a Government that has made as of 2008 the possession of a Cuban cigar a crime punishable by fines and prison?
xpj1000 @ 18:
It's those sins of ommission we need to watch out for. How DID these two pre-packaged wonders vote today...did they vote at ALL????????
Did they show up?
This country has a long history of installing and propping up dictators. We've now come full circle and have one of our very own.
crazytown @ 126:
Doesn't matter. Anyone who is against "National Security" policy is going to be viewed with suspicion by both Neorepublicons and Democrats at this point.
Good for Greenwald! He's been tireless and invaluable on these issues.
And even better for Dodd! It's so damn refreshing to hear him speak on this.
crazytown @ 126:
Clinton didn't bother to show up to vote. Obama was there. He voted "Aye" on Feingold/Webb's amendments and "Aye" on Dodd's Amendment.
BabushkaBlue @ 130:
The "Aye" votes were just not there; something that Hillary and Obama were both
very aware of ahead of time, so casting either an "Aye" or "Nay" vote would not have made a difference in the ultimate outcome.
Chris Dodd is truly a role model for public servants today. It was nice to have a candidate who said that on day one of his presidency that, "You're gonna get your constitution back."
Obama was there and voted for those amendments? Well, then, he gets the party nomination, he gets my vote in the general. It's that big a deal to me. God, I hope Hillary isn't the nominee.
Doggiebobo @ 131:
I still appreciate the stand on it. He's putting himself in the line of fire from Goebbels over at the Nazi News Channel. The National Socialist Party is already attacking Obama as a "bleeding heart liberal". If it was me, I'd go on O'Reilly's show, get him mad enough that he takes a swing at me, and then beat the piss out of him. If O'Fascist takes the first swing, it's self defense.
Doggiebobo @ 131:
So, what you're saying is, don't show up to do your job if things aren't going to go your way. So what if the voters weren't there? It's her job to show up to the Senate and vote, that's what the people of my state elected her to do. I'm frankly surprised Senator Obama took the time to show up and vote, and frankly, that willingness to come out on the right side of this issue, rather than skip it altogether because the voters weren't there, is one reason I think I'll support him from now on. This is too important to just say, 'Eh, the votes aren't there, so why bother showing up?'
Notice how the MSM is deafeningly quiet on this topic? Not one mention at CNN, USAtoday, ABC, NBC, etc.
Are there any real reporters or editors left in corporate media? (redundant question).
Why is this not considered at least as important as a runaway bride?
Is there any doubt that we live in a soft fascist/totalitarian state? Is there anything these psychopaths aren't capable of?
Rigging elections
Waging illegal wars
Co-opting media
Depleted Uranium poisoning of foreign nations and its own forces
Questionable Anthrax attacks
Questionable day before 9/12
Lies about Tillman
Lies about Lynch
Lies about waterboarding
Lies about Patriot Act
Lies about Military Commissions Act
Lies about PD51
Lies about warrantless surveillance
Lies about secret renditions
Lies about WMD's
Lies about the economy
Lies about....
"The “Aye” votes were just not there"
Obama's "aye" vote was there. Wasn't it Hillary who attacked him on those "present" votes in the Illinois senate?
Well, I wasn't going to vote for Hillary in the Primary Election anyway (because of her connection with DLC). I was on the fence about showing my support for Chris Dodd or Dennis Kucinich by voting for one of them -- or getting behind Obama. Obama's vote today pushed me off the fence.
Now the dilemma is whether to support Sen. Clinton in the General election if she should get the nomination.
Goodbye, Democrats. You have failed miserably. You are Democratic in name only. I will not be part of a party that cannot stand up for the Rule of Law.
Glenn Greenwald:
But a large number of elected Democrats vote in favor of the radical Bush agenda for a very simple reason: they believe in it. Despite the glorious "D" after their name, their views are materially indistinguishable from the defining ones of the Bush faction on the key issues. A huge portion of Congressional Democrats are members of the corrupt, bipartisan Beltway political establishment first, and everything only follows that, and they thus embrace and support the values of that establishment.
That's why Bush has won and -- even with "Democrats in control of Congress" -- continues to win most key votes. The fault lines in the Beltway aren't primarily between Republican and Democrat but between those who support the core values of our political establishment (as reflected by the Bush administration) and those who don't. Through a bulging coalition of both Democrats and Republicans, the pro-establishment forces have a strong, clear and easy majority, and that's why the most radical Bush measures continue not only to prevail, but -- as today -- do so easily.
When the House folds on this issue, I will declare my independence from your corrupt, feeble, spineless party and unregister myself as a Democrat.
Enough. Is. Enough.
Doggiebobo @ 131:
Nice apologist spin.
One amendment only missed by 3. And if Clinton is so "ready to lead from day one," might she not be able to persuade one or two others? No? Then what good is she?
Masked Avenger @ 134:
We do not disagree on this. My "only" point was for the purpose of letting those know,
who did not know, that it was a foregone conclusion that the granting of immunity to
the telecom industry would occur. And Hillary, tho here in my home State of Texas
doing her campaigning bit, should have flown to D.C. and cast her vote, so I am certainly
not making excuses for her.
CalGeorge @ 139:
What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Joementum @ 142:
or when the japs attacked , say what did the japs attack?
Joementum @ 142:
Or when the Japs attacked England or Poland?
Well as to the candidates position on our civil liberties...we have entered the twilight zone...
Obama voted for telecom immunity
Hillary didn't show up
And McCain voted against immunity
Rod Serling... you have got to be about to step out from behind a curtain to explain this one!
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Senate_OKs_immunity_for_telecoms_0212.html
Obama was there and canceled out John McCains vote. Where was Hillary? Oh in Texas trying to round up a few votes in a Red State that is not supposed to be important anyway.
SassySandy @ 146:
True...Tx. is a "red-ass" State. I know, I live here, so you can be assured that McCain
will win here....at least on the Repug side of aisle, but still uncertain as to whether
Obama or Hillary will carry the Dem side and garnish the LARGE number of electoral votes.
Clinton AWOL on voting for amendments to FISA and cloture. Guess she really cares about the rights of citizens she wants to vote for her.
Doggiebobo @ 147:
Opps, I meant the "LARGE number of delegates" going into the Dem. Nat. Convention.
Doggiebobo @ 147:
I too live in Red Texas. I was just saying that Hill says Red States don't matter when Obama takes them, but she skips out on the Fisa vote to campaign in Texas( which according to her doesn"t matter).
Login or Register to post comments.