Two months after insisting that they would roll back broad eavesdropping powers won by the Bush administration, Democrats in Congress appear ready to make concessions that could extend some crucial powers given to the National Security Agency. . . . Although willing to oppose the White House on the Iraq war, they remain nervous that they will be called soft on terrorism if they insist on strict curbs on gathering intelligence.
A Democratic bill to be proposed on Tuesday in the House would maintain for several years the type of broad, blanket authority for N.S.A. eavesdropping that the administration secured in August for six months.
Aren’t you glad now the Dems won in 2006? Aren’t they inspiring you to work hard for them in 2008? Caroline Frederickson nicley calls them out:
“The Democratic leadership, philosophically, is with us,” Ms. Frederickson said. “But we need to help them realize the political case, which is that Democrats will not be in danger if they don’t reauthorize this Protect America Act. They’re nervous.
“There’s a ‘keep the majority’ mentality, which is understandable,” she said, “But we think they’re putting themselves in more danger by not standing on principle.”
These craven idiots would not know a principle if it hit them in the head.
55 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
will be the defenses of this crap from the usual suspects.
Hey, you think Move On might run an ad?
and didn’t even bother to write anything up. I wonder if there’s even anything left to be said for these people.
If I were going to do an attack ad against Congressional Dems, I’d probably have a tag line like
and call them “soft on terrorism” so they won’t have to worry about being called “soft on terrorism” anymore.
Eh, I know – that won’t work either.
If the old meat-packing plant in my home town hadn’t shut down, I’d have sent ’em a box of spines and balls.
but, these chicken shits keep fooling enough of the people on election day. I hate getting lied to worse than anything.
poll. Should we torture terror suspects? 58% voted yes.
of assholes.
Personally, I don’t think they are reading your posts on the Constitution.
Why is the following script so hard to pull off? Meet the Press, hypothetically:
Republican: Without this new legislation, terrorists will have an easier time attacking this country. We will be less safe.
Democrat: No we won’t.
Republican: The NSA needs these tools to better protect us.
Democrat: No they don’t.
Republican: How can you say that? You’re weak on terror.
Democrat: I don’t cast votes based on claims that are not true. What you said is not true. So, I won’t cast votes based on it.
Democrats have effectively come to a bi-partisan agreement on the fundamentals of ruling America. Both they and Republicans agree that Democrats should always be subserviant to Republicans.
Finally, the divisiveness tearing us apart is over!
sigh
I truly felt like I’d been kicked in the gut. I would think I should have built up a tolerance against these slams to the stomach by now, but no, it still hurts.
“Dems” are introducing the bill Tuesday. Where is the rally call w/phone @s, e mails, etc.?
Not much I have to offer in this department, my friends. But consider this: when they say “Democrats in Congress” will once again sell out, let’s not loose sight of what they really mean – the usual, relatively small coalition of moderate to conservative DINOs who side with the Repubs every chance they get. What makes this so astonishing and incomprehensible to us is that the _leadership_ of the Dems in Congress prefers to stand with who they know will win the day, and not with the Constitution. These people simply need to go, there is no other way to put it. I’m actually looking more and more favorably at the idea of a very public propaganda campaign against the Dem Congressional leadership. Seriously – what have we got to loose?
But meanwhile, let’s not forget that the Progressive Caucus will do us proud voting against this craven law. We’re not going to win this particular fight right here, right now – but we’re not in this alone.
This is somewhat off topic but do you know if Cindy Sheehan is a member of this site? Is anyone in email contact with her to see if she even knows this site exists? Do we care?
Well, what to do about this?
First, I think we need to realize that it’s not all Democrats who are craven. Second, we need to concentrate our fire on those who are, and we need to do that from their own constituencies.
You are sounding absolutely Republican lately. I could have written this post myself.
WTF is happening in the world when we agree?