On this weekend of blogospheric celebration, someone has to rain on the parade. And that someone is me. One of our favorites, Avedon, links to LarryE lamenting the state of the anti-war movement:

the real reason that the antiwar movement seems unable to stop the war despite having the support of perhaps two-thirds of the public is that too much of that "movement" to too god damned concerned with its own image. Too god damned concerned with being "respectable," with being seen as "serious," as truly "pro-American." Too god damned concerned with politics over praxis, with positioning over protest. As a result, it has surrendered tactical decisions to the leadership of the Democratic Party and moral leadership to a crew of inside-the-Beltway wannabes both on- and offline who have mocked demonstrations and made Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi the arbiters of the acceptable limits of debate. And that has been a horrendous blunder, both tactically and ethically, with disastrous consequences for Americans and even more - far more - for Iraqis.

I think Larry is right about the anti-war Netroots failing miserably in 2007 but I think he is wrong on the why it is failing. I will explain my thinking on the flip.

NYTimes:

They have got us in a vise,” Representative Louise M. Slaughter, Democrat of New York and chairwoman of the Rules Committee, said as she left a Saturday afternoon meeting where senior Democrats were debating how to handle the issue in the final hours before recess.

If there is one thing Bush knows how to do well it is how to intimidate the useless Democrats in Congress. I have never ever seen a more pathetic group of negotiators in my life.

Congresswoman Slaughter, have you ever thought of actually just demonstrating some public resolve? Even if you plan to cave in later, do you think you MIGHT act as if you might stand up to Bush? He might give you a concession once in a while. Apparently getting pre-punked, as Sen. Obama was on the Iraq Supplemental (remember the not playing chicken remark?), is the SOP for Dems.

This quote is as pathetic and incompetent a piece of bargaining that I have ever seen.

Let's face it - Congressional Democrats stink at politics and stink at political bargaining. Utterly incompetent.

Final Update: The debate was a big coup for Yearly Kos and the blogosphere. It had buzz and electricity and while the questions were not great and Matt Bai was an odd choice for moderator, it was well worth the time and effort to attend. There was a sense of comraderie and unity in the hall -- an acknowledgment that we are all in this together and working for the same thing, to bring an end to the abuses of the Bush Administration -- that transcended individual candidate preferences.

****

Combining Big Tent's thread and mine. Big Tent said:

Gina Cooper, YKOs Director introduces Matt Bai of the NYTimes who apparently is moderating the forum. Extremely strange to me that a blogger conference has a NYTimes reporter moderating the event. But whatever.

Joan McCarter, Daily Kos Contributing Editor, and good friend of Talk Left will be the lead questioner apparently. Dr. Jeff Feldman, a friend of mine, will be fielding questions from the audience. It is being live streamed here.

(TalkLeft live blogging from the debate hall below)

McJoan: To Bill Richardson: He has said his model Supreme Court Justice would be Justice White. Would he reconsider?

"I screwed up on that." His court would have diversity and legal scholars. He would ask, "Do you believe Roe v. Wade is settled civil rights and privacy law? If yes, he might attend them.

Update: (Big Tent, please chime in) Obama is up now. He is against Bush's tax cuts. Our biggest fiscal problem is Medicare and Medicaid. We are spending too much on the war.

More...

I previously discussed Barack Obama's answer on the use of nukes and this important piece of information comes to us via Kevin Drum, the transcript of the exchange:

AP: Sir, with regard to terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan ...

OBAMA: Yeah.

AP: Is there any circumstances where you'd be prepared or willing to use nuclear weapons to defeat terrorism and Osama bin Laden?

OBAMA: No, I'm not, uh, there has been no discussion of using nuclear weapons and that's not a hypothetical that I'm going to discuss.

AP: Not even tactical?

OBAMA: No. I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance. Uh, if involving you know, civilians... Let me scratch all that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table so...

Emphasis supplied to the RIGHT ANSWER from Obama and the exact same answer given by Hillary Clinton. This is exactly what Obama should have said. Unfortunately, he did not stop there. His failure to adhere to his initial statement was his error. I wonder if now people like Matt Yglesias will retract their attacks on Hillary Clinton's response to this. As is apparent, Obama himself realized he made a mistake, "scratch all that." I hope they will "scratch all that" nonsense they wrote in criticism of Clinton on this subject.

I'm in the front row of a very packed room waiting for Hillary Clinton to arrive. She will speak at a breakout session here at noon.

Only problem for live-blogging is my battery is very low, so I won't be able to update until it's over and I get back to an electrical outlet.

If you're watching a streaming version, feel free to use the comments here to keep everyone updated.

Really big buzz in the room, lots of excitement. The entire Yearly Kos event seems to have come alive today.

More later...

The Senate's pathetic performance last night really did not come as a surprise. It has proven time and time again to be filled with Democratic members who talk tough and then capitulate at the first resistance (Senator James Webb comes to mind as possibly the biggest tough guy phony in that body.) Unlike many folks, I know that Leader Reid has no hand to play in the Senate.

To me the only hope for resolve against Bush comes in the House. But there is little evidence for my hope. Consider this from today's Times story on the FISA Capitulation:

The House is expected to take up the White House-backed measure on Saturday morning before going into its summer recess. Democratic leaders acknowledged that the bill would probably pass.

The question is why? Why can not Democrats in the House just say "Mr. President, we have offered you a bill that addresses the problem." Sign that bill. This is, of course, a reprise of the Iraq Supplemental Capitulaton.

More.

The Dem House version failed to get 2/3 votes needed, under the special rule to provide for immediate consideration. The Senate completely caved in to Bush and passed the McConnell-Bond-Bush version with the requisite 60 vote total. The Dem version, the Levin-Rockefeller bill, is presently in the process of failing to get the requisite 60 vote for passage.

What does it mean? That the just passed Senate GOP version will be offered in the House tomorrow and pass and the President will sign it. It is amazing how a President with a 25% approval can roll this Congress so easily. Pathetic.

Now guess what? This bill will sunset in 6 months. We'll be in an election year. Are you confident that these spineless Congresspersons and Senators will have more guts then? Me neither.

This ranks with the torture approving bill passed with the support of many Dem congresspersons prior to the 2006 election. Later we will provide the names of all the Dem Senators whose cowardice allowed this to happen.

No roll call vote available. On the flip I will list the ones I heard.

It appears that the latest developments are pathetically bad for Democrats on President Bush's FISA amendment. The latest in the rumor mill is that there will be side by side up or down votes on a Dem alternative (Levin-Rockefeller Amendment) and a Republican alternative (McConnell-Bond amendment) and the Republican alternative is likely to pass.

No details on what is in the legislative proposals but one expects the Republican alternative is precisely what Bush wants.

A pathetic display by our Democratic Congress. Good thing they are not showing for Yearly Kos, they might get run out on a rail. Just pathetic.

More.

We know that our Unitary Chief Executive is The Decider of all questions in the executive branch. Now it appears that President Bush is also The Decider of issues before the legislative branch.

President George W. Bush said Friday that Congress must stay in session until it approves legislation modernizing a U.S. law governing eavesdropping on foreigners. ... The president said that lawmakers must not leave for their August recess this weekend as planned unless they "pass a bill that will give our intelligence community the tools they need to protect the United States."

They must, must they? What constitutional provision empowers the president to order the legislature to remain in session so that it can enact another one of his bad laws?

President Bush insists that it should be Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, not the FISA court, that should review the Administration's surveillance program.

And he will not sign a bill unless he gets his way. Bush makes the bizarre claim that having Gonzo, not the courts, review the program is necessary to keep us safe. Who in the heck believes that?:

The president threatened to veto any bill by the Democratic-led Congress that his intelligence director deemed unable "to prevent an attack on the country. . . McConnell and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would oversee the eavesdropping process, according to the White House plan. That prompted howls of protest from Democrats who distrust the attorney general to protect privacy rights. "We need a legal framework around this program," Reid said. "No more blank check for this attorney general, no more blank checks for any attorney general."

If the President seriously thinks this change is necessary, then he would accept court review, not the review of the most incompetent and discredited Attorney General since John Mitchell.

The President's attitude betrays either unseriousness on the issue, or dishonesty in his claims, or both. Probably both. He is the worst President in the history of the nation.

This RNC ad is hilarious

Al From must be touched by the GOP's concern. Hat tip TPM.

At 4:00 pm today in Room 100a-c, I'll be moderating the voting rights panel at Yearly Kos.

"Ensuring Every Vote Counts" features former Gore campaign Manager Donna Brazile, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund's Director of Litigation Debo Adegbile, the Brennan Center's Justin Levitt and George Washington University law professor Spencer Overton, author of the book "Stealing Democracy," about voter suppression.

Donna will be highlighting Howard Dean's 50 state voter protection plan and providing tools and checklists to protect the vote in 2008. She'll also talk about voting problems affecting minorities. Debo will talk about voter denial and intimidation, including caging lists.

Justin Levitt will talk about the Department of Justice's alarming trend of using its authority in ways that limit rather than protect voting rights. Check out the Brennan Center's site, Truth About Fraud.

I hope they also discuss my favorite voting rights issue, restoring the right to vote to ex-offenders.

Hope to see you there!