home

Hoyer: The New King Of High Broderism

Digby writes one of the great grafs you will see:

What we have . . . is the portrait of a Village hero, the ultimate master of the only game that matters --- ostentatiously capitulating to conservatism. It's the biggest accolade a Democrat ever gets, like winning a congressional Oscar, and the preening Hoyer is happy to make his acceptance speech in the pages of the Drudge Daily. This one is sweeter than most because he managed to capitulate to the congressional minority and the most unpopular president in history on an issue of fundamental constitutional principle which contained little political risk to uphold. A truly bravura performance. In fact, it's worthy of a lifetime achievement award.

Surrender Steny would like to thank the Dean of the Washington Press Corps for his inspiration and support and of course, the new budding Dean, Joe Klein . . .

Speaking for me only

< Politicizing the Department of Justice | Democratic Convention to Be Simulcast In Spanish >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    That is (5.00 / 5) (#1)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:35:55 PM EST
    beautiful snarkiness indeed. Digby has a way with the keyboard.
    Steny Hoyer can be proud to be so accurately and lovingly immortalized.

    Since winning the majority in 2006 (5.00 / 10) (#3)
    by myiq2xu on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:37:08 PM EST
    The Congressional Democratic leadership has done everything it could to support the argument that there is no difference between the parties.

    It's so much easier to surrender when you (5.00 / 7) (#4)
    by MarkL on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:41:51 PM EST
    hold the reins of power.

    Parent
    It's so much more masochistic. (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:29:09 PM EST
    ::wince:: (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by kredwyn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:31:49 PM EST
    that sounds scary and true at the same time.

    Really...I don't want a horsehair shirt.

    Parent

    I'd point out min wage (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:43:16 PM EST
    Something silly like that, but I hate the party too now.

    Who will be left to defend them?

    Parent

    Certainly not me (5.00 / 9) (#8)
    by janarchy on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:47:48 PM EST
    Most people think I left in a fit a pique over Clinton not getting the nomination. That was just the piece de resistance. The non-action of the past 2 years and the spineless, ball-less behaviour of most of the House and Senate over the past eight years just pushed me to the point of no return.

    This is a perfect example of why I can't defend the Dems anymore. When my Republican friends/family point out stuff like this, there's no excuses. They're right. Which is not to say they're correct about their own elected officials.

    A pox on both their houses!

    Parent

    for me its a question (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:05:30 PM EST
    of self respect.

    And have now come to the conclusion that not only will politics never evolve past calling everyone who disagrees with you a coward, but that dems now believe continuing to do so should be rewarded.  On some psuedo sado-masochistc cycle of dysfunctionalism level.  It could be steny gets off on this.  And I do not kid.  Provide a better explanation.

    For me  it was about Clinton but not just out of loyalty to her person but a choice to look at politics and politicians differently.

    That failed.  My choice is now the minority position in the party.

    I laugh.  I'm hamlet.  Steny and pelosi and obsms are rosencrantz and guildenstern.  The netroots/media is England.

    They did make love to this employment.

    Parent

    Don't be so glum (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by ineedalife on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:14:56 PM EST
    will politics never evolve past calling everyone who disagrees with you a coward

    We have evolved to the era of calling everyone who disagrees with you a racist. See, we are making progress. Three options now: Coward, Racist, or Racist-Coward. A veritable rainbow of political capitulation.

    Also: My choice is now the minority position in the party
    Actually, it is 50% of the party. Glass half-full or half-empty? It will actually be a good starting place after 4 years of McCain.

    Parent

    The audiences at Political satire shows (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:49:17 PM EST
    need permission slips to laugh at pols now. leno makes one false move and he'll be fired (roll on that Day).

    Parent
    You ain't lying...and they wonder why (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:01:35 PM EST
    no one takes them seriously....obama may be a DINO, but he sure hooked up with the right group.

    Parent
    well said and to the point! (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:58:05 PM EST
    that is beautiful (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:47:11 PM EST
    poetic almost.  Hard to believe that it is true and I keep waking up and expecting to see the headline on the WSJ saying "Dems make country less safe" but alas, I am saddened when I open the paper and it is not there.  

    High broderism (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:47:50 PM EST
    has infected the entire party. I'm not letting Steny off the hook just saying that he's only part of the problem.

    Anybody else get the feeling (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by magisterludi on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:55:18 PM EST
    the democratic leadership really dislikes democrats?

    I mean, if actions speak louder...

    That's a question for the DNC as well (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by goldberry on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:04:41 PM EST
    maybe Democrats are just out of favor with the party this year.  

    Parent
    Dem "leadership" vs. Dems (5.00 / 3) (#43)
    by DFLer on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:34:41 PM EST
    The vote by Dems in the House on the "compromise bill" was 128 (NAYS) to 105.

    The "leaders", Pelosi, Hoyer, Clyburn, Emmanuel...are in the minority of their own Dem Cong caucus...not just the "left wing" of the party.

    Yikes.

    Parent

    even worse they hold voters in distain. (5.00 / 4) (#56)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:59:52 PM EST
    anyone who thinks otherwise needs to reflect on this past campaign and the actions or lack thereof of democrats since 06. i leave no one off the hook by the way.

    Parent
    Joe Klein's comments make no sense (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:56:43 PM EST
    Especially this:

    There are those, like Senator Russ Feingold and assorted civil liberties activists, who believe that the legalization of this program erodes essential constitutional rights of Americans. I respect their point of view, but believe that the greater good here will be the protection of Americans from terrorist attacks--and the prevention of extremist governments like George W. Bush's from illegally spying on U.S. residents.

    By definition no change in the law is required to prevent illegal spying, or illegal anything for that matter.  Because ... um ... they're already illegal.

    Klein's a moron.  And I don't think that's a personal attack.  Based on the quote above, I think it's a demonstrable fact.


    When does Joe Klein make any sense (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:02:53 PM EST
    these days...too much spinning can make one too dizzy.

    Parent
    Indeed, JK, we only 'believe' what everyone saw (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Ellie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:18:10 PM EST
    How Joe Klein is able to write while simultaneously being unable to read is a mystery for the ages.

    There are those, like Senator Russ Feingold and assorted civil liberties activists, who believe that the legalization of this program erodes essential constitutional rights of Americans
    .

    Indeed, I, too, was duped into a state of slack-jawed irrational belief that the plain, explicit ink on parchment of the Constitution guaranteeing a right to warrants actually guaranteed a right to warrants.

    But don't go by me. I'm mad. MAD. Madder than Mad Jack MacMadd, the winner of last years Mr. Mad Man competition. [/The Black Adder]

    Parent

    but then klein never makes sense. (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:00:09 PM EST
    Obama said the same thing!!! (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by talex on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:22:39 PM EST
    he said there would be no more 'illegal' spying.

    And he will make sure of that by voting to make illegal spying 'legal'.

    Parent

    Joe Klien is a moron (none / 0) (#31)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:26:20 PM EST
    and feingold is a pretty useful foil.   we can keep faith in the Dem that no other Dem actually follows or votes with.  it sorta feeds into th vanity of the American leftwing to have Feingold oppose something while the party does something else.

    Parent
    I'm the kind of Liberal the Dem 'Left' left behind (5.00 / 0) (#40)
    by Ellie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:33:01 PM EST
    The "embarrassing" poor cousin always yapping about human rights, personal liberties, constitutional protections, transparent government and scrupulously maintaining everyone's franchise.

    I truly strenuously stink.

    Parent

    I am not so sure the Reagan Democrats, or (none / 0) (#86)
    by MKS on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:29:50 PM EST
    the lower income whites in Ohio and Pennsylvania, would be all that unhappy with FISA....The response could well be why do we oppose spying on terrorists.....

    In spite of all the concern over these voters, I am not so sure liberals are all that copacetic with their views....

    If many were concerned about Obama's flag pins....FISA could easily be caricatured as an elitist issue...

    Perhaps Reagan Democrats care about FISA but I doubt it....

    Parent

    If you legalize unwarranted wiretaps (none / 0) (#78)
    by Calvados on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:35:41 PM EST
    then you are preventing people from committing the crime.  It's amazing the crime that would be prevented if controlled substances were legalized.

    It's a vacuous argument, and the suggestion that it would prevent an administration from doing what it wants is not a valid one.  The reason illegal surveillance happens is that the administration is willing to break the law.  Making it legal certainly doesn't make it any harder.

    Parent

    Has Kos published his support (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:00:08 PM EST
    of the compromise bill yet?  

    Heh (5.00 / 0) (#46)
    by kredwyn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:36:50 PM EST
    waiting...baited breath...waiting

    Parent
    eavesdropping (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by laurie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:07:03 PM EST
    A Democratic Congress under Pelosi and Reid has done what a Republican Congress in 2006 could not do-punted on civil liberties.
    Repugs and Dems seem interchangeable. Third Party anyone?

    Telecoms greased the wheels (5.00 / 10) (#24)
    by standingup on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:17:59 PM EST
    and it worked with the Dems, just as it does with the Republicans. MAPLight.org has a new report out today on Telco PAC contributions to Dems who changed their votes on FISA.

    Of the list of 94 Dems in the House changing their votes to support immunity, 4 of the top 7 recipients of telecom money are 4 of the 6 top leaders of the Democratic House and Caucus Leadership.

    • No. 1 - Rep. James Clyburn, SC-6 (Majority Whip) $29,500
    • No. 2 - Rep. Steny Hoyer, MD-5 (Majority Leader) $29,000
    • No. 3 - Rep. Rahm Emanuel, IL-5 (Democratic Caucus Chair) $28,000
    • No. 7 - Rep. Nancy Pelosi, CA-8 (Speaker of the House) $24,500
    The only compromise I see is our civil rights in exchange for money for their campaign coffers.

    wait that's conspiracy mongering /snark (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:23:23 PM EST
    I object (5.00 / 6) (#44)
    by standingup on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:35:05 PM EST
    In no way did I suggest the telecoms targeted the Dem leadership and got what they wanted in return ;-)

    Parent
    Good grief (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by MichaelGale on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:28:10 PM EST
    Would you look at those Democrats on that list.

    I gave money to quite a few thru Act Blue too.

    Parent

    Thanks. My boy from da Bronx Joe Crowley (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by vicndabx on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:03:16 PM EST
    is #6!  Woohoo!!  My representative made the top ten!!  I'm sooo proud.  /s

    Parent
    I am disappointed that my congressman voted in (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by FLVoter on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:03:23 PM EST
    favor of this and only received a $1,000 contribution.  He could have done so much better. <SNARK>

    Parent
    thank you (none / 0) (#47)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:38:24 PM EST
    nicely done

    Parent
    Brava Steny! (5.00 / 0) (#30)
    by kredwyn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:26:01 PM EST
    An act of true legislative substandard brilliance bar none.

    I know that digby was neutral in the primary.... (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Oje on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:30:39 PM EST
    But I wonder if movement progressives are not passing into a phase similar to movement conservatives in the 1980s. "The Village" is back in bi-partisan form and a bete noir of progressivism (anti-Constitutional law breaking) proceeds unchecked by congressional powers. In a word, it is more profitable for the movement if issues are not resolved and "teh fight" must continue. It preserves the relevancy of those who seek to feed their children now, rather than seek to produce change.

    Then, comes support for the transformative Dear Leader who never quite delivers and always cuts deals through no flaw of his own political character (this we learned is different for women candidates, when all decisions and positions reveal her deeply guarded character flaws). The presumptive Democratic nominee capitulates on FISA and takes steps to undermine public financing of elections. Despite the fact that the Democratic nominee has been trolling for large donors for the past three weeks (and the Democratic convention is being financed by the TelCos), but this does not discourage the "creative class" that sets about telling us that public financing is the deepest desire of undemocratic forces and that those who oppose Obama's public financing funding decision are somehow always already "teh elites" of "Teh Village."

    How long can the faux-progressive blogosphere go on portraying themselves as "outsiders" and "anti-elitist" when the political role they now seek to play is so deeply entwined with the DNC insiders who engineered the nomination of a bi-partisan candidate who routinely fails to defend the most basic positions of movement progressivism? The movement will continue for those who want to rend and wave their bloody shirts each time there is a congressional vote, but substantive political change will always be diverted by their mercenary electoral choices.

    If he didn't approve the House vote (5.00 / 0) (#39)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:32:02 PM EST
    he's not incontrol of his backers and underlings.

    Parent
    BO 'had' to (politics) HRC: the girl can't help it (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by Ellie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:52:03 PM EST
    And that's it in a nutshell:

    Then, comes support for the transformative Dear Leader who never quite delivers and always cuts deals through no flaw of his own political character (this we learned is different for women candidates, when all decisions and positions reveal her deeply guarded character flaws).

    This disparity isn't even that remarkable, but so dully familiar that the usual psycho-caca "explaining" it has become (for me) a legitimate form of comic relief.

    Parent

    I have been supporting and making (5.00 / 0) (#61)
    by kenosharick on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:27:58 PM EST
    excuses for these people in the leadership- not enough time,not enough dems, ect. BUT NO MORE. Time for new congressional leadership who has the actual backbone to stand up to the MINORITY. How about Feingold in the Senate leadership?

    Feingold is the coat hook (none / 0) (#62)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:30:58 PM EST
    that Democrats get to hang their cowardice on.

    His job isn't to lead he's their to reflect the vanity of the American left.

    Parent

    Digby is right on. (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:40:36 PM EST
    It is so depressing to think that both major political parties are more interested in the fewer than 30% of the dead-enders in this country who still love George Bush.  Stunning really.

    I'm not sure that's the reason. (none / 0) (#72)
    by pie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:23:18 PM EST
    I would think they're beholden to other groups with money and clout.  OTOH, the security industry has exploded around the DC area.  There was a Time article about employment opportunities and increased home sales several months ago.

    Parent
    Nope (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:24:15 PM EST
    Someone with better googling skills than me can find it I'm sure but Kerry said on one of the Sunday talk shows that there will be no UHC. Like Salo said, it's pretty much been announced as being DOA.

    Digby could have written the same thing (4.87 / 8) (#6)
    by andgarden on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:44:29 PM EST
    about Pelosi a year and three months ago when she capitulated on Iraq funding.

    Digby is wise (4.75 / 4) (#48)
    by Steve M on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:39:09 PM EST
    As long as I can remember, the acid test for any elected Democrat has been whether they have the courage to vote against their own base.  I've never seen the Republicans held to the same standard.  This is just how the liberal media works, I guess.

    They're not held to that silly standard (none / 0) (#87)
    by RalphB on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:43:36 PM EST
    because the GOP won't follow the media's script.  They do whatever they want and consequences be damned.


    Parent
    I'm sure Obama can do better. (none / 0) (#2)
    by MarkL on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:36:26 PM EST


    At capitulating? (5.00 / 8) (#10)
    by janarchy on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:48:56 PM EST
    I'm waiting for it and expecting it. Even the Daily Show and the Colbert Report suddenly noticed that the gild was off the lily...

    Parent
    Good! (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by magisterludi on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:27:31 PM EST
    Now I can start watching again. I was tiring of Family Guy reruns.

    Plus, holding Obama's feet to the fire on shows like Stewart and Colbert, reaching such a large audience, will hopefully make him a better candidate, no?

    Parent

    Stewart actually told the audience (5.00 / 0) (#37)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:30:46 PM EST
    that is was okay to laugh at Obama. he actually had to tell adults that it was okay to guffaw at a hapless Seal Design. Not to be so scared of poking fun at the ballooning ego.

    Parent
    really? (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by kredwyn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:33:33 PM EST
    He's now hit the making fun of stage?

    The obsequious stuff was bugging the crap out of me...so I stopped watching.

    Parent

    He got Obama nicely on teh AIPAC pandering (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:41:13 PM EST
    and the Seal was such an easy joke.  But teh Audience didn't know that it was alright to laugh.

    Parent
    The fact that the audience didn't know (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by kredwyn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:42:22 PM EST
    that it was okay to laugh...that kinda worries me.

    Parent
    I'd say that we are in for a... (none / 0) (#51)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:46:00 PM EST
    ...glum four years.

    Parent
    That's one of the problems... (5.00 / 4) (#54)
    by kredwyn on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:53:26 PM EST
    with overly earnest people. They can sometime have difficulty laughing at the obviously funny...if it appears that it might adversely effect their cause.

     

    Parent

    I'd find this a lot easier to laugh at. . . (none / 0) (#60)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:14:15 PM EST
    if I had any idea what people are talking about.

    Parent
    To get you in the mood for your new leader (none / 0) (#67)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:54:17 PM EST
    Obama appeared with his own Obama's Presidential Seal

    From what I hear it has been retired after becoming a punch line for the comedian crowd.

    Parent

    That's one of those ideas... (none / 0) (#89)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:24:58 AM EST
    that should've stayed buried deep inside the idea box.

    Parent
    That is disturbing. (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by AX10 on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 06:54:45 PM EST
    This is GOP behavior.
    Democrats never had a problem of laughing at themselves.  Now they do.  Just how the GOP does.
    I do not like what I am seeing.

    Parent
    Oh there are some... (none / 0) (#90)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:29:45 AM EST
    who're completely incapable of laughing at themselves.

    To their minds...their cause is true and just and whoever snarks at them should just...well...how dare they even consider finding the funny.

    Parent

    See, there you go again, giving the GOP (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:53:30 PM EST
    ideas.  And, anyhow, Obama hasn't voted yet.  Give the man a break.  

    Parent
    Give Obama a break? (5.00 / 6) (#19)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:02:57 PM EST
    Who is he?  The cute little kid on a sitcom?

    He's now the presumptive nominee the Special Olympics treatment of his candidacy is over.

    Parent

    He's approved of the vote. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:24:35 PM EST
    and he'll do some brilliant oppasporting Speech which the medioa will adore and i'll have to appologize for.

    Parent
    Snarkalicious! (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Steve M on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:36:04 PM EST
    So, is Joe Klein privy to all that (none / 0) (#13)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:56:27 PM EST
    inside info the Representatives alluded to during their speeches?

    Great One (none / 0) (#26)
    by squeaky on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:19:08 PM EST
    I can see him preening as I type. Disgusting.

    This bit regarding Goodling et al, is not too bad either:

    Congress insists on taking most of their bullets out of the chamber and then begging the executive branch to be reasonable, after they have shown no interest in ever doing so. This is how you get the DoJ hiring far-right conservatives and breaking the law with impunity. And getting caught doesn't seem to be an obstacle.

    The next four to eight years, should Sen. Obama win, will be littered with "exclusive" stories from inside the DoJ of corruption and politicization and all sorts of malfeasance. These "honor" students are who those charges will be coming from. It'll be a total reversal and somebody had better recognize it.

    digby

    Digby's our Tom Paine (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Ellie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:28:26 PM EST
    A true (s)hero in our time. Her keyboard will one day grace the Smithsonian.

    Parent
    most of the net will end up on the ash heap. (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:33:28 PM EST
    Maybe two or three things from our era might be remembered and they are probably happening in China or India as we speak.

    Parent
    who want's to be accused (none / 0) (#27)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:22:46 PM EST
    of blocking "vital" "national security" measures in an election year?

    The first mistake is buying into that framing (none / 0) (#69)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:58:05 PM EST
    The second is not realizing that every other year is an election year. When can we expect Dems to stand up for something?

    Parent
    I didn't buy into it. (none / 0) (#70)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:04:41 PM EST
    It's what the Democratic leadership bought into. Possibly for good reason for all we know.  Also, it feels like a pet issue.

    Parent
    Liberals fight back, those Dems are Fauxgressive (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ellie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:31:22 PM EST
    They're so cowed by the GOP's vilification of the term Liberal that they run for cover at the mere whiff of a threat it might be applied to them ... yet again.

    Thing is, the GOP have gone to that Liberal=Evil well so often, they slap the label onto anything they just don't like. They've actually gone through phases of gratuitously calling each other "liberals" with no conceivable connection to an actual dictionary definition.

    It's one of their phony AHA!s, a "naked under their clothes" posture of empty accusation that sends Dems scurrying instead of standing firm and shouting, "So freakin' what, @ssho!e?" or, at the very least, "And what, pray tell, have you got on under your skivvies?"

    The leadership ar not liberal. (none / 0) (#80)
    by Salo on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:44:58 PM EST
    not even leftwing.    why is there even a vote on FISA this year?

    Ugh, please, you slander (none / 0) (#83)
    by Valhalla on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:05:08 PM EST
    the 'very liberal left' by assigning this group of lazy slacker cowards to us.

    I do not claim them.  I don't know who does.

    To belong to any particular part of the political spectrum, whether right, left, far, moderate etc, you have to espouse some some set of beliefs and work toward (even if stumblingly) enacting some set of principles into law.

    This group has no such set of principles.  Instead, as corporations do, they have not principles but a goal.  One goal, to get Dems elected and get themselves re-elected.  That is what the 50 State stratery is, in total.  Which is a fine goal if you mean to use the power of the majority to actually do some good.  There is no evidence they do.

    So please don't assign them to any particular part of the spectrum, because what binds them isn't part of it.

    I'd like to see a discussion (none / 0) (#84)
    by pie on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:09:38 PM EST
    Yep (none / 0) (#88)
    by RalphB on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:48:17 PM EST
    looks like rolling back those Bush tax cuts may get a position under the bus.  wow.

    Parent