<p>I don’t think the Democrats would get a majority to block the telephone immunity, but I would have hoped they could have mustered enough for a fillibuster. May the Constitution RIP. I just heard about this from Moveon.Org because I am a member.
<p>We would hope some would show backbone nonetheless. People do not understand, if the president gives unlawful orders you SHOULD NOT and CAN NOT obey or you will be held accountable. That’ why he’s a President, and not a goddamn KING!</p>
<p>I object to any granting of immunity before determining what was done wrong. You no disclose, you no get immunity.</p>
<p>That said, the Democratic majority in the Senate is too narrow to make this stick. Especially when Joe Liebercain is one of the Democrats [sic].</p>
<p>I agree with dstark. I am tired of the Dems caving in on issue after issue without even putting up a fight. There is something to be said for standing up for what is right, even if you know you can’t win.</p>
<p>That’s because we don’t have these people caned.</p>
<p>I object to any sentence short of having the CEOs of these companies caned within an inch of their lives. That applies to Bush as well. And all the other spineless politicians.</p>
<p>Just put me in charge: I’ll go to Bush’s office and say, you have 90 days to completely restore peace in Iraq. If there’s so much as a murder on Day 91, we’re cutting off ALL funding. And you have 90 second to turn over ALL evidence regarding domestic wiretapping. If you don’t, I’ll have you arrested for contempt.</p>
<p>It’s also because nobody ever gets angry about it. At least during Vietnam, you all watched, and you all got angry.</p>
<p>Democrats being here to restore our civil liberties is a joke that only the willful ignorant still buy into.</p>
<p>Saying that they’re spineless is actually being too nice, in the same vein that saying Bush is dumb is being too nice. The truth is that both are corrupt and dishonest, likely even criminally so.</p>
If we block telephone immunity and these CEO’s lose millions we won’t have to cane them. The shareholders will do it for us :).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let’s Keep Iraq out of this. People are pretty polarized on that issue. The only people who will change their opinion on Iraq this late in the game are moderate Republicans who live in blue/purple states that come up for election in '08 and are praying to the God they don’t get kicked out. Ya that mean’s Franken will kick your decietful butt, Coleman!</p>
<p>
Now I’ll never defend all Democrats Vyse but I will tell you something about some of them. More than half of the Democrats in Congress opposed the war in Iraq. More Democrats than Republicans opposed Patriot Act and other warrantless wiretapping. Although their are moderate and DLC Democrats that tarnish the image of the party (Clinton, Liebermann, Bayh, Pryor), Democrat will always be way better than Republicans to defend our civil liberties.
And as Colbert would say, that is the word !</p>
<p>How many of those Democrats voted against the Iraq war simply because it was Bush’s war? How many of those same Democrats supported Clinton’s aggression in Bosnia?</p>
<p>The truth is that the two party system has lead to war mongering from both sides for decades. The party in power always abandons their principles in favor of aggression. Bush actually won in 2000 by promising a humble foreign policy, no nation building, and no policing the world. It was backlash to Clinton’s interventionist Middle Eastern policies that drew Bush support from the libertarian wing of his party.</p>
<p>Ron Paul has always been anti war nobody which party initiates it, he voted against the patriot act, against the national i.d. card, against h.r. 1955, etc.</p>
<p>Opposing the Iraq War does not mean opposing all miltiary action. I never said it would or should be. Usually if there’s a genocide going on I will support action to end it if there is a clear solution that has international backing and popular support in both this country and the country in question. A lot of conditions as you see.
</p>
<p>Vyse, I ask you, no , I beg you to stop turning every thread on politics into a Ron Paul advertisement. I am sorry but he’s not going to win so he needs to start drawing up papers for a third party run. He can have all the money in the world, it doesn’t matter. Ask Ross!</p>
<p>This quote is an example of “magical problem solving.” I can usually tell that someone is either ignorant, stupid, or young when they prescribe simple solutions to complex problems. Since I know you aren’t stupid or ignorant, I can only attribute your simplistic approach to youth. Enjoy this time in your life, because by the time you are as old as your parents nothing will seem this simple. </p>
<p>(My issue was the environment. All we had to do was shut down all businesses that polluted and everything would be OK! It was all so simple!)</p>
<p>I’ll make book about Iraq, Barrons: the question has always been, who controls Iraq and under what circumstances. A transient downturn in carbombs isn’t an indicator of “victory.” The Mahdi Army and Muqtada al Sadr is still in intact. The Badr Corps and SIIC are still intact. The central government is highly skeptical, and continues to throw roadblocks in front of, the USA’s arming of the Sunni “Awakening” movement that has resulted of the routing of AQ in Anbar…while making the Sunnis are more formidable foe in future intramurals with any Shiite-dominated central government. The “surge” has brought no progress on the Iraqi political front and in some ways we’ve gone backwards as we’ve committed our prestige to propping up and maintaining the weak, ineffective, and dysfunctional Maliki government. </p>
<p>Note: the “Awakening” movement has worked well in al Anbar because the region is very heavily Sunni to the point of being pretty homogenous; no such luck in any more mixed environs such as, say, Diyalah (sp.?).</p>
<p>I wouldn’t start looking a preparation and presentation instructions for crow just yet.</p>
<p>GLUCLA, I’ve looked at the reports and derailing telecom immunity isn’t dead. Reid has tabled further debate until January…leaving time to stiffen some spines. To me, the fundamental issue is one of not issuing blank checks.</p>