Their mission is simple:
"The Big Brass Alliance was formed in May 2005 as a collective of progressive bloggers who support After Downing Street, a coalition of veterans' groups, peace groups, and political activist groups formed to urge that the U.S. Congress launch a formal investigation into whether President Bush has committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war. The campaign focuses on evidence that recently emerged in a British memo containing minutes of a secret July 2002 meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top national security officials."You should join to if you support an investigation or impeachment. Americans at least deserve some answers.|W|P|111760146345183446|W|P|Big Brass Alliance|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Chris Woods|W|P|Rob, you convinced me! Robert Schumacher|W|P|I'm sure it didn't take too much convincing :) Chris Woods|W|P|You're right, it didn't. Thanks again. jarnocan|W|P|Wow, I gotta get me a set of those balls . This blog is set up so cool- love all your links!!! I've played with my template a little but pretty wimpy/skimpy. jarnocan.blogspot.com NoBu**Sh**zone. I love the new forum http://bigbrassblog.com/phpbb/"Minutes from a summer 2002 meeting involving British Prime Minister Tony Blair reveal that the Bush administration was ''fixing" the intelligence to justify invading Iraq. US intelligence used to justify the war demonstrates repeatedly the truth of the meeting minutes -- evidence was thin and needed fixing. President Clinton was impeached for perjury about his sexual relationships. Comparing Clinton's misbehavior to a destructive and costly war occupation launched in March 2003 under false pretenses in violation of domestic and international law certainly merits introduction of an impeachment resolution. Eighty-nine members of Congress have asked the president whether intelligence was manipulated to lead the United States to war. The letter points to British meeting minutes that raise ''troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war." Those minutes describe the case for war as ''thin" and Saddam as ''nonthreatening to his neighbors," and ''Britain and America had to create conditions to justify a war." Finally, military action was ''seen as inevitable . . . But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.""If Clinton can get impeached for getting blowjobs in the Oval Office and then deciding he didn't need to tell a federal Grand Jury about it, then I think Bush can be impeached for high crimes, treason, and lying to the people of the United States. All of these things have led to the deaths of almost 2,000 American men and women. How much longer will we let these things go on? Check out DowningStreetMemo.com. Hat-tip to Suburban Guerrilla.|W|P|111759574889971488|W|P|The 'I' word?|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Robert Schumacher|W|P|Considered joining the Big Brass Alliance? We got a mention on CNN (WMV) today, despite only being a few days old.The Downing Street Memo, while not the "smoking gun" in the strictist sense, is certainly a clear declaration of what the Bush Regime was doing all along...we knew it, but it's now confirmed by outside sources (ones that can't be said to be Democrat attackers).
It warrants an investigation, at the very least.
"Bradlee said today, "The thing that stuns me is that the goddamn secret has lasted this long." He was the Post's executive editor during Watergate and now is a vice president of the newspaper."To steal a phrase from Atrios--heh, indeedy.|W|P|111758379199985503|W|P|Who knew DC could keep a secret this long?|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"This is not Live Aid 2. These concerts are the start point for The Long Walk To Justice, the one way we can all make our voices heard in unison. This is without doubt a moment in history where ordinary people can grasp the chance to achieve something truly monumental and demand from the 8 world leaders at G8 an end to poverty. The G8 leaders have it within their power to alter history. They will only have the will to do so if tens of thousands of people show them that enough is enough. By doubling aid, fully cancelling debt, and delivering trade justice for Africa, the G8 could change the future for millions of men, women and children."These concerts look like an amazing thing--if only there was one closer to Des Moines. Looks like I might have to make a roadtrip to Philly. Check out more information here. Line-ups at each location are as follows: (London looks like the best location)
- Hyde Park, London: U2, REM, Coldplay, Sir Paul McCartney, The Cure, Dido, Keane, Sir Elton John, Annie Lennox, Madonna, Muse, Razorlight, Scissor Sisters, Joss Stone, Stereophonics, Sting, Robbie Williams, Mariah Carey, Velvet Revolver, Bob Geldof, The Killers, Snow Patrol
- Museum of Art, Philadelphia: Stevie Wonder, The Dave Matthews Band, Bon Jovi, Maroon 5, P Diddy, Jay-Z, Sarah McLachlan, Rob Thomas, Keith Urban, 50 Cent, Kaiser Chiefs, Will Smith (host)
- Eiffel Tower, Paris: Jamiroquai, Craig David, Youssou N'Dour, Yannick Noah, Andrea Bocelli, Calo Gero, Kyo, Placebo, Axelle Red, Johnny Halliday, Manu Chao, Renaud
- Brandenburg Gate, Berlin: A-ha, Crosby, Stills and Nash, Brian Wilson, Lauryn Hill, Bap, Die Toten Hosen, Peter Maffay
- Circus Maximus, Rome: Duran Duran, Faith Hill, Irene Grandi, Jovanotti, Tim McGraw, Nek, Laura Pasini, Vasco Rossi, Zucchero
"David Shipler, who recently joined me on a panel at UNC, tells a striking story about a single mother he met while researching his book, The Working Poor. She had no savings and low earnings, so she had to live in a drafty wooden house. This exacerbated her son's asthma. That led to two ambulance rides to the hospital. Those trips led to ambulance charges she couldn't pay. Those charges damaged her credit report. And so then she was denied a loan to buy a mobile home. That meant she had to stay in that drafty house—the house that contributed to her son's asthma attacks. And she had to buy a car from a sleazy dealership that charged her 15 percent interest. As one little boy David met told his mother, “Being poor is expensive.”"The entire post, and hopefully the next few days' posts, will also be full of the wonderful analysis that Sen. Edwards brings to us on poverty in his first post. Having grown up in very modest surroundings myself, even being deemed a poor child by the federal government during my elementary and middle school years, I have some understanding of poverty. But it isn't that great of an understanding, and I feel fortunate for that. Now, with my political ambitions, I hope to fight poverty the same way Sen. Edwards is.|W|P|111758250319909711|W|P|It ain't cheap being poor|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"Even we at Fox News manage to get some lefties on the air occasionally, and often let them finish their sentences before we club them to death and feed the scraps to Karl Rove and Bill O'Reilly."This from a Slate.com article, and quoted from Scott Norvell in the Wall Street Journal.|W|P|111757847739621501|W|P|Faux News admits bias|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Why isn't the right-wing blogosphere or media tackling the issues of the Deep Throat revelation? Power Line hasn't posted anything, and Fox News is barely reporting it (and when they are, they seem to be challenging the admission and revelation). Fascinating, hmm......|W|P|111757732203253005|W|P|An interesting question|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"Woodward Confrims Felt Is 'Deep Throat'"Go read the full article here.|W|P|111757557420416969|W|P|Woodward confirms it|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"It was John Felt, the FBI's #2 at the time. The upcoming Vanity Fair has a long interview with the newly named source, and the Captiol Buzz points us towards an advance copy of the article. It's pdf, but this is a big fucking moment. Off you go."Go read the pdf now, I'm working on it, but I've also got to get ready for work.|W|P|111755491589800204|W|P|Deep Throat revealed!!!|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Chris Woods|W|P|I'm pretty positive its him. The Felt family has already contacted the Washingon Post, and it looks like the Post is getting ready to publish a huge article about it tomorrow, and Bob Woodward will be having one printed on Thursday. Unless they're gonna outright call him a liar, then I'd say W. Mark Felt is our man."After all, every American who has a relative with one of these diseases—which means nearly every American—is beginning to understand the issue in a new way: it's "pro-cure" versus "anti-cure," with the anti-stem-cell folks in danger of being swept into the medical wastebin of history."He's absolutely right. Look, my brother has a devastating disease that has given him almost no immune system. He used to have 8-hour transfusions every 3 or 4 weeks to stay healthy and alive. Now they've been able to improve the technology and science so that he take a shot of the stuff a week in the privacy of his home. Someday science may be able to get the medicine he needs into pill form. But they'll never be able to cure the disease. And it will still cost my family (and him on his own eventually) and the insurance companies hundreds of thousands of dollars every year. Stem cell research can cure it. His immunologist worked for a research group that had been using the federally-funded stem cell lines; that is, up until they all got contaminated and they had to suspend most of the research. My grandfather has Parkinson's disease. Stem cell research can cure that, too. My cousin has diabetes. Stem cell research can cure that as well. This is a political movement. In 2006, the winners will be pro-cure. I'm pro-cure, are you?|W|P|111750662653695451|W|P|It is time to launch the Pro-Cure movement|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
David Schantz|W|P|The only way I can really explain my feelings on this is to quote a friend that was talking on the subject of genetically modified food when he said,"The Bible says we should praise God not play God." Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see everyone I know (including my wife and myself) that has health problems cured. I just question some of todays technology, maybe it's an age thing.God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
Chris Woods|W|P|Playing God, I think, comes up with issues such as cloning human beings for the sake of cloning human beings. I don't know where I stand on that morally.But when it comes to praising God, I think the fact that we're trying to prolong and protect the amazing gift of life that he granted to us makes supporters of stem cell research righteous in their cause.
"The U.S. military nearly set off a sectarian crisis Monday by mistakenly arresting the leader of Iraq's top Sunni Muslim political party, while two suicide bombers killed about 30 police, and U.S. fighter jets destroyed insurgent strongholds near Syria's border. . . . The arrest of Iraqi Islamic Party leader Mohsen Abdul-Hamid, his three sons and four guards did little to help efforts to entice Iraq's once-dominant Sunni community back into the political fold. The Sunnis lost their influence following Saddam Hussein's ouster two years ago."Well, that's just great. We're helping them to bring about a civil war!|W|P|111749190820774104|W|P|Aren't we the smart ones|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"In exchange for our uniformed young people's willingness to offer the gift of their lives, civilian Americans owe them something important: It is our duty to ensure that they never are called to make that sacrifice unless it is truly necessary for the security of the country. In the case of Iraq, the American public has failed them; we did not prevent the Bush administration from spending their blood in an unnecessary war based on contrived concerns about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. President Bush and those around him lied, and the rest of us let them. Harsh? Yes. True? Also yes. Perhaps it happened because Americans, understandably, don't expect untruths from those in power. But that works better as an explanation than as an excuse."God bless you all.|W|P|111747950687794248|W|P|Memorial Day|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"BROWNBACK: George [Stephanopoulos] and Arlen, when did each of your lives begin? When did your life biologically start? And we shouldn't be researching on that life at any time during its continuum unless we have your consent. When did your life start? SPECTER: Well Sam, I'm a lot more concerned at this point about when my life is gonna end."In case you didn't know, last fall Sen. Specter was diagnosed with Hodgkins Lymphoma and is currently undergoing severe chemotherapy while maintaining his duties as Senator from the state of Pennsylvania. Brownback was a total jack-off.|W|P|111741833656470803|W|P|Specter on stem cell research|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
David Schantz|W|P|Chris, Your brother will be in my prayers. I'll also be praying for all of those who are now serving or have served their country in the past. I hope you will stop by to answer my Question Of The Week.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic
"The war on Newsweek shifted attention away from how the Guantanamo prisoners have been treated, how that treatment has affected the battle against terrorism and what American policies should be. Newsweek-bashing also furthered a long-term and so far successful campaign by the administration and the conservative movement to dismiss all negative reports about their side as the product of some entity they call "the liberal media." . . . . . .I fear that too many people in traditional journalism are becoming dangerously defensive in the face of a brilliantly conceived conservative attack on the independent media. Conservative academics have long attacked "postmodernist" philosophies for questioning whether "truth" exists at all and claiming that what we take as "truths" are merely "narratives" woven around some ideological predisposition. Today's conservative activists have become the new postmodernists. They shift attention away from the truth or falsity of specific facts and allegations -- and move the discussion to the motives of the journalists and media organizations putting them forward. Just a modest number of failures can be used to discredit an entire enterprise. . . . But this particular anti-press campaign is not about Journalism 101. It is about Power 101. It is a sophisticated effort to demolish the idea of a press independent of political parties by way of discouraging scrutiny of conservative politicians in power. By using bad documents, Dan Rather helped Bush, not John Kerry, because Rather gave Bush's skilled lieutenants the chance to use the CBS mistake to close off an entire line of inquiry about the president. In the case of Guantanamo, the administration, for a while, cast its actions as less important than Newsweek's."It really is an assault on the media by Washington Republicans and the Wingnuts. If you criticize or take away from a positive gain that they make, then you're a liar, a fraud, and un-American. The attack on an independent media seems to be quite coordinated with the consolidation of power being taken by the Bush Regime (which I discussed yesterday). The greater the ability to propogate their lies, the easier it is for them to attack the media and the easier it is to confuse and manipulate Americans.|W|P|111722912490856053|W|P|Conservative attack on the media|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"Shut it down. Just shut it down. I am talking about the war-on-terrorism P.O.W. camp at Guantánamo Bay. Just shut it down and then plow it under. It has become worse than an embarrassment. I am convinced that more Americans are dying and will die if we keep the Gitmo prison open than if we shut it down. So, please, Mr. President, just shut it down. If you want to appreciate how corrosive Guantánamo has become for America's standing abroad, don't read the Arab press. Don't read the Pakistani press. Don't read the Afghan press. Hop over here to London or go online and just read the British press! See what our closest allies are saying about Gitmo. And when you get done with that, read the Australian press and the Canadian press and the German press."Go read the whole piece, it is quite impressive. I wonder if the "freedom-lovers" will get on his back about this. How long do you think it will be before Power Line slams him as not being a patriot?|W|P|111721024645090194|W|P|Shut it down|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"The campaign to prevent the Senate filibuster of the president's judicial nominations was simply the latest and most public example of similar transformations in Congress and the executive branch stretching back a decade. The common theme is to consolidate influence in a small circle of Republicans and to marginalize dissenting voices that would try to impede a conservative agenda. House Republicans, for instance, discarded the seniority system and limited the independence and prerogatives of committee chairmen. The result is a chamber effectively run by a handful of GOP leaders. At the White House, Bush has tightened the reins on Cabinet members, centralizing the most important decisions among a tight group of West Wing loyalists. With the strong encouragement of Vice President Cheney, he has also moved to expand the amount of executive branch information that can be legally shielded from Congress, the courts and the public. Now, the White House and Congress are setting their sights on how to make the judiciary more deferential to the conservative cause -- as illustrated by the filibuster debate and recent threats by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and others to more vigorously oversee the courts. ... With control over the House Rules Committee, which determines which bills make it the floor, how they will be debated and whether they can be amended, Republicans have made it much harder for Democrats to offer alternatives -- for example, a smaller tax cut than one Republicans advocate. Democrats also are increasingly shut out of the final negotiations on legislation between the House and the Senate before bills are sent to Bush for his signature."Ezra is right, he sounds incredibly shrill. I think this just proves what I started talking about a long time ago as the Bush Regime started to ascend into power. As the Congress begins lining up his way, he consolidates power in the Cabinet and the Executive, his last stop on the Regime train is the judiciary--meaning a Supreme Court nominee. The compromise achieved by the Gang of 14 slowed him down a bit--will it hold as a permanent block to the Regime train?|W|P|111720990287178646|W|P|GOP tilting the Balance of Power|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
- The Bush administration is, as this piece in today’s Washington Post puts it, working to “consolidate influence in a small circle of Republicans and to marginalize dissenting voices that would try to impede a conservative agenda.”
- They are doing so with a historically unprecedented, at least in this country, degree of secrecy, and therefore lack of accountability.
- These same people, acting with unprecedented centralization of power, and secrecy, have taken it upon themselves to suspend the most basic rights enumerated in our constitution, and are carrying out the functional equivalent of a police state on Guantanamo Bay, and at various prisons around the world. It is a police state in which torture is condoned and prisoners are, on occasion, murdered. According to Amnesty International, the United States is operating a “gulag” that “has sought to justify the use of coercive interrogation techniques, the practice of holding 'ghost detainees' (people in unacknowledged incommunicado detention) and the 'rendering' or handing over of prisoners to third countries known to practice torture,” More here.
- While they pay rhetorical tribute to “democracy,” they side with tyrants whenever convenient.
- In response to even the most carefully documented evidence, the White House simply refuses to engage and, instead, impugns the character of those who present it, like this: “In response, Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said, 'I think the allegations are ridiculous, and unsupported by the facts.'" They also take Orwellian doublespeak to a level that would have embarrassed Orwell. “'We've also - are leading the way when it comes to spreading compassion,’ Mr. McClellan said."
- And one reason they get away with it is that many in the media, even alleged “liberals” are eager to help. And I don’t mean just Fox, Rush, and the entire structure of the conservative echo machine.
- No less important in allowing it all to take place, is that the so-called “Gang of 500,”—the insiders of the mainstream media, do not really care about any of the above.
"Call me shrill, ideological, or whatever you like, but I think we’re losing our Constitution, our civil liberties, and in many significant respects, our country. When future historians look back on this period, they will wonder, most of all, I think, how we let it go without a fight."This is indeed an interesting period of American history. How will I explain this to my children and grandchildren? I do not know. . .|W|P|111715963976642765|W|P|7 Easy Steps to Lose a Country|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"Former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, the steward of President Clinton’s economic policy, told the House Democratic Caucus yesterday that it needs to continue to “hold firm” in its opposition to President Bush’s effort to reform Social Security and advised the Democrats not to introduce their own plan, according to aides and lawmakers in the meeting. Rubin, who has gained huge stature in the party for presiding over the national finances during the Clinton boom years, counseled congressional Democrats against engaging Republicans on specifics. He urged them instead to cast the debate in terms of principles, with opposition to deficit spending as their guiding conviction. “Putting out a Democrat plan on Social Security would be a horrible mistake because right now it’s the president’s principles against our principles,” Rubin said, according to a Democratic leadership aide. The aide added that Rubin told his party colleagues that it would be hard to win a battle of specifics."Look, I'm pretty sure that Democrats can mark this down as another victory this year. There is low public support for any of the Bush Regime's ideas, the math just doesn't make sense (as Paul Krugman has repeatedly shown us), and it is just a plain bad idea (even philosophically). As Josh Marshall says:
"Add to this the fact that the president is clocking in at under 30% support on Social Security and most Americans now understand that he wants to dismantle the program and the whole thing really becomes a no-brainer. In fact, Dems should really start making the point now that they are the ones who stopped President Bush from phasing out Social Security this year. Be loud, be proud."We don't rub it in the Washington Republicans' faces enough. We're winning now. This is three in a row. Let's not stop it here. We're tired of being the Chicago Cubs of national politics the past couple of years--we get so close and blow it in the end. Now we're winning early and making substantial gains, especially in state legislatures. Let's pick up these victories and slam it in the GOP's face. Rub it in until it hurts. It is time to brag and to boast. It is our turn and we won't relent--we CAN'T relent. No compromise, no deals. We're gonna win this. Advantage Democrats.|W|P|111715800036911354|W|P|Where does Social Security privatization stand?|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"But if the Washington Republicans stopped to listen to the American people, this is what they’d hear: Americans are sick and tired of getting caught in the crossfire of partisan sniping. Americans want us to put the common sense center ahead of nonsense . Americans want us to bring people together, to focus on what we owe to one another, and the responsibilities we share. And Americans want their agenda – their jobs, their health care, their security – to get back on the front burners of the nation’s agenda."The Washington Republicans are out of touch with America, especially their leader, George W. Bush. But the agenda continues:
"Americans are coming to realize this Republican Congress is out of touch with the real problems of working families and that the agenda the Republicans are advancing is at odds with what people in this country really care about. We Democrats have something better to offer. A reform agenda that will cleanse Washington…give power to the people – not special interests…and make sure that everyday Americans and their concerns get back on the Congressional calendar. Strengthening our national defense. Rebuilding our economy. Providing families with affordable health care. Making America energy independent. Securing our retirement. That’s our agenda. That’s America’s agenda. But the Republican Congress has put all this and more on hold. I hope that now we can finally turn to the people's business."Democrats should repeat this over and over again to themselves. This is what we're fighting for. This is what you will bring your constituents. This is what America wants AND deserves. And thankfully, he's a Democrat who understands the importance of national security:
"We need a common sense reform agenda for the common good. And that starts with defending our nation and making it more secure. As of this month, more time has passed since 9-11 than the time between Pearl Harbor and the defeat of Japan. During those three years and eight months – sixty years ago – we invaded North Africa and Normandy. We freed people from the Philippines to France. Hitler lay dead and Tojo was in chains. We had defeated fascism around the world and had begun to build the new United Nations. But today Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, our homeland is still not secure, we’re still not energy independent, and – in many ways – Americans are less safe than we were before 9-11. Democrats are the party of national security. And we have an agenda to defend America from danger. We stand for increasing our military strength by 40,000 troops so we can wage the War on Terror on every front. We stand for securing our borders and bridges, our seaports and airports, our nuclear and chemical plants. We stand for tracking down and securing the loose nuclear weapons that threaten our people. And we will honor our troops and their families by making sure they get the benefits they have earned."Let's follow-through.|W|P|111715421753978846|W|P|Harry Reid just gets it|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"Now I wonder when Mr. Bush and Mr. DeLay will find the time to address - or rather, to denounce - the depraved ways in which the United States has dealt with so many of the thousands of people (many of them completely innocent) who have been swept up in the so-called war on terror. People have been murdered, tortured, rendered to foreign countries to be tortured at a distance, sexually violated, imprisoned without trial or in some cases simply made to "disappear" in an all-American version of a practice previously associated with brutal Latin American dictatorships. All of this has been done, of course, in the name of freedom."I again refer you to my post on the GOP life crisis, as Herbert's premise for this article is the recent discussion over human life and embryonic stem cell research. Herbert is right. Washington Republicans have essentially said that protecting human life is not as important as bringing people freedom. But what good is freedom to hundreds of thousands of dead people?|W|P|111712437636177250|W|P|Is it really on the march?|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"The foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany persuaded Iran on Wednesday to continue its freeze on nuclear activities, averting a diplomatic crisis that could have led to punitive international measures against Iran. In exchange, the Europeans offered to present Iran with detailed, step-by-step proposals by early August at the latest on how to move toward consensus on the shape of Iran's nuclear program. Last November in Paris, Iran agreed to suspend all of its uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities while it negotiated the economic, nuclear, political and security benefits it would receive."This is good news. It'll just be interesting to see how the renewed compromises end up. Someday the US will be able to have diplomatic power like this again.|W|P|111707489831197402|W|P|Iran to continue freeze on nuclear work|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
David Schantz|W|P|Chris,Yes it will be interesting to see how long Iran continues to cooperate. They don't have a real good record on telling the truth about their nuclear programs. What do you suppose brought this change on? Or was there a change at all?Even though we don't agree on the gun control issue I'd like to thank you for stopping by my site. I'd like to invite you back. I have now posted a response to your comments. I also wanted to let you know both of your sites are interesting, I'll be stopping in from time to time.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
Aggressive-Voice|W|P|Is Bolton "waaaaaaaay out of the mainstream" too?"Nearly a dozen detainees at the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba told FBI interrogators that guards had mistreated copies of the Koran, including one who said in 2002 that guards "flushed a Koran in the toilet," according to new FBI documents released today. The summaries of FBI interviews, obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union as part of an ongoing lawsuit, also include allegations that the Koran was kicked, thrown to the floor and withheld as punishment and that guards mocked Muslim prisoners during prayers. The release of the new FBI documents comes in the wake of an international uproar over a now-retracted story by Newsweek magazine, which reported that an internal military report had confirmed that a Koran was flushed down a toilet. The retracted story has been linked by the Bush administration to deadly riots overseas."I'm sure they'll love the ACLU even more now because of this. Honest to god, the whole Newsweek blow-up keeps looking more and more ridiculous as these allegations continue to unfold--and are substantiated by documents and interviews of those in our own damn government. Nevertheless, I'm sure this will be said to have been uncorroborated completely and totally unsubstantiated so the wingnuts will say we have to disregard it and Newsweek still lied and people died. But if they're so pissed off about people lying and then people dying, why aren't they monstrously upset at the Bush Regime? Huh? Fuckin' hypocrites.|W|P|111706379138047048|W|P|FBI documents show Koran abuse at Gitmo|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."So much truth in one statement.|W|P|111706297280779527|W|P|The truth|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Fred|W|P|I would expect more as time goes on... Sar|W|P|Great blog, Chris! I found you through BE Rocket."You'd think, after months on the campaign trail, that the combatants would know they needed some sound bites rather than just a solid performance. So why don't they call up Aaron Sorkin, or indeed Geoffrey Nunberg, and commission a few? Why don't they go in for the kill?"|W|P|111704703828009739|W|P|Bring the 'zingers' back into politics|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Robert Schumacher|W|P|Sen. Inouye has been missing some time in the Senate lately because his wife in being treated for cancer. Given that even with all of the Democrats voting against her she still would have been confirmed, he probably didn't see much point in voting. Just a guess..."At a White House press briefing Monday, Press Secretary Scott McClellan, pressed by reporters and with Afghan President Karzai in disagreement, retreated on claims that Newsweek's retracted story on Koran abuse cost lives in Afghanistan. He also claimed that he had never said it did, even though a check of transcripts disputes that. On May 16, for example, he said, "people have lost their lives." On May 17, he said, "People did lose their lives," and, "People lost their lives" due to the Newsweek report."Oops.|W|P|111699037855183872|W|P|A liar in the Press Room|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"That's why insiders see a quiet consensus developing around Reform Lite. Republicans seem increasingly willing to abandon Bush-style accounts and their opposition to any tax increases. And Democrats have privately expressed a willingness to accept benefit cuts and hand Bush half a victory rather than be seen as blocking needed changes. "We are getting within striking distance of really constructive proposals," says a leading Democratic Social Security strategist."Look, we gave President Bush a half-win last night while making the Dobsonites look like fools. It was only a half victory for us, so let's not let the special winning Kool-Aid get to us. As Markos says, "expect all hell to break loose" if those 7 Democratic senators decide to compromise on this. Honest to God, there is no crisis in Social Security. The math people use to talk about some kind of imminent crisis is just plain wrong and bad math. The bigger domestic entitlement problem are the fiscal issues facing Medicare. It is a much, much bigger liability than Social Security will ever be. Furthermore, the 'reforms' that Congress passed (if you can even say they did that after the amazingly long vote they took) made the problem even worse and was simply a movement to kiss tons of pharmaceutical complany ass. The fact is, if Democrats defy the party orders on Social Security there will be some hefty consequences. Like no financial help from the DCCC or DSCC for campaigns in 2006. That should get their attention. Here's what Dems should do, according to Liberal Oasis' Bill Sher:
"In one fell swoop, Democrats should declare the following:Sounds like a damn good plan to me. We need a big victory, and this can be our chance. If you've got thoughts on Social Security, leave them in the comments. There is no compromise when it comes to issues like this.|W|P|111698254359555209|W|P|Time to move on to more pressing matters|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.comThe Social Security debate has ended, as the public has rejected partial privatization and is not demanding any hasty changes to the system. In turn, Democrats will no longer participate in congressional hearings on Social Security, and will not debate Social Security with Republicans in the media, at least until Republicans drop privatization. Instead, Democrats will begin addressing the real crisis of Medicare and skyrocketing health care costs, by putting on the table a few comprehensive reform plans, leading their own hearings to foster public debate and discussion about them, and culminating with a single plan for the party to run on in the 2006 congressional elections. Why would this strategy work? Because it flows from what Democrats have already been saying."
Robert Schumacher|W|P|Frist isn't bound by the agreement...the deal the 14 Senators signed basically made no committment on Saad and Myers. Thus the Democrats (the 7 on the agreement) are free to join in a filibuster of them without breaking the agreement, and if Frist uses one of them to "go nuclear" the 7 Republicans should join the Democrats in opposing the nuclear option.Nothing in the agreement really prevents Frist (who didn't sign onto it anyway) from calling for a cloture vote...but if the Republicans stick to their end, they'll block the nuclear option.
Chris Woods|W|P|What irks me though is that Harry Reid decided that this was a decent enough compromise to comply with, and he encouraged numerous Democrats to agree to it as well.You would think the majority leader would attempt to bring back the comity of the Senate as well, but when you're the wingnut's whipping boy, I guess not.
Robert Schumacher|W|P|You mean you actually expected Frist to bend at all?If I continue with the analogy of Bush as Palpatine, Frist is a good stand-in for Vader...except he never was "good". :)
Chris Woods|W|P|I think the whole compromise left me wishing for the whole Senate comity and getting along thing. I was confused because the moderates actually agreed on something :-).But that's past now. I hope he enjoys his leadership position while he's got it. Another failure like the one he got last night, he's in even deeper shit.
Chase was right: the House was getting jealous that the Senate was getting all of the attention so now they're preparing to vote on a bill for stem cell reasearch. Beyond my own personal beliefs on stem cell research (if you want to know them, ask and I'll tell--I think I already have in a post somewhere on here anyway), I think the bill is a good thing for America, as well as all ailing Americans. The White House has already stated their distaste with the bill, and President Bush has already threatened a veto if it makes it his desk. The veto would be a watershed moment in Bush's presidency because it would be his first veto, and it would come on such a controversial bill. Today Bush even called the legislation in the House "morally troubling" and that we should the right thing to do is protect human life. Before I move on, please note the obvious hypocrisy in this quote as pointed out by Joe over at AMERICAblog. What I don't understand is the two seemingly contradictory positions coming out of the GOP and the White House. They love life so much that they wanted the federal government to intervene in a tragic family disagreement about a woman's right to life. Yet now they oppose stem cell reasearch would could save thousands, if not millions, of American lives someday. You would think this is something that the GOP would want to stand from the top of the Capitol shouting--"We are fighting hard to save American lives through scientific achievement." It seems though that this is just another policy issue commandeered by the radical right and their agenda to bring God deep into government. The White House and right wing advocacy groups seem to only have one point of opposition to this research: "every life is a priceless gift of matchless value" (as President Bush said today). However, the logic behind their position appears flawed to me. It seems to say that increasing federal funding for research on embryonic stem cells because if we do that we will cause an increase in abortions or the discarding of human life. Nevermind the philosophical debate on when life begins (true science has already made clear when life begins and ends), they want to protect lives, even though they would veto a bill that could end up saving thousands of lives. These embryos aren't human life. These embryos come from fertility clinics where they will most likely never be used. The ones that are usable have most likely been used to create a precious human life that will grow up just like any other normal person. Moreover, the bill makes it expressly clear that the embryos used in these new lines for research must be expressly donated by the couples who control the embryos, and the money cannot be used to create new embryos for research nor destroy them for research. Moderate Republicans in Congress are some of the most ardent supporters of the Castle-DeGette bill that is now being debated in the House. Most Democrats are in favor of the bill as well. However, people like House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX-22) and other GOP-ers controlled by the radical right are opposed simply on the life issue. The facts though are simple. These embryos, in almost all circumstances, will not be used to create human life. They will simply be abandoned or discarded. If the GOP and all Republicans really cared about protecting life in all circumstances, they would support this bill whole-heartedly. But they're not. So, they have upon their hands a "life crisis." They're going to try to protect it only when its good for them.|W|P|111697120688374515|W|P|The GOP's life crisis|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"So I walk in the door and turn on the TV to check out the "all-nighter" session the Senate declared and to see if Bill Frist was wearing the Spongebob pajamas James Dobson bought him and instead get the most fearsome of images in the form of Joe Lieberman trying to smile. I apparently already missed the speeches from Mike DeWine explaining that his name was Mike DeWine and he was actually a United States Senator, and Robert Byrd telling a story about how he knew Ben Franklin."Go read the rest of it NOW!|W|P|111696507701906873|W|P|Best deal post EVAR|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
- Robert Byrd (West Virginia)
- Daniel Inouye (Hawaii)
- Mary Landrieu (Louisiana)
- Joseph Lieberman (Connecticut)
- Ben Nelson (Nebraska)
- Mark Pryor (Arkansas)
- Ken Salazar (Colorado)
- Lincoln Chafee (Rhode Island)
- Susan Collins (Maine)
- Mike DeWine (Ohio), go to Contact Information and select email form
- Lindsey Graham (South Carolina)
- John McCain (Arizona)
- John Warner (Virginia)
- Olympia Snowe (Maine)
"Since the signing of the Public Broadcasting Act more than 35 years ago, Americans have relied on the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), National Public Radio (NPR), and other public broadcasting outlets to provide quality programs and independent journalism free from political or commercial pressure. According to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the public believes that PBS programming is free from political tilt: A survey reveals that "the majority of the U.S. adult population does not believe that the news and information programming on public broadcasting is biased." Unfortunately, that is not sufficient for some -- like CPB chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, who wants public broadcasting to reflect his conservative political beliefs."Sounds like they've got a good mission to work from: protect the CPB from becoming an outlet of the Right and from becoming state-run propaganda.|W|P|111695955896720890|W|P|Hands Off!|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
|W|P|Oh good, I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed that while watching C-SPAN. I was starting to worry about myself when I take note of Senators' ties."A Modest Victory for Bush, but Challenging Tests Lie Ahead"It is a news analysis, so I'm not that worried. It does, though, show me that Richard W. Stevenson (a good Times writer) has decided to look at politics through the lens of the White House or the Bush Regime, so I'll keep that in mind when reading future stories. Oh, and Carl Hulse is definitely working for McClellan as well. Just read his ridiculous stories and the cheap shots against the Dems that he adds in his writing. The other example is from the Washington Times. Anyone who thinks that they still aren't conservative after reading this headline can kiss my big white ass:
"7 Republicans abandon GOP on filibuster"And it comes from everyone's favorite conservative politics writer Charles Hurt! What a goddamn tool. These have been your media bias examples for the day. We now take you back to regularly scheduled programming.|W|P|111695859836366239|W|P|Media bias examples|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
To: Bill Frist, US Senate. From: Mitch Berg, Schmuck Citizen and pissed-off former GOP contributor Re: Your Infinite Cretinism Senator Frist, Mitch Berg here. You probably don't know who I am; I'm a typical schmuck. I write a blog, and I try to pitch in on GOP activities around Minnesota. And on behalf of the entire GOP, I'm having a hard time seeing an upside to this deal right now. At first - and second, and tenth - glance, it looks like you've sold out your party. No, not just the party; not just the assembly of suits and climbers and hangers-on that no doubt surrounds you at work every day. No, I'm talking about all of us who busted our asses overcoming a full-court media press (and continue to do so), and gave of our time and money until it hurt - hurt our wallets, our families, our relationships, our equilibrium. We gave them all with enthusiasm because we knew what was at stake; a whole generation of Supreme Court decisions. So we gave. And you took. And today, you looked us all in the face, and spat. Reading Michelle and John and Ed, I'm about as depressed as I can be. We won you a majority, pinhead. What the hell good is it? You think the Democrats are going to abide by your little gentleman's agreement? You got conned. You entered into an agreement with a Klansman, a drunk machine hack and a party bag man. You are the Neville Chamberlain of my generation. I don't believe in Karma, but I believe what goes around comes around. And I guess you demonstrate it, Frist. The Democrats elect a pinhead doctor to lead their party - I guess it's only fair we did, too. Thank God for Tom Delay. The least you could do is make it hard for the Dems to neutralize you, rather than walking off the cliff into the kool-aid vat on your own. Captain Ed is right. Not one more dime. You have made me ashamed to be a Republican. Oh, I'll bounce back. We all will - most of us, anyway. We'll have to. Because you showed us today - the grass roots have got to do it for themselves; we'll get no help from hamsters like you. Sincerely - go back to medicine. Mitch Berg Saint Paul|W|P|111695812162098143|W|P|The Righties are still crying|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"If a state law called for shoving a red-hot poker up the defendant’s rectum immediately after indictment, Thomas (George Bush’s ideal Justice) would point out that the precedent of Richard II showed that such a practice was not “unusual,” and that in any case it wasn’t covered by the Eighth Amendment because it was pre-conviction and therefore not “punishment,” which by definition comes after conviction and sentence. That’s just the sort of guy he is."Wow.|W|P|111695739284079246|W|P|Quote of the Day|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"The explicit language of the agreement reached tonight by a group of senators rejects the nuclear option, preserves the filibuster and ensures that both political parties will have a say in who is appointed to our highest courts. The agreement embodies the very principle of consultation and consensus that the filibuster encourages. This is good news for the American people. Saving the Senate's constitutional advice and consent role, and the checks and balances that protect judicial independence, is especially important with multiple vacancies expected on the Supreme Court. The agreement assures that the filibuster will be available, as it has been throughout our history, if the President ignores the spirit of this agreement and nominates an ideologue to the Supreme Court. "The unprincipled nuclear option has been averted. This is a major defeat for the radical right. Senators from both parties have rejected demands by the White House, radical right groups, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist that the filibuster be eliminated on nominees. It is a rejection of White House demands for virtually unlimited power to undermine the independence of the courts. "Nonetheless, we cannot endorse every aspect of the deal that was announced today. We are deeply concerned that it could lead to confirmation of appeals court judges who would undermine Americans' rights and freedoms. We will urge Senators to vote against confirmation of nominees who have not demonstrated a commitment to upholding individual liberties and the legal and social justice accomplishments of the past 70 years. "The bipartisan rejection of the nuclear option provides President Bush with a clear path out of the divisive impasse that has been caused by his obstinate refusal to engage in bipartisan consultation and compromise on judicial nominations. "It is time for President Bush to recognize what the senators who negotiated this agreement know -- that the Senate is the President's constitutional partner in appointing federal judges. It is time for the White House to abandon its confrontational strategy on judges, and to work with senators from both parties to find some consensus nominees, especially in the case of expected Supreme Court vacancies."|W|P|111690870926078742|W|P|The Aftermath: PFAW responds|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Chris Woods|W|P|Yeah, I had heard the same musings from a couple other places as well. And to tell you the truth, I think Sen. Graham is telling the truth, because he was a staunch supporter of the Nuclear Option up until the last minute when he realized how much of a higher ground the position of compromise would be. He said tonight that he doesn't bend to majority or White House orders, so I've got a bit more respect for the guy, even if he's wrong on the Nuclear Option, Social Security, and a lot of other things."This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats. Only three of President Bush’s nominees will be given the courtesy of an up-or-down vote, and it's business as usual for all the rest. The rules that blocked conservative nominees remain in effect, and nothing of significance has changed. Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice William Rehnquist would never have served on the U. S. Supreme Court if this agreement had been in place during their confirmations. The unconstitutional filibuster survives in the arsenal of Senate liberals. We are grateful to Majority Leader Frist for courageously fighting to defend the vital principle of basic fairness. That principle has now gone down to defeat. We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust."Loser.|W|P|111690307097507145|W|P|The Aftermath: Dobson responds|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Tony W|W|P|The Filibuster is good for all!"This is not a good deal for the U.S. Senate or for the American people. Democrats should have stood together firmly against the bullying tactics of the Republican leadership abusing their power as they control both houses of Congress and the White House. Confirming unacceptable judicial nominations is simply a green light for the Bush administration to send more nominees who lack the judicial temperament or record to serve in these lifetime positions. I value the many traditions of the Senate, including the tradition of bipartisanship to forge consensus. I do not, however, value threatening to disregard an important Senate tradition, like occasional unlimited debate, when necessary. I respect all my colleagues very much who thought to end this playground squabble over judges, but I am disappointed in this deal."So, I guess the moral of the story is this: If you're a liberal and mad, Russ Feingold agrees with you, so you're not alone among the politicos.|W|P|111690271171711150|W|P|The Aftermath: Feingold doesn't like the deal either|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Robert Schumacher|W|P|Feingold seems more disappointed that it had to come to the compromise in the first place. That the GOP "leadership" was so lacking in leadership that they resorted to guerilla tactics to get their way.I'm not exactly jumping for joy, but such is the nature of compromise...if either side is really, really happy over it then it's not a true compromise, it's a concession from the other side.
I do agree that it's fucked up that it had to come to needing a dozen or so Senators (who seem to be the real "leaders" in the chamber) doing what Frist was too immature to do...work together to get over an obstacle. The GOP forced a showdown, and from what I saw the Democrats were willing to compromise so long as the option to filibuster remained. Those who deal in absolutes (i.e., Frist) are the losers (he could take a lesson from Obi-Wan on that one).
As I was reflecting on my blog, the big fish are the nominees for the Supreme Court...and the big victory in this for Dems is retaining the ability to block extremists there. We can't block all nominees, even though we may not like 'em (and no surprise, Bush is going to nominate righties), but keeping the ability to keep out the really extreme ones (or the "litmus test" ones) is important. Frankly, I'd have bent on all of these small-fish judges in light of what is at stake in the high court.
The really, really screwed up thing is that Bush forced this, in a way...he stubbornly re-nominated rejected judges. And the compromise, while allowing some of them through, sends a message that he still does not have carte blanche to nominate just anyone. That is a victory, too.
On the flip side, Democrats have to pick their battles a bit more carefully...abuse of the filibuster could bring the nuclear option back up (and Frist will just be itching to interpret any filibuster as a break of the compromise by the Dems).
|W|P|I too had the same thought.UPDATE: It doesn't look like the right-wing blogosphere likes the deal at all. Maybe this'll put some Democrats' points of view in perspective. Here's an interesting comment from someone over at RedState.org and here's the take on over at Power Line (they don't like it either). Michelle Malkin doesn't like it either. Boo-fuckin'-hoo.
Already the left-wing blogosphere is up in arms over the deal reached tonight. Some are calling it a sell-out (from TalkLeft):
"The worst, the compromise is in. Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor are in. Total capitulation by Democrats. Total victory for Frist. Let them spin it how they want, it's a loss for the Democrats. Henry Saad of Michigan is the fall guy. He won't get a vote. No one cared about him anyway. That's tossing the Dems a chicken bone."Chris Bowers over at MyDD has an initial reaction of defeat, though he does say we might've prevailed on a few things. Jeff Dubner over at TAPPED isn't that thrilled either. I, on the other hand, am pretty happy with this deal. We had 49 votes for sure, and we could have won. Sure, the best picture would be Democrats marching down the aisles of the Senate celebrating our victory of the Nuclear Option's procedural vote. Had we lost that vote however, we really would've ushered in the theocracy that the folks over at Talk Left are complaining about. I agree with what Markos has said.
"Now, some wanted to roll the dice, but had we lost, Dobson would've chosen the next Supreme Court justice. I wasn't willing to make that bet, and I'm glad we didn't have to. On top of everything, Frist looks weak. He's failed his crazies. He's finished. Things may change, but so far, this is the second-best option. Beating Frist on the procedural vote may've been the best option. But the worst option was too horrible to contemplate."Honestly, this really is the best thing for us. Washington Republicans and the theocrats and the extremists get a few judges. We get the 2006 mid-term elections. We get to watch Bill Frist lose momentum on his run for President in 2008. The radical right and the rest of the wingnuts are going to place the blame heavily on him if any of these judges don't pass. And still, Henry Saad will be blocked, so will Myers and others. We reserve the right to filibuster judicial nominees in extraordinary circumstances. In retrospect, this is really going to be a good thing for Democrats, especially in preserving the Senate as an institution. We want to keep things hospitable in the chamber. This victory helps seal the deal. That's all I've got for now, I'll probably post more later, especially if my opinion changes or if I find some good reactions to quote from.|W|P|111689588494685703|W|P|The Aftermath: Reflections on the deal|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS We respect the diligent, conscientious efforts, to date, rendered to the Senate by Majority Leader Frist and Democratic Leader Reid. This memorandum confirms an understanding among the signatories, based upon mutual trust and confidence, related to pending and future judicial nominations in the 109th Congress. This memorandum is in two parts. Part I relates to the currently pending judicial nominees; Part II relates to subsequent individual nominations to be made by the President and to be acted upon by the Senate’s Judiciary Committee. We have agreed to the following: Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations A. Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture on the following judicial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit), William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit). B. Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to vote for or against cloture on the following judicial nominees: William Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit). Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations A. Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist. B. Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII. We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word “Advice” speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President’s power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration. Such a return to the early practices of our government may well serve to reduce the rancor that unfortunately accompanies the advice and consent process in the Senate. We firmly believe this agreement is consistent with the traditions of the United States Senate that we as Senators seek to uphold."|W|P|111689596851672372|W|P|Full text of the compromise|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
Priscilla Owen - Gets in William Prior - Get in Janice Rogers Brown - Gets in Michigan Judges - 2 of 3 get in (Henry Saad does not) Willian Myers - Does not get inNow that Republicans have gotten their up or down votes on Owen, Prior, and Rogers Brown, they'll basically be shoe-ins--unless somehow Washington Republicans decide to vote conscience and realize how bad these people are.|W|P|111689407028994953|W|P|The Aftermath: Who's in and who's out|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
- Group of 14 senators
- 7 Democratss, 7 Republicans
- Byrd (D) and Warner (R) were senior leaders
- Janice Rogers Brown, Pryor, and Priscilla Owen will face up or down votes (the 14 Senators here will vote to end debate with the cloture votes)
- future nominations will only be filibusters under extraordinary circumstances
- do everything in power to prevent filibusters in the future
- McCain (R-AZ) spoke first, then Ben Nelson (D-NE), then Mark Pryor (D-AR), then Robert Byrd (D-WV), then John Warner (R-VA), then Mike DeWine (R-OH), then Joe Lieberman (D-CT), then Olympia Snowe (R-ME), then Mary Landrieu (D-LA), then Susan Collins (R-ME), then Lindsey Graham (R-SC), then Ken Salazar (D-CO) (two who signed and aren't there are Inoyue (D-HI) and Chafee (R-RI).
- Based particularly on "good faith"
- Byrd: "We have kept the Republic."
- These are most definitely the institutionalists of the United States Senate
- Lieberman: "Band of Brothers and Sisters. We did the unexpected."
- McCain: "The Senate won and the people won."
"We are going to lose. This does not mean, in any way, that we should stop fighting and not take the actions listed above. In fact, that we are going to lose makes taking them all the more important. If nothing else, this at least needs to turn into a good story for Democrats, even if it will result in bad policy But we are going to lose. Walter Shapiro notes:That is quite pessimistic. But rightfully so. Unless there is a compromise, things don't look so good. However, when Chris writes that he hopes we can win it in terms of politics, it is because of what Sen. Reid said in a press release about a month ago in April. Sen. Reid said:The Republicans will probably win 51-49 or 50-50 with Dick Cheney breaking the tie when the Senate votes Tuesday on a rule change eliminating judicial filibusters. What leaves me baffled is why the Democrats don't take any deal that they can get from the handful of Republicans who remain rightly fearful about detonating this nuclear option. Blocking two or three right-wing appeals court judges and preserving the glimmer of a chance to filibuster if Bush nominates, say, Ann Coulter to the Supreme Court may, alas, be the best outcome liberals can hope for in difficult times.We are going to lose this one in terms of policy. Hopefully we can win it in terms of politics."
"As a matter of comity, the Minority in the Senate traditionally defers to the Majority in the setting of the agenda. If Bill Frist pulls the nuclear trigger, Democrats will show deference no longer.Invoking a little-known Senate procedure called Rule XIV, last week Democrats put nine bills on the Senate calendar that seek to help America fulfill its promise.
If Republican's break the rules Democrats will use the rule to bring to the Senate floor an agenda that meets the needs of average Americans, such as lowering gas prices, reducing the cost of health care and helping veterans.
"Across the country, people are worried about things that matter to their families - the health of their loved ones, their child's performance in schools, and those sky high gas prices," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. "But what is the number one priority for Senate Republicans? Doing away with the last check on one-party rule in Washington to allow President Bush, Senator Frist and Tom Delay to stack the courts with radical judges. If Republicans proceed to pull the trigger on the nuclear option, Democrats will respond by employing existing Senate rules to push forward our agenda for America."
Democrats have introduced bills that address America's real challenges. (Details attached)
1. Women's Health Care (S. 844). "The Prevention First Act of 2005" will reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and abortions by increasing funding for family planning and ending health insurance discrimination against women.
2. Veterans' Benefits (S. 845). "The Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2005" will assist disabled veterans who, under current law, must choose to either receive their retirement pay or disability compensation.
3. Fiscal Responsibility (S. 851). Democrats will move to restore fiscal discipline to government spending and extend the pay-as-you-go requirement.
4. Relief at the Pump (S. 847). Democrats plan to halt the diversion of oil from the markets to the strategic petroleum reserve. By releasing oil from the reserve through a swap program, the plan will bring down prices at the pump.
5. Education (S. 848). Democrats have a bill that will: strengthen head start and child care programs, improve elementary and secondary education, provide a roadmap for first generation and low-income college students, provide college tuition relief for students and their families, address the need for math, science and special education teachers, and make college affordable for all students.
6. Jobs (S. 846). Democrats will work in support of legislation that guarantees overtime pay for workers and sets a fair minimum wage.
7. Energy Markets (S. 870). Democrats work to prevent Enron-style market manipulation of electricity.
8. Corporate Taxation (S. 872). Democrats make sure companies pay their fair share of taxes to the U.S. government instead of keeping profits overseas.
9. Standing with our troops (S. 11). Democrats believe that putting America's security first means standing up for our troops and their families
"Abusing power is not what the American people sent us to Washington to do. We need to address real priorities instead -- fight for relief at the gas pump, stronger schools and lower health care costs for America's families," said Senator Reid."
That settles it. We can win on this politically. It may not happen right away. But by forcing Washington Republicans to vote against these things makes great campaign material to reclaim the Senate in 2006.
I know this is a long and complicated post, but there is light at the end of the tunnel, even if we lose. But let's not lose this--let's win it!
|W|P|111688893629181702|W|P|Nuclear Option: Chris Bowers is Mr. Pessimism|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com Chris Woods|W|P|Exactly. That's the message that Democrats are working hard to get out, but the media just isn't covering this whole debate in the most illustrious way. They're framing it as simply another obstruction by Democrats who are upset because Republicans want to change the rules to make the Senate run better and get stuff done. That's just plain wrong, but our 'liberal' media just isn't pointing this out.However, even if we lose this vote, we can win overall by bringing our own legislation to the floor quickly and making Republicans vote against it. When they have to vote against progressive and effective legislation like this, we'll make them look so bad in 2006 that Democrats will have to reclaim Congress.
Senator Grassley's Des Moines Office 721 Federal Building 210 Walnut Street Des Moines, IA 50309It is time to get busy folks.|W|P|111688567341688880|W|P|Nuclear Option: Citizen filibusters|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com
"Unfortunately, some Senate Republicans are trying to give President Bush power no president has ever had -- the ability to personally hand out lifetime jobs to judges -- including the Supreme Court, without consensus from the other party. This abuse of power is not what our founders intended. It's wrong for one political party -- be it Republicans today or Democrats tomorrow -- to have total control over who sits on our high courts and rules on our most basic rights."
Via Taegan Goddard's "Political Wire:"
""In an unusual move, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will appear tonight in a 90-second television ad calling on Republicans to stand down on their threat to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominees," Roll Call reports. The ad will be shown nationally on CNN, CNN Headline News and Fox News Channel and in the Washington, D.C., area on local television between 7:50 and 8 p.m. tonight."I'm sure Crooks and Liars will get the video as soon as they can tonight, but everyone pay attention and watch this ad. Talk about Democrats getting organized, getting mad, and getting active! This is amazing work from the Senate Democrats.|W|P|111687351885969813|W|P|Nuclear Option: Reid to do TV ad tonight|W|P|christopherdwoods@gmail.com