Obama has a second chance to stand for FISA principles

Special Comment” on Countdown with Keith Olbermann – June 30, 2008.

more about “Raw Replay – Revisiting History“, posted with vodpod
About these ads

215 thoughts on “Obama has a second chance to stand for FISA principles

  1. That’s not what he said, Willy. I’m talking about this Special Comment only.

    I see this as a way for Obama to pull his fat out of the fire, so to speak.

    I’m not thrilled with Obama’s fuck up on this, but this is a possible solution for him.

  2. Just here to say good morning and have a good day all…Ugh~ on this issue….Blessings

  3. The “possible solution” being what? That he vote for Reid’s measure, and then when it fails, he vote FOR the FISA Bill, and later, if he is elected president, he can push for a criminal prosecution?

    Because that is what Olbermann is saying.

    what if Obama doesn’t win? Then McCain has one less amendment to worry about.

    And what if he does win? Then Bush will gove a full pardon to the telecoms before he leaves office. Just like he did Scooter Libby to keep him from talking about Cheney’s role in the Plame case.

    So what is the “way out” for Obama that Olbermann is suggesting? Either way, the 4th looses.

  4. and either way, they set the precident to give retroactive immunity to anyone that breaks the law and violates the constitution, if the administration just asks for it (in an election year that is).

    Don’t you find that to be a bit troubling considering that mcCain and Lieberman may just “win” this thing?

  5. Good day everyone. :)

    I agree Zooey this is the 2nd chance to make this right. Since Dean and the ACLU have researched this and found a big hole that the Telecoms and Bush can be charged in criminal proceedings that is great news. I can’t wait to read Dean’s research paper and check out what the ACLU has written about it also.

  6. They can be charged in criminal proceedings, until the president gives them a full pardon.

    Think Bush will pardon them? Yes he will.

    Do you think he cares how it will make him look? no. he didn’t care how he “looked” in the Scooter Libby pardon, did he.

    So Dean’s argument is moot. It’s meaningless. It’s a way to try to save face while giving up the 4th amendment rights of the people of this country.

    That’s “change we CAN believe in”? I don’t think so.

  7. None of this is ideal, Willy. In fact, the whole thing sucks.

    This is a balancing act right now, with the primary goal being getting the neo-cons out of power.

    It matters how Bush “looks” because they do not operate in a vacuum. Their supporters support them through thick and thin, but there is a line at some point. I think Dean is fixated on that line.

    Bush did not pardon Libby, he commuted his sentence. There is a difference.

    I choose to wait and see Dean’s brief. You may well choose not to do so. Fair is fair.

    I’m at work, so I’m not going to be here consistently.

  8. They can be charged in criminal proceedings, until the president gives them a full pardon.

    You can’t pre-pardon anyone, Willy. They have to be found guilty to pardon them. That’s what Dean was saying.

    I am very not happy about the FISA situation and I can only say I hope that it does better on this 2nd pass. (no pun intended) I am not hopeful. After what came out yesterday about Congress privately funding Iran regime change, we’re pretty well fucked if we do and fucked if we don’t.

    The dems suck as bad as the goopers.

  9. “You can’t pre-pardon anyone, Willy. They have to be found guilty to pardon them.”

    Yes you can, been done before.

    Google “Ford pre-pardon of Nixon”…

    It’s called “blanket immunity Pardons” or just “blanket immunity” like what they are giving the telecoms, before they are “found guilty”.

  10. You can’t pre-pardon them before they’ve been charged. Since they wouldn’t be charged until Obama took office Bush couldn’t pardon them.

  11. Zooey, you wait to see Dean’s brief.

    me, my article is more about Olbermann than it is Obama. I am simply making the point that Keith O is digging himself further in the hole by trying to defend his support of Obama on this issue after he railed the President on the very same issue not one month ago.

    Now Keith is reduced to hoping that Dean can find some loophole (that according to Keith existed and was mentioned in congress before he railed on Bush about this as being fascist attacks on the constitution) that people will by into even though he and Dean both know that this president will give the telecoms the same deal that Ford gave Nixon on his last day in office.

    (and there is the little problem of McCain just might “win” the election)

    Feingold has a great comment on this on his website.

  12. Shayne, what does “retroactive immunity” mean then? It means that all companies, not just the ones charged now, will enjoy the same immunity for illegally spying on US citizens.

  13. Now I will give Keith O credit for this much.

    In the comment he does mention George Washington’s warning about ‘political Parties” destroying this country; and he is damn right about that.

    Here we have republicans defending this Bill that WILL cripple the 4th ammendment because it’s their “party” that did it in the first place…

    …and we now have democrats defending this same Bill simply because their candidate refuses to take a stand on it.

    And people like Greenwald, Feingold, Kucinich, Huffington and few others standing in the middle unable to believe what it is they are seeing.

  14. Thanks, I will.

    I may be wrong, but since the vote will not take place until after the July 4 break, I see no reason to decide all the potential horrors now.

  15. Understanding the “potential horrors” is what drives people to write their congressmen Before they vote (since writing them After they vote is a little pointless).

    At least, I think that’s Feingold’s point (and mine for that matter).

  16. This is the key and intriguing part by Dean:

    “It… “would require acceptance by them of the fact that they had broken the law, and thus be an admission of guilt.

    “And a blanket pardon would be an admission by Bush that his war on terror has been a lawless undertaking, operating beyond the bounds of the Constitution and statutes that check the powers of the president and the executive branch.

    “It would be an admission by Bush, too, of his own criminal culpability (which is why Nixon refused to grant his aides a pardon.)”

    This is what I want to explore more. “an admisison of guilt”

    Bush will NEVER go down that road.

  17. No problem Zooey, I am going to see what I can find out from the ACLU also. They seem to be comparing notes.

    Plus, only a side note, the reason Keith O is siding with Dean is because he feels he is the smartest man he has ever met and trusts his opinion.

  18. Right. Bush woudl NEVER go down that road…

    …pardoning or granting blanket immunity to the telecoms…

    …except for the fact, that he is fighting to provide blanket immunity to the telecoms.

  19. “Plus, only a side note, the reason Keith O is siding with Dean is because he feels he is the smartest man he has ever met and trusts his opinion.”

    Really? That’s facinating, because I thought he was blindly reversing his position on the FISA Bill to support Obama and USING Dean to help fabricate a rationale for it after Glenn Greenwald blew him out of the water for it.

  20. Bush will never admit personal guilt. You know that, Willy.

    Thanks for the link, FR. I’ll read it as soon as I can.

  21. here, ZZ. Here is part of what the brilliant John Dean says…

    ” If Senator Obama is going to honor the statement he made to Will Bunch, then he should place the Bush Administration and telecommunications companies on notice of his intentions. This will provide President Bush an opportunity to immunize those who broke the law at his request from criminal prosecutions, which he can do as long as he is President with his power to grant pardons.”

    “This WILL provide Bush the OPPORTUNITY to IMMUNIZE those who broke the law… which he CAN DO as long as he is President with his power to grant PARDONS……”

    Now folks, what part of that don’t we understand? The part that the brilliant John Dean says the President CAN grant pardons to the telecom criminals before he leaves office…

    … or the part where he says ush SHOULD grant pardons to those self same criminals?

  22. You may be right, but I read his comments to that in the daily kos willy. If you would like I will get you the link.

    He had met with Dean prior to the article, I’m pretty sure, that Glenn wrote. Which by the way, I liked very much. If fact the whole series was fantastic. I respect Glenn Greenwald, he does his homework and he is very forthright and honest.

    Now I’m going to see what I can find out about the ACLU and try to read what Dean wrote.

    I hope everyone is having a good day :)

  23. Oh my God… this is GREAT!

    “…and it would offer Bush a chance at historical ignominy far exceeding what he already faces, and thus potentially become a powerful issue for the Democrats to campaign on during this 2008 election year.”

    Right! Give in to Bush’s protection of the telecoms and the stripping of the constitution, and Bush will suffer with “historical ignominy” forever.

    Oh yeah, I see Bush losing sleep over that. Not murdering a million innocent Iraqis, no, but Historical Ignominy for protecting his buddies at AT&T, yeah, that will keep him up at night.

  24. I read the Kos article, read the Greenwald article that prompted them, saw the segment where olbermann reversed his position of FISA to support Obama, and saw the video of Olbermann giving a special commnet calling Bush a fascist for supporting FISA and wrecking the constitution.

    I saw it, Freedomrebel. I saw it, I read it, I thought about it, and Olbermann is wrong.

    And so is his genious, Dean, in my opinion, and the opinion of Russ Feingold who wants them to halt this terrible bill.

    Because, ladies and gentlemen, the BIGGEST problem with this bill is that it further erodes our civil liberties, just like Olbermann said in his first special comment so long ago.

  25. and I will leave you with this…

    “Bush is very politically savvy. He knows that a blanket pardon, or even the prospect of it, could give Obama and the Democratic Party a wonderful issue during the coming months of the general election.”

    What the f___ is he talking about?

    Bush wouldn’t do it until AFTER the elections are OVER so this is moronic to even argue.

    Do you guys understand that Dean and Olbermann are REALLY stretching to support Obama’s position?

    I mean, you CAN see that, right?

    and Zooey… the entire “admission of guilt” is just Dean’s OPINION…. it may be a historical opinion; it may be the MAJORITY opinion; but in the end, IT’S JUST HIS OPINION… So why would Bush not protect the telecoms (and his own illegal activities) by providing them with the same pardons that DEAN HIMSELF just admitted Bush could provide?

    All Bush will say is that he did it “for National Security” and that is the end of that.

  26. and just for the record, boys and girls…

    “As White House Counsel, he became deeply involved in events leading up to the Watergate burglaries and the subsequent Watergate scandal cover up, even referred to as “master manipulator of the cover up” by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” Wiki on John Dean.

    a master manipulator who sums up his argument for Obama by suggesting that Obama can prove his willingness to stand up for our rights by coming out in FAVOR of the FISA Bill that stips them away.

    He’s not that “masterful” here folks. He’s kinda obvious, if you ask me.

  27. It would be an admission by Bush, too, of his own criminal culpability…

    I think this is the sticking point, where Bush’s actions are concerned.

    Willy, you might think this is nothing compared to the things he’s done over the years, but you have to consider how Bush thinks.

    This is a man who, when asked, cannot come up with a single thing he’d do differently — even after all the fuck ups he’s been involved in. He simply cannot be wrong. Not ever.

    What is Bush concerning himself with these days? The war? The economy? No. He is desperately concerned about his LEGACY. That’s who he is.

    Also, if Bush took this course it would cost the Republican party major damage, possibly terminal damage — and they won’t allow it to happen.

    In the end, in Bush’s mind, this has nothing to do with the telecoms, law, the people, or the Constitution — only his own sorry hide.

  28. In my opinion, Keith O was offering possible options for Obama — not recommendations. That would be absurd on it’s face anyway, since KO is not an advisor to the Obama compaign.

    I wonder, if Obama pulls his head out of his ass long enough to realize the mistake he’s made, and he comes out strongly against this FISA bill with the immunity, if enough Dems will change their votes for it not to pass?

  29. wrong. The investigation into the telecoms is about finding out what they really were looking for; who they tapped; and when they started.

    The people that Bush answers to would NEVER let that get out in public…

    that is why the democrats are pushing it as well. They aren’t doing it to prtect BUSH they are doing it to protect the people that pull the strings.

    So Bush’s personal “feelings” about his “legacy” are totally meaningless when put up against that. So, yes, don’t be surprized when Bush pardons the telecoms just like Dean says he will.

    he will do it AFTER the election, obviously, and it will be long forgotton in the next election cycle.

    Hell, Dean knows exactly how that works, The same thing happened when he turned states evidence on his old boss Nixon.

    “He was the first administration official to accuse Nixon of direct involvement with Watergate and the resulting cover-up in press interviews. Such testimony against Nixon, while damaging to the president’s credibility, had little impact legally, as it was merely his word against Nixon’s.”

    This is a dog and pony show by a “master amnipulator” who, by the way, was also involved in he coup in Chile, while working for Nixon, back in the day.

    Wonderful American Hero, we have here, huh?

    “Dean pled guilty to obstruction of justice before Watergate trial judge John Sirica on November 30, 1973. He admitted supervising payments of “hush money” to the Watergate burglars, notably E. Howard Hunt, and revealed the existence of Nixon’s enemies list.”

  30. “I wonder, if Obama pulls his head out of his ass long enough to realize the mistake he’s made, and he comes out strongly against this FISA bill with the immunity,…”

    Now THAT is what I am suggesting! I am 100% with you there.

  31. I think you’re being awfully harsh on Dean, Willy.

    He did plead guilty. He didn’t deny, deny, deny even in the face of his obvious guilt. He exposed a lot of what went on in the Nixon years. Hopefully, there will be a comparable John Dean from this White House. I would think that would mean something to you.

    I think John Dean is a brilliant man. He’s the only conservative I respect.

  32. Really?

    try Bruce Fein, the leading expert on the reasons for the impeachment of George W. Bush.

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0610.fein.html

    or maybe, Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons inspector and one of the few that came out, vocally against the iraq war long before obama or the war it’self…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter

    and this is a list of 6 republicans who voted AGAINST the Iraq war resolution (while Clinton was repeating Bush’s lies on the Senate floor)

    http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/10/11/194543.shtml

  33. You seem to keep thinking this is about left vs right.

    What did you think about lincoln? He was a conservative. I kinda like him…

  34. Just popping my head in briefly before I fly out the door in two minutes..

    I also have a LOT of respect for John Dean. He is a brilliant man, and one deserving of respect. He has my total respect and gratitude for all he’s taught me in his writing. He paid a price for what happened before, and he has more than made up for it since then.
    Read his books. They are enlightening, and excellent. His head and heart are in the right place. He is contributing a lot to the good and betterment of this country.
    Just my two cents..

  35. so you “love John Dean” but what about his argument? What about him saying Obama needs to prove he is standing up for the rule of law by supporting FISA Bill?

    uh? hello.

  36. Ok, I respect them too. Darn, I forgot about them.

    Are we switching the discussion to the fact that there other conservatives I ought to respect?

  37. I wonder what Jonathan Turley has to say about this. I’d also like to hear Rachel Maddow’s take on Dean’s argument. It would be interesting to see if either of them agrees with Dean.

  38. Okay, here’s my rant, if anyone’s interested:

    This issue is pissing me off more and more, as is the entire Democratic congress. WTF happened? We gave these idiots a mandate in November, and they got into office and immediately fucked us. With this FISA bullshit, the new excuse is that ‘when Obama gets into office, he’ll have his Justice Department start investigations.’ 1) WHAT IF THE ELECTIONS ARE STOLEN AGAIN? We cannot count on Obama winning, there’s a long way to go before November and we all remember 2000 and 2004. 2) Even if he does win, why the hell do we have to wait so long? I know I’m ranting, but it’s been a horrendously long 7 1/2 years, and these last 6 months are gonna kill me. I can only imagine the outrage and frustration of those people bringing the civil suits, probably wasting all their time and money trying to hold the telecoms accountable, while a bunch of suits in Washington play politics with their rights. It just sucks.
    End of Rant.

  39. AND WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!

    “1) WHAT IF THE ELECTIONS ARE STOLEN AGAIN?”

    Then what happens to Olbermann and Dean’s and Obama’s brilliant plan?

    I’ll tell you what.. Lieberman runs the HR 1955 program with complete authority to sweep up EVERY communication and sort through the ones they find offensive (ie. mentions things like the old constitution and such).

  40. and then they can call anyone a hoemgrown Terrorist, without proof without anything.

    just rendition them away like they did those chinese guys at Gitmo for 6 years for being anti Chinese government opposition.

  41. Jane, read the first entry in the blog I posted above. I think that is a very interesting take on WTF Congress is doing (or, more to the point, NOT doing).

    And I cannot get out of my head that whole Anthrax thing to Daschle and other dems right after 9/11. There is something going on and it’s buried. Congress had a clear mandate. No, they don’t have votes to accomplish many things, BUT, that said, there is something deeper here…all those things that make thinking people go Hmmm? (Or more likely WTF? WTF? WTF??)

    Willy, while I often agree with you, you really have to look at the tone of your posts. You come across as a dick. Sorry to say it. There are times I won’t even respond because you can be terribly nasty.

    Just how I feel. Sorry to say it.

  42. again someone talks about my “tone”, then they are free to call me a “dick”.

    perhaps people just get angry because I don’t automaticly agree with their point of view and I usually have proof and logic to back up my position.

    You call it “tone” but I call it “discussion”. You call me a “dick” and I don’t resort to name calling.

    But thank you so much for ‘correcting” my behavior in light of others now agreeing with my point I was making in the first place.

    But, let me honestly congradulate you, MsJ.

    “BUT, that said, there is something deeper here…”

    yes, there is something deeper here at work. And i also want to applaud your looking into the GeorgeWashingtonBlog.

    He posts quite often on 9/11 Blogger where i am a member, and occationally posts comments on my site. He is very well researched and informative.

    he gets alot of death threats too, I might add.

    But, yes, there is something deeper going on here msJ, IMHO. (sorry about the Sanrkyness earlier. it happens when someone, politely albeit, calls me a ‘dick”)

  43. ZZ asked where Dean suggested Obama support FISA Bill…

    here… straight from his article

    “Since Obama Has Already Declared that He Will Hold the Bush Administration Officials Responsible for their Crimes, He Can Now Have It Both Ways: Support the FISA Amendments and Hold Miscreants Responsible”

  44. Since the Strategic Defense Command is supposed to have the capability of taking down any bogey in US airspace within 20 minutes, I often wonder how 2 of the 4 made it to their targets.

  45. “Willy might be interested in the second entry on that blog.”

    the one on 93 being shot down? Read it.

    I actually agree with one of the commenters who says that the passengers may have kicked in the door and seen the autopilot running the plane back to the East via a remote control and that is why they shot it down.

    Also, ever wonder why 4 buildings were destroyed and four planes were taken?

    Think maybe Building 7 was supposed to be hit by Flight 93? Something to think about.

    Also, it explains why the debris field was scattered over 8 miles.

  46. ” I often wonder how 2 of the 4 made it to their targets.”

    Well, the story changed three times, and the last story was that the planes that were launched accidnetally went out over the Altantic Ocean.

  47. “If the elections are stolen again, I guess none of it matters anyway. Right?”

    Well, it would be my wish that we not give these bastards any more ammunition, so we really SHOULD stop the FISA bill on the off chance that they DO steal the election.

    IMHO

  48. here… straight from his article

    “Since Obama Has Already Declared that He Will Hold the Bush Administration Officials Responsible for their Crimes, He Can Now Have It Both Ways: Support the FISA Amendments and Hold Miscreants Responsible”

    I read that as supporting the FISA Amendment without the immunity.

  49. perhaps people just get angry because I don’t automaticly agree with their point of view and I usually have proof and logic to back up my position.

    That would be an incorrect analysis of why so many people seem to not enjoy interacting with you.

  50. Willy, I did not call YOU a dick, I said you come across as a dick. That’s not parsing. It relates to tone.

    I like you, guy. I honestly do. But there are times you turn me off.

    I have the same anger you do. I feel for the issues you feel strongly about. But you can’t talk AT people. You need to talk with them.

    And I will leave it at that.

    Told you guys you’d like that blog. :D VERY interesting take on WTC 7. Very interesting indeed.

    Here’s another completely OT blog post you might want to read vis a vis Clark on McCain’s service:

    http://archpundit.com/blog/2008/07/01/bad-message-control/

  51. “I read that as supporting the FISA Amendment without the immunity.”

    Well then, Obama should support the fillabuster, and do that, support the FISA Bill without the immunity.

    (but, Dean is arguing that the immunity can be overridden in the future (unless Bush pardons them, according to Dean) so my guess is that Dean supports Obama’s position of supporting the legislation as is.)

  52. Thanks for the link, MsJ – scary, scary shit.

    Gorn, your comment sounded just like something that Teal’c on Stargate SG-1 would say – or Data, from Star Trek Next Gen. :)

  53. In my opinion, Obama needs to speak on this — and soon. Just saying he “supports” the bill isn’t enough for me. I need to hear more.

    I still don’t read Dean as supporting Obama’s position on the FISA bill. You admit you’re guessing on this as well, Willy.

  54. of course not.

    Dean is supporting Obamas support of the bill saying Obama can have it both ways; support the bill AND get accountability (if Bush doesn’t give them a pardon, which he will).

    that’s what olbermann says, and Dean is pretty clear. So… no… that’s not a guess.

  55. Now, if he said this second chance was about CHANGING the FISA bill to not include immunity, then I would agree, but, that is left off Dean’s table, so to speak.

  56. I read what he wrote, and listened to (and read) Olbermann’s comments.

    call it what you like. but they are quite clear.

  57. Jane or Wayne,
    There is a carousel at Bear Mountain State Park in NY that was a hummer when I was there about four years ago. I do not remember the original construct date, but the reconstruct contains almost all of the original. Pop over and take a pix.

  58. Yes, they are quite clear, Willy. BUT they are KO’s words and ideas. Not carved in stone.

    We need to hear from Obama.

  59. BTW, I listened to what Keith said, and read along as well.

    Just in case you’re thinking I didn’t.

  60. Watch it, Gorn. Data was the whole reason I started watching TNG. I had a serious crush on that android! I could have taught him how to feel! ;)

  61. Damn I am getting a head ache. time for some Bailey’s..Can I throw something out there for you all to consider…..Remember before the 2006 election.? How about “Impeachment is off the table”.?..How many bill’s get reversed or eliminated after they are in effect…What make’s you all think Obama is going to do what he said he would do when he’s painfuly silent and side stepping now..Uh, hello….Just saying this little diddie turned out to be the 3rd major reason I’m picking someone else.

    Been reading everything presented….Sorry crew, your old resident witch is not buying it….I will not vote for any one I have to coerce by email’s or phone call’s to protect my constitution or country when they are applying for the job to do just that..They are either qualafied or they are not and I still stand by there can be no compromise when it come’s to the constitution….Yah I know Kucinich is even backing him, well not me….

    Thank’s for the great link’s, info and post’s…Everyone must do what they believe is the correct thing to do…And no matter what ya all do I love ya anyway..Blessings

  62. http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/kucinich-wont-rally-for-obama-until-he-gets-answers-2008-06-27.html

    I wonder about that Witch…

    I know the story came out in Jan of Kucinich supporting obama, but nothing since, that i can see, and in fact, from what I read, kucinich is still refusing to stump for him.

    In fact, he hasn’t been asked to speak at the convention this year. That is a huge insult. And if he doesn’t get asked, I won’t vote for obama either.

  63. Thank’s for the link Willie…Rather Kucinich get’s asked or not is a tiny issue to me….I don’t fall into the little issue and personal insult’s catagory when making my decesion’s, just like race, gender or sexual preferance of a person has no weight….My decesion’s are very straight forward, the war, backing Israel 100% and their war like way’s and the constitution….How a person vote’s, do they stand up and back their country and constitution or do they pander to big business and the centerest’s willing to give all our right’s away are way more important than the personal or little thing’s……Blessings

  64. Obama gets my vote, based on the speech below alone. I don’t expect perfection, but I do expect a president with a track record of clear-headed thinking, because that’s the best indicator of whether we will make positive progress or sink further into the hole.

    October 2002 Barack Obama’s
    2002 Speech Against the Iraq War
    Illinois State senator
    The Federal Plaza in Chicago
    Complete Text

    I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.

    I don’t oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.

    I don’t oppose all wars.

    After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.

    I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

    What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

    That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

    Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power…. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

    But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

    I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.

    I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

    I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

    You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

    You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that…we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

    You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

    You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

    Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

    The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

  65. Yah, Gorn…I watched that speech and thought we had found a new leader…Now, not so much..We are how we vote…Just my opinion…Blessings

  66. I’m having a hard time imagining a better choice among the two placed on our table, dear Witch.

    I understand that some people will prefer not to vote at all, or to vote for a minor candidate who has no chance to win. I suppose there is some self-satisfaction in that approach, but I’m hard pressed to understand how it helps progress the country on any kind of practical level. In fact, history has proven that it can do the opposite.

  67. Obama or McCain.

    Pick one.

    One of them WILL be the next president.

    If you think the Republicans aren’t dancing with glee at the way Dem voters get all self-righteous about our votes, you are sadly mistaken. They count on it!!

    The right may not like McCain, and he’s certainly not all they would want — but they damn well WILL vote for him.

    My 2 cents.

  68. Gorn, that’s just it. I am livid with Obama over FISA but no matter how pissed at him I am, he is better than McCain. Honestly, there is nothing Obama could do that would make me either vote for McCain (not gonna happen ever) or waste my vote for Barr or Nader. You’re exactly right, we saw what a wasted vote did in 2000…and we see what happened.

    Obama isn’t a saint and he knows what politics he has to do to get votes. And right now, we’re not in a primary, we are in a GE and those indy’s and centrist Goopers votes are needed.

    I don’t like it but it is what it is. Just like the fact will come when taxes will have to be raised. You can’t get rid of a multi-trillion dollar deficit by cutting taxes (or leaving the status quo), they will have to be raised to attempt to fix what Bush mangled. And with the economy so fucked up, that is going to take some serious dancing to not send the entire world into a massive global depression. But would Obama say he’s going to raise taxes? On the rich, yes. He can get away with that because it’s looked at as “fair” by the masses. If he ever said taxes would have to be raised across the board, he’d be done.

    While Obama may want to take the GE in a different direction, we cannot discount what the voters, what the masses will tolerate and accept. And we have to factor in that the masses are dumb as stumps, too.

    Talk about a fine line to be walked. How fast can you change Washington? You certainly cannot get elected by solely speaking the truth.

    And that is reality. Plain and simple.

  69. Do as you choose and I will not fault you in your choice, kindly give me the same do….Blessings

  70. Willy, Obama has no chance of winning without the AIPAC vote. You suggest he tell them to fuck off?

    Again, I repeat: Reality intervenes. Reality is politics for the GE.

    I wonder what America will be with a President McCain. Because this election is between McCain and Obama and no one else.

    It is Obama or McCain.

    Period.

  71. Every four years, the Republicans try to divert the attention of the voters by a series of well orchestrated tricks. One perennial trick is to get Democratic voters to fight amongst themselves, in the hope that they will vote Republican, or for an unelectable third candidate, or just stay home. This worked very well in 2000 and 2004.

    Nothing will prevent me from going to the voting booth in November and casting a ballot for Obama. Nothing will divert my attention from that overriding goal. Nothing. Not any reference to rabid pastors, not any suggestions with racial or religious undertones, not any concocted smear against his patriotism or lapel accouterments, not any pandering he may do in order to shift to the center, not any misstatement blown out of proportion, not any individual position taken in a stump speech that I may disagree with. Nothing.

    As witch1 said, we each have to decide our priorities and act accordingly. That is what I will do.

  72. My priority is NO MORE REPUBLICAN RULE.

    None.

    McCain guarantees more of Bush policy — he said so himself.

    That leaves Obama as the only candidate standing.

    I’m voting for him.

  73. Oh, yeah, bring them all out

    1. nobody’s perfect…
    2. Obama’s better than mcCain…
    3. the republicans are causing this turmoil

    right, thank you for the insight into the topic at hand, which was, John Dean’s and Olbermann’s comments on Obama’s support of the FISA Bill.

    But, Glenn Greenwald and the many others who are ATTEMPTING to get democrats to help bring Obama’s attention to the fact that we want him to STAND UP for democracy and the constitution…

    … that’s right, Gorn. It’s all a republican plot to make Obama look bad.

    it’s not that my argument makes sense, it’s about who’s better, McCain or Obama.

    Thanks for your help in the matter, Gorn. As usual, the “big picture” we all needed to see was that Obama is better than mcCain.

    forget all the other issues we were talking about.

  74. That’s exactly what they do, gorn.

    They can’t govern, because they hate government. They should never have the power they’ve had in the last decades — we can see what they’ve done with it.

    But what they CAN do, and what they DO do, is manipulate EVERYTHING.

    Keith said it in his comment, and it’s absolutely true.

  75. That is what I will do.

    And I shall be right behind you. Even if they come out and say, three days before the election, that Obama is a full fledged Nazi.

    You’re exactly right. Manufactured diversions. And I don’t care what they are. We need anything but McCain.

  76. The topic went off course, Willy, and that is what gorn is addressing — as am I. Are you going to start in on me as well?

    You listed those items, why not address them?

  77. willy: “it’s not that my argument makes sense”

    Willy, at what point did I make any specific reference to ‘your argument’ at all?

    Am I not permitted to state a viewpoint on this blog without it all somehow coming back to being about you?

  78. MsJ;

    again with the language…

    “fuck off”? is that what I said? No.

    Somewhere in between “fuck off” and promising all of Jerusalem to the Israelis would be nice… see, that’s called diplomacy when you are talking about the legitimate needs of two countries, Israel and Palestine (and since the UN in ’67 drew up the official borders, the rest of the world sees it that way too.). In fact, what Obama did was something no other US diplomat has done, not even this Bush; promise all of jerusalem to the Israelis, including the Dome of the Rock.

    So no… not “fuck off” MsJ. But something alittle less insulting to the people of Palestine would be nice.

  79. Excuse me, Willy? What are you implying here?

    BTW, I doubt MizzJ appreciates “correction” any more than you do.

    I think we all understood she was using a figure of speech, and I really doubt you didn’t understand it as well.

  80. You’re argument seems to be that my argument is just more republican diversion, Gorn.

    I tend to react to that kind of chat. Go figure.

    But I will tell you what is amazing here. A bunch of people who a month ago were rapid about the loss of the 4th amendment and hoping mad at the Bush administration, are now resigned to just see what happens, when their candidate, backs that same FISA Bill by not standing up for the constitution, and their previous concerns.

    That is the republican diversion, boys and girls. Once again, getting us to support their illegal and unconstitutional position for the glimmer of “hope” in an election that will probably be rigged.

  81. “I think we all understood she was using a figure of speech, and I really doubt you didn’t understand it as well.”

    I said what I meant; he should have been much more diplomatic when addressing AIPAC. The Palestinians plight is very important to many Americans as well as Israelis (not to mention “the terrorists”)

  82. Once again, willy: I am not addressing your “argument” at all. What I am addressing is the concept put forth by multiple people, and not just on this thread or this blog, who have said they will vote for some minor candidate or not vote at all, for one reason or another. I feel very strongly about this, regardless of what I think of the FISA bill or any other subject.

    If I want to make an argument about the FISA bill, I will do so. If I want to address your take on it, I will do so. I don’t need your authority or permission to do so, and I don’t need your chastisement if I choose not to do so.

    You can be a bully all you want on your own blog, but kindly try to hold onto some level of civility here. Thank you.

  83. Well, you apparently would also like to decide what MizzJ meant. You don’t get to have it both ways, Willy.

    It’s not all or nothing, Willy. Just because we don’t agree with you about KO’s or Dean’s motives, does not mean we are now all for dumping the 4th amendment. No one here has said that. No one.

    Things are not always black or white, Willy. Has anyone here said you shouldn’t be feeling the way you feel about this? NO. Do us the same courtesy. Thank you.

    You’re not wrong, and neither are we.

    Now, please explain what you meant by this: am I allowed to address msJ? she directly mentioned me in her comment? is that ok with you guys?

  84. You might ask yourselves, just who is really causing the diversion here?

    1. He drifts back toward the “center”
    2. His comments that went over the top at AIPAC
    3. His stance on FISA
    4. His asking people to give money to Clinton’s campaign to reimburse them
    5. His changed stance on NAFTA
    6. His cabinet positions full of Clinton advisors
    7. His attack on Gen. Wesley Clark for simply stating what mcCain himself said in ’98

    and the list goes on and on…

    maybe it’s not the republicans driving a wedge between us, huh?

  85. When someone suggests my 2 hour discussion here is just a simple matter of republican diversion tactics, I tend to address that issue and that person.

    I have listed above some, and I repeat, some of the “diversions” that the Obama camp has created.

    They are not, “republican tactics”, they are Obama’s changed stance on important issues facing this nation.

    this is important stuff that shouldn’t be dismissed as republican diversions.

  86. this list, Zooey?

    “1. nobody’s perfect…
    2. Obama’s better than mcCain…
    3. the republicans are causing this turmoil”

    these are what I call the “stay in line and vote the way you are supposed to, memes.”

    they are put out by the DLC and the DNC and the Progressive Democrats of America to get people to shut up and quit talking about their candidates rather unusual behavior right before the election.

    But they just work for me, and for more and more liberals in this country, because like MsJ said earlier, something just isn’t right around here anymore.

    Something is definately “going on”.

  87. When someone suggests my 2 hour discussion here is just a simple matter of republican diversion tactics, I tend to address that issue and that person.

    I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you had taken personal ownership of this thread.

    Factually, I mostly glide over and ignore most of what you write because your style of debate irritates me. Therefore, the fact that you think I was somehow making a judgment about the content of your precious argument is deliciously ironic.

    No matter how many times you want to repeat it, my commentary was not about your “argument” unless by indirect happenstance. The amount of time you spent honing your argument matters even less.

    I have listed above some, and I repeat, some of the “diversions” that the Obama camp has created.

    If you wish to view it this way, that’s your business. It changes nothing whatever about the position I stated.

  88. “I agree. It is someone else entirely.”

    If by someone else entirely you mean the same people that keep Peslosi and Conyers from impeaching… then we are in agreement.

    “However, they are the beneficiaries.”

    I don’t know… that last time I checked republicans and democrats alike are being screwed at the pump, forced to stand in “free speech zones”, losing earned income on a yearly basis, paying more for insurance and getting less, and dying in Iraq.

    So, no, I disagree. The politicians are benifiting and all of us are getting screwed by this criminal regime (including Obama, cus he is going to get screwed out of his presidency).

  89. You ask me to address these each, Zooey?

    ok

    “1. nobody’s perfect…

    I am not asking him to be, just applying pressure to affect change, as we all should rather than caving when a candidate changes his stated position after the primary season.

    2. Obama’s better than mcCain…

    I have never argued that. But, so are many people. The point is, that is not enough. We must hold our candidates to our, and their, stated postions. How many things do we let slip because one is “better” than the other? At what point do we draw a line in the sand? if more of us reserved the open support for our candidates for when they really deserved it, rather than just saying “he is better than the other guy” then I think, just my opinion, that they would be less inclined to drift away from our issues to garner the support of ‘the middle”.

    3. the republicans are causing this turmoil”

    my other list shows clearly that the republicans are not causing this turmoil. Though that does happen in other cases, and will probably happen in this election, McCain didn’t write olbermann’s comment nor did he tell Obama not to vote on the FISA Bill.

  90. Thank you.

    1. We all apply pressure to effect change, Willy. We are wearing our fingers into bone emailing and writing letters to everyone we can think of. We are not caving. That’s just your opinion of us.

    2. Obama or McCain will be president. Many other people are not running.

    3. The republicans ARE a large part of this turmoil. why do you hold them to a lesser standard after all these years, and all the damage they’ve done?

  91. Now, for at least the fourth time, address this:

    “am I allowed to address msJ? she directly mentioned me in her comment? is that ok with you guys?”

  92. Dang, go away for an hour to take notes on a UCSD professors speech and the thread takes off. :)

    Willy, “fuck off” was theatrical. You cannot say much to AIPAC and realistically get elected which is where that whole Politics 101 comes in.

    And Gorn is completely right – which is proven out here, right here, right on this thread.

    You get Dems thinking and worrying about this, that or what have you. Then you get uncertainty. Then you get, well screw it, I am voting for __Fill in the Blank___.

    Look at this thread. Dems are thinkers. Goopers are lemmings who follow whatever Rush O’Hannity say. We do not.

    You pull at that thread and you worry it apart.

    Which is what we are doing.

  93. if it’s ok with you Zooey, I would like to add a timely comment to the question of who is causing this “division” among us…

    Richard Danzig… to add to the above list…

    “Richard Danzig, an adviser to Obama on national security and a former navy secretary, said: “My personal position is Gates is a very good secretary of defence and would be an even better one in an Obama administration.”

    That’s right. The Obama campaign is now floating the idea of Robert Gates as his secratary of defence. The same Robert Gates that couldn’t define torture or tell if waterboarding was torture.

    That’s going to be viewed as a little divisive, don’t you think?

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4232070.ece

  94. Let me also chime in:

    1. Obama has to be elected for him to do any changes. If he’s not elected, McCain will be and what possibility do any of us have of affecting ANY change?

    2. As said, it’s one or the other. Do you think McCain is better than Obama? If so, why? If not, why would you not support Obama?

    3. Stated in my last post.

  95. Hello? Is this thing on?

    “am I allowed to address msJ? she directly mentioned me in her comment? is that ok with you guys?”

    What is up with phrases like that, and this one: “if it’s ok with you Zooey…”

  96. “You cannot say much to AIPAC and realistically get elected which is where that whole Politics 101 comes in.”

    what I said was he went “overboard” and promised all of Jerusalem to the Israelis. George Bush didn’t do that, nor did clinton, nor GHW bush, nor did Reagan, nor Carter, nor Ford, nor Nixon.

    in fact, even McCain didn’t go that far. pandering is one thing; promising to take another countries land and 3rd most sacred temple and just give it to the Israelis is another.

  97. I’m done.

    I don’t appreciate having to ask a question over and over again.

    I deserve more respect than that.

  98. Zooey:
    “Hello? Is this thing on?”

    I already responded to the question you asked about my comment…

    “am I allowed to address msJ? she directly mentioned me in her comment? is that ok with you guys?”

    that was my response to this…

    Zooey:
    “The topic went off course, Willy, and that is what gorn is addressing — as am I. Are you going to start in on me as well?”

    I was not “starting in” with Gorn, just defending my previous discussion points with you guys about how Olbermann’s Special Comment was out of line, when he suggested these are just ‘republican diversions”.

    Willy
    “When someone suggests my 2 hour discussion here is just a simple matter of republican diversion tactics, I tend to address that issue and that person.”

    so there it is. a discussion about a discussion.

  99. MsJ asks:

    “2. As said, it’s one or the other. Do you think McCain is better than Obama? If so, why? If not, why would you not support Obama?”

    Well, not until the privacy of the voting both, it isn’t. And why not continue to hold our candidates up to our higher standard till then, MsJ?

    That is my suggestion, msJ.

    Quite frankly, the DLC and the DNC and the mainstream media (remember Tim’s UFO question?) wiped out many of the candidates WE wanted… so why not apply alittle pressure to the presumptive nominee till voting day? let ‘em know we would appriciate them sticking to the issues that “won” them the primaries?

  100. Zooey;

    “I don’t appreciate having to ask a question over and over again.”

    I answered the question about the “lists” twice.

    i thought I made my comment on msJ pretty clear with the comment I listed above.

    (it takes me awhile to write these things, I have to get quotes, think about it… takes a while)

  101. Willy, I understand what you are trying to accomplish, but at this stage, I think it’s more destructive than helpful.

    I appreciate that we do indeed need to hold these people to a higher standard. But, we also need to make sure that the better person is elected and when these discussions turn people off of the one person who we all need to win, right now, right at this point in our history, they will not produce fruitful discourse. They will only create doubt and confusions and possibly send people off to 3rd party candidates. Right now, RIGHT NOW, we do not need that.

    We need to do anything it takes to make sure that there is no President McCain. For a president McConfused, Mc100 years war, McDontKnowMuchAboutEconomy, McGasCosts$2.55, McLiesLiesLies, will be THE WORST THING our country could possibly attempt to endure.

    Do you disagree with that?

  102. Hey, guess what? I still don’t see an answer to my question.

    My question was what you were implying by that question, Willy, not what you were responding to.

    Are you going to answer that question? I think it’s fairly straight forward. I asked the question approximately 1.5 hours ago. I added to the question approximately 23 minutes ago.

    A little courtesy is all I ask.

  103. msJ says:

    “Willy, I understand what you are trying to accomplish, but at this stage, I think it’s more destructive than helpful.”

    I can certainly understand that point of view.

    But MsJ, this conversation wasn’t about Obama’s candidacy, it was about the FISA bill and I simply feel, as do ohters, that this “second chance” for Obama is better used by his standing up for the same thing that he said a month ago about it, and Olbermann ripped Bush a new one about it.

    Because just like I pointed out, and Dean said himslef, bush can and will give them a blanket pardon before he leaves the White House.

    And just like Jane said, what happens if this election is rigged like the last two and McCain gets in the White House?

    All I am saying is a little pressure right now from his constituency might help get this bad, 4th amendment violating Bill, changed.

    I have no intention of voting for McCain. And yes, I know the worst thing for this country is mcCain/Lieberman… all you have to do is visit my site to know that.

    But we need to keep the 4th amendment.

    it might come in handy later. Would you agree with that?

  104. Completely.

    And I was apoplectic as you regarding this. I am calling Feingold on a daily basis begging him that if he doesn’t get a good bill on FISA that he put a hold on it.

    I am calling his five offices every day. And I tell his staffers that the Goopers have been playing the hold game against our country and Feingold is one of very few with the good sense to do this FOR our country.

    Obama isn’t the only fruit on that tree. I have no problem with pressure. I have a problem with the kind of discussion that sends people off to 3rd party people. That would be a seriously bad thing to happen during this election cycle.

    Do you agree with that?

  105. And now that I’ve read MsJ’s comment, I would also agree with that. (The first “I would” was for willy.)

    To paraphrase Inigo Montoya, I don’t think that you’re arguing about what you think you’re arguing about.

  106. Well, msJ.

    If by that you mean discussions here? I don’t know.

    Do you think pointing out Obama’s changing positions may “drive people to vote for a third party candidate”?

  107. MsJ says…

    “I have a problem with the kind of discussion that sends people off to 3rd party people.”

    you see, I agree with that, but it seems to me, the one inniciating those discussions…

    … is Obama. I mean his people just released a statement saying they may keep Gates as the secratary of defence. That’s bound to stir up some controversy, right? And i didn’t say it. His campaign did.

  108. You definately get the prize.

    it’s an all expense paid trip to lovely GITMO!! Yea!!!

    Cus you know they got this site under the new FISA plan, right? And they really don’t like it when you talk about the plan behind the plan….

    So off you go. Do not pass go do not collect $200 bucks.

  109. This may be too much to hope for…..

    Zooey
    July 1, 2008 at 7:10 pm · Edit

    Hello? Is this thing on?

    “am I allowed to address msJ? she directly mentioned me in her comment? is that ok with you guys?”

    What is up with phrases like that, and this one: “if it’s ok with you Zooey…”

    THIS ONE, WILLY. THIS IS THE QUESTION I WANT YOU TO ANSWER.

  110. Willy, that is the second anti-Obama article from the Times Online. Isn’t that a Murdoch owned operation?

    Jeez, look at the WSJ these days? I don’t bother with the WSJ – once highly respected rag. Now just a rag.

  111. But don’t worry, at Gitmo you will be surrounded by all your friends..

    TrueBlue, Wayne, Shayne, MsJ there, even Gorn, god bless him, and the lovily ZZ herself.

    Many of the finest people in America will put in apperances like Gore Vidal, Noam Chomsky, Al Gore, Dennis kucinich, Chuck hagel, Sean penn, and Phil Donahue, just to name a few…

  112. well, the quotes are taken directly from obama’s campaign advisors. I don’t think they would just make those up.

    but we will see.

  113. that was in responce to your comment that I was ‘going after” Gorn and would I be “going after” you next.

    I wasn’t going after Gorn, I was talking about what he said about the points that had been made.

    And I never “went after” you at all.

    So, yes, that is what that comment meant, Zooey.

    Is it ok for me to address MsJ on this thread; after all, she did directly address the comment to me.

    i thought that is what I said earlier. Does that clear it up?

  114. Wow, I see everyone has had a busy evening. Good evening everyone. :)

    Thanks Ms Joanne for the great link.

  115. Willy, why do you think you have to ask a question like that? Why do you phrase things that way?

    You do what you like, right? This is an open blog, right?

    Asking a question like that implies that we are something different, and I won’t leave it hanging out there for speculation.

    That is my point in pursuing an answer from you. You wouldn’t appreciate me implying something like that on your blog, would you?

  116. Zooey. People take me the wrong way, all the time. People think I am a republican disinformation agent, they think i am a cointelpro plant, they think I am trying to undermine candidates…

    i look back on this thread, and I wouldn’t take one single comment back, except for one.

    being snarky to you.

    But “snarky” for me.. it isn’t.. it isn’t the same as what you guys do on say, TP. It comes from a different place than what others say to you guys over there. that isn’t what I am about.

    I don’t come here to distract, nor do I come here to make friends. i come here to share info, and get info.

    So, when you asked about the comment, I told you about the comment. You suggested I was after Gorn and I snarked back to say I wasn’t. It never occured to me that this was something more than just banter.

    i feel I get that alot here, as evidenced by another couple comments earlier in this thread. I think people sometimes asign a tone to my comments that they are more familiar with at somewhere like TP.

    I don’t mean to be short with people; I just don’t edit myself like I should sometimes. But it is not an “attack” as much as it is just plain lack of practice.

    i didn’t mean to leave you hanging, I just thought you understood that about me. that’s all.

  117. Thanks, FR. Be sure to check out his Profile and go to the Constitution blog, too. Not much there but it’s good.

  118. Now, as to this being an “open blog” site.

    sure, you don’t edit or remove comments, unless they are pretty heinous.

  119. I’m on the side that definately does not support Obama not voting on the FISA Bill. I am on the side that wants him to fillabuster it with Feingold and the rest. That’s my side.

  120. I have made it clear what “side” I am on. I am on the side that wants impeachment before the elections and the side that wants a reasonable approach to the palestinians made public so as not to lend credence to more hostility toward them and the side that wants my candidate to continue saying the same things he did before he won the nomination. and i am on the side that wants a new investigation into just who exactly attacked us on 9/11. this is my side. are you on it?

  121. well, when your way hands over our 4th amendment rights and “hopes” we get them back, yeah, Gorn your oversimplified snippy comment just happens to work this time.

  122. Sounds like the same side to me, Willy.

    Will you be able to accept it if things don’t go exactly as you hope? Or if there is compromise?

  123. But you just keep on crossing your fingers that this election isn’t rigged and we don’t hand over this criminal FISA Bill to McCain and Lieberman.

    You keep on hoping away there Gorn.

  124. The point being, my friend, that when someone you are chatting with extends an olive branch to you, it’s impolite to spit on it. Why can’t you simply accept that you agree on the one point without pulling out a half dozen other of your willy litmus tests?

    You seem to revel in confrontation for some reason.

  125. “But you just keep on crossing your fingers that this election isn’t rigged and we don’t hand over this criminal FISA Bill to McCain and Lieberman.”

    I never said anything about hope. I said there is no choice about who to support in this election. Seems to me that’s a pretty simple concept.

  126. “Will you be able to accept it if things don’t go exactly as you hope?”

    What, you think I killed myself after they railroaded Kucinich out of the race or after democrats fought as hard as they could to keep from impeaching the most criminal administration in history?

    What am I doing, if not still trying to do the best I can as this crap just gets deeper and deeper?

  127. “I said there is no choice about who to support in this election. Seems to me that’s a pretty simple concept.”

    We were talking about how we should discuss the issues BEFORE the election, there Gorn. perhaps you would like to catch up on the conversation before joining in.

    and it seems to me that Zooey understood my point and that i was not ‘spitting on her olive branch”.

    again, the reading suggestion may apply here too.

  128. “A simple yes or no would suffice.”

    I guess it all depends on just how far he goes doesn’t it?

    What is it they say about blind alegance to anything?

    (remember what olbermann said in this special comment about parties killing our democracy? the quote from George Washington? kinda fits)

  129. I mean really, you are not in this thing alone, Willy. We’re all in the same position, hoping for the same things, and wanting our country back.

    It’s not you against everyone else. It’s all of us.

    We need to unite against the ugly force in this country the way they unite against us, and we absolutely suck at that.

  130. yeah well, I am hoping that sometime before it’s painfully obvious, some people here may realize that the “ugly force” isn’t just the ones wearing elephants or donkeys.

    the ugly force that we have to unite against wants FISA and no impeachment, and a perminent war economy and NAFTA.

    It’s the “ugly force” that I am talking about. and they aren’t all republicans.

    We had better flex our muscle on our candidate because your “ugly force” damn sure is already. and to my best knowledge, that is exactly how we “unite” against them.

    not just ignoring what they are doing to our candidate and saying “well, he’s the best we got” every time he drifts a little further right to appease them.

  131. it’s my opinion that what unites us is our belief system, and not a candidate that was hand picked by the MSM and the DLC. And everytime he turns further right, he proves my point.

  132. hell, maybe that’s one reason we can’t “unite”; because so many people are trying to unite behind a facade, and they just don’t really buy into it.

    just a thought.

  133. Willy, that is exactly what I am talking about. Facade? Do you think that, honestly? Obama was hand picked by the corporate media? Do you honestly believe that? Wright 24/7? Please spare me that bullshit.

    The race was Clinton’s to lose. And lose she did. She was the always front runner until her advisors fucked up and had her going off in amazingly odd directions.

    I agree that the corporate media dissed Kucinich and Edwards but I think Edwards was the only other viable candidate from the git go. But that’s just me.

    I hardly think Obama was the anointed one.

  134. Give it up Willy, we are a minority of 2….For me I have huge personal issues to address…..Life and death issue’s so I will be leaving you all for awhile…I am sending Blessings untill we read each other again.

  135. by the time they started talking about Wright, all the pundits and the polls said that Clinton couldn’t win anyway. Hell, she stuck it out for months after she was told she couldn’t win.
    remember that, msJ?

    Yeah, Kucinich, gravel, Edwards, Bidden, Richardson, all viable candidates in my opinion. And were they to get the same attention as the Clinton and Obama show, who knows.

    But yes, like it or not, your “choice” was made for you. just like it was in 2000 and 2004. The people that run this country have a plan, and it doesn’t involve a bunch a rubes with an “I voted’ sticker.

    (you ever wonder about those “odd directions” she went off in and compare them to the odd directions Obama is going off in now?)

  136. Clinton had numbers issues for a long time. Do you not remember that?

    Gravel viable? On what planet?? Richardson maybe. Biden had his issues. I don’t think he was really viable at any point.

    I said it before and I will say it again. We are not in the primary any longer. We are in the GE. Obama has to go more to the center to get elected. He has to. No, I don’t like it but the left only goes so far and will not be enough to get him elected.

    And, again I repeat, HE MUST GET ELECTED. We cannot have a McCain presidency.

  137. Hey #1, sorry to hear you’re still not feeling well. Could you keep us informed how your doing. I know we’ll all be worried.

  138. right now, 87% of this country thinks we are on the wrong path. the republican center path…

    and the voices out there in republican and democrat land are crying for real “change”…

    and you think we have to go back to the “center” to win?

    even the democratic congress is under fire for not achieving what they claimed they would.

    we won by a landslide in 2006 (the Diebold fixes not withstanding) promising out of Iraq and accountability and real universal healthcare.

    and you say we have to move to the center to win?

  139. You think that the Bush agenda is CENTER? And if you look at Dems who won in ’06, I doubt you will find all that many hard lefters. Willy, I am pretty left, but you sound like you’re so far bent over that you’re meeting me on the right side after you’ve gone around the world.

    Come back to reality, hon.

    Bush center. HA!

  140. Here is a taste of “reality” MsJ. the elections were rigged in 200, 2002, 2004, 2006, and they are even coming out with cases from the primaries this year.

    Diebold is owned by republican businessmen as is ES&S and Sequoia. The Hlep America Vote Act, put these machines in carefully place districts around the country and state and federal law makes looking at their software that counts the votes illegal.

    The people that run this country are setting up a storyline for why the dems blew this election, in a year that they should win it hands down without even trying after the failed economy and the failed war and the lies of this administration.

    But we will lose, MsJ. That’s reality. Because the people that run this country aren’t finished with their plans for a “new middle east” and the full time 100 year “war on terror”.

    So they will NEVER hand it over to someone who will change it. That’s why they picked obama, and that’s why Clinton ran till the end; to set up the story line.

    there is your ‘reality”. Obama and your vote isn’t going to ‘save” you, it’s going to take more work than that. i just hope that people see this coming before the day after the election, because then it will be too late.

  141. I’m not tearing him down.

    I am suggesting he take the higher road that many many people want to see him take.

    i also suggest that he call for impeachment hearings.

    and this whole time, i have simply suggested that he call for the FISA Bill to be rejected till the thing is fixed and it protects our 4th amendement rights and nixes immunity so that we can see what the government was REALLY spying on.

    That will go a long way to exposing the “ugly force” that is running this country.

    that’s how that will help

  142. I’m not the only one who thinks pressure may help…

    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/333805/spy_protest_group_tops_obama_website

    9,000 Obama supporters on his site have united to press him to use this chance to ‘get FISA right” this time.

    “A grassroots group of activists has been organizing on MyBo, Obama’s official social networking portal, to protest the Senator’s recent decision to back controversial legislation granting the President more spying powers. The effort hit a big milestone on Tuesday afternoon: It is now the largest self-organized group on Obama’s website, topping networks that were launched over a year ago. ”

    from The Nation.

  143. But yes, like it or not, your “choice” was made for you.

    This is such paranoid nonsense. Obama simply ran the most effective campaign with the best combination of fundraising, organization, and message.

    Yeah, Kucinich, gravel, Edwards, Bidden, Richardson, all viable candidates in my opinion. And were they to get the same attention as the Clinton and Obama show, who knows.

    “Viable” in terms of being smart enough, experienced enough, knowledgeable on the issues enough, etc., to be credible – yes. But not viable in terms of running a presidential campaign. They failed.

    Look, I have little admiration for the press, but they spend time on a candidate based on what they think the viewers want to see. They don’t think that people will tune in for a story on Mike Gravel. They think people will tune in to see a story on Barack Obama. Guess who they will feature more?

  144. Gorn in your haste to continue to defend anything and everything about this campaign, you seem to forget the question and time discrepencies that we ALL talked about here; you forget Clinton’s own words caugh on camera about ‘weeding out” the :unserious” other candidates; and you forget that i and many others, personally chatted with the newsdesk editor from MSNBC who confirmed to me that the decision to “reduce” the pool of candidates had been made for their debate between them and the DNC.

    You forget while so MANY of us wanted a real debate about healthcare, i mean REAL universal healthcare, they silenced kucinich and never allowed him to speak on the subject in the debates.

    When people wanted to hear about impeachment a year ago, they again silenced him by not allowing him to be asked questions on it during the debates. All they did was ask a question about who supported it and show a raising of hands, to make people like him and Gravel look like the “fringe” characters.

    Just because you don’t remember these things, Gorn,doesn’t mean we don’t. And you can dismiss the facts I have laid out with the “paranoid nonsense” crap all you want, but, I remember the process leading up to where we are now. Even if you don’t.

    Then Gorn, Google New Hampsire Primary vote count, look into the serious discrepencies in the exit polls and the pre-primary polls and the voting results.

    you will find others as well, in other primaries this year, if you choose to look.

  145. Now, Gorn, those are facts; not just merely opinions or unsubstanciated chatter. If you want to look them up, go right ahead.

    But Dennis K, when he was talking about real universal healthcare, not a payout to big insurance companies like the Obama/Clinton plans, was VERY popular.

    When he talked about impeachment a year ago, he was VERY popular.

    In fact, I think you will be hard pressed to find an online poll that he didn’t win outright, or come in second in.

    He was very popular, because his message was very popular; and it still is.

    So Gorn, no, those again are facts and what you suggest is just what you “think” about the decisions that the MSM made during the primaries.

  146. Oh, and let’s not forget the classic Tim Russet “UFO” question, one of the two or three that was asked of Mr. Kucinich during a debate.

  147. I agree Zooey this is the 2nd chance to make this right. Since Dean and the ACLU have researched this and found a big hole that the Telecoms and Bush can be charged in criminal proceedings that is great news. I can’t wait to read Dean’s research paper and check out what the ACLU has written about it also.

    I had a one on one, face to face with my Congressman this past weekend and he told me the same thing… this FISA bill does not exempt anyone from criminal charges.

  148. No Cats, but the blanket pardon Dean himself admits that Bush can give them… will.

    and when he does, that is that. We have a FISA Bill that erodes the 4th amendment… and no recourse to gather critical information about what the government was really looking at.

    and if Obama Doesn’t win, we have Lieberman and mcCain set up with their new warrentless eaves-dropping legislation to go with the Homegrown Terrorism Act.

    that’s what we have. Dean said as much and Greenwald said as much.

  149. Witch1: Give it up Willy, we are a minority of 2….For me I have huge personal issues to address…..Life and death issue’s so I will be leaving you all for awhile…I am sending Blessings untill we read each other again.

    Make that 3. Just because the voices that agree with Willy and don’t think he is the anti-christ for telling unpleasant truths aren’t the most vocal or obnoxious, doesn’t make us the “paranoid fringe”. And frankly, I am sick of that shit. From everyone, up to and including the supposedly “progressives”.
    Witch, blessings your way as well. Sounds like you need a few. Good luck with those issues. Willy, you have way more forbearance than I. Keep fighting the good fight, my man.

  150. Bluedahlia, Witch1 & Willy,

    My point, which was lost in the fray, is that I think we all want the same things, we just might differ on how we go about getting them — which is ok.

    I want to hear from Obama before I decide I know what he’s thinking, and what his motives are. Even then, I may not agree with him — and will let him know by writing him AGAIN and letting him know what I want from him.

    We absolutely MUST get the Republicans out of power. They are killing this nation, with the help of complicit Democrats.

    If this election is stolen, all bets are off. We are ALL screwed. The only way to even have a chance of preventing that is to show up at the polls in such large numbers, that it will be too obvious that the election was stolen.

    I would love to get Bush and Cheney impeached. I want them to start hearings today, even if they say there “isn’t enough time.” Bullshit!! Get the hearings started, and let the people know what’s been going on in this country, because believe it or not, the average person out there doesn’t know shit about this administration.

    Yall vote for whoever you want. I respect that. I will vote for Obama. Please respect that.

  151. This is not a message aimed at dragging out a dialog with willy. I have no interest in that. This is merely a general statement. Willy, if you want to follow up, it will be to yourself as I’m done with this thread (and anyway going on the road for awhile).

    The fact that the MSM spent a lot of time on Clinton and Obama does not mean that the media “wanted” them to win for any political or ideological purpose. It means they are doing what they think the viewers want. If they wanted them to win, it is only because the continued drama was good for ratings.

    It’s a sad excuse for journalism, but that’s it. As long as you know what you’re getting when you turn on CNN or some other MSM channel, then you can self filter it.

  152. Thank you BlueD. It’s good to hear from you. And be well witch1. I hope things work out for the absolute best for you.

    Zooey, I understand how you feel about this, but I want you to know, that when you see this election is fixed, either before or after election day, and it will be apparent to many people that right now don’t want to accept it, I want you to know that we are not screwed; we can’t be. Because we still have to do what we can to change it as best we can. and there are lots and lots of us out there.

    Like blueD said, they might not be the most vocal or the most obnoxious (like me) but we are many, Zooey. and that is the hope when the rest seems gone.

    I wish you all the best this holiday season. i will be gone for awhile with lots of work piling up and I am off to Atlanta for a day or so.

    keep the faith. no matter what. As ghandi said “peace out, B.”.

  153. Willy, what are you talking about..? You are sounding like you are on a different side than the rest of us.. I have stayed out of this, but I have to say something now. I along with others have busted my ass over the last year posting on this stuff. None of what you are saying is news here. We all know this stuff. We are all very concerned about this stuff. We have ALL written or called our Congressmen and Senators. We are ALL on the same side of this issue. What are you talking about!
    You sound just like my husband when he comes home and lectures me about how to recycle, when I do 99.9% of all the recycling in this house – like he is the only one concerned about the environment.. It is so condescending. Are we just not being militant enough for you here? Is that it?

    Willy, once and for all. We are ALL on the same side fighting for the same things here. ALL of us. We don’t all do it the same way, but we ALL care deeply and are fighting in the ways that we can. That is why I spend SO much time on my computer typing while I let things fall down around me.

    We are all fighting in our own ways. You are not unique here, or more enlightened.. We all post and read the same information. We all get pissed off about the same things. We all have a good idea about what is going on, and what is wrong. Please stop being so GD condescending, so defensive, and stop working so hard at baiting people. That’s not conversation. That’s obnoxious.
    If you want to debate or have a conversation about exchanging ideas or sharing information, then do that. Don’t come at people and treat them like they are idiots and you are the only person with a brain.
    I’m sorry, but I am just tired of this, and I have a really bad headache..

  154. Thanks Shayne. I have just had enough.. :-( I”ve been gone all day again and my head is coming apart. I better go find the Advil..

  155. I’m sorry, muse, you put this video up so that it would expose the tragic flaws in Olbermann’s comment? Is that why you put it up without comment? or did you put it up because you agree with it. Because I clearly didn’t, that’s why I took the time to write about his flawed logic on my site.

    And once again you are superimposing your husband’s behavior on me. Didn’t you and I talk about that the last time?

    I don’t call people “hon”.
    I don’t use abusive language.
    i don’t suggest people get “realistic” (unless I am responding to that accusation against me first, like I did with msJ.)
    And I don’t suggest that this is merely “republican divisive tactics”.

    Now, you may think we are all on the “same side”, but, lets face it. Someone in this thread has openly admitted (at least she is open about it) that she doesn’t like discussions here that may “lead people to vote for a 3rd party”.

    So in fact, Muse, we are NOT all on the SAME side.

    I wrote what I wrote in defence of the 4th amendment and many here keep YELLING that the OLNY thing that matters is Obama winning in Nov.

    So, MUSE, that is clearly not “on the same side”.

    As for being “unique here” I didn’t claim I was. i mention several times in the post that there are many here that share my position, and witch1, Blue, and others make that comment here as well.

    So i am not “unique” nor do i pretend to be.

    Now, if you saw the same problems with olbermann’s logic that I did, then maybe you should have written a little note about them.

    But that is ALL that I attempted to bring attention to here, and it was those same people that SCREAM that Obama’s victory is the only thing that matters, that lit into me for doing so.

    They tried to defend Olbermann, and I put forward my disagreement.

    i didn’t cuss, or call people “hon” (demeaning terms) or slander their position. i just stood my ground for the Constitution while they worried about Obama votes.

    “You are sounding like you are on a different side than the rest of us..”

    My side is not the “Obama or bust” side. Some here feel that way, and they reacted to my comments accordingly.

    i am not alone is that observation. others have mentioned it here.

    and if you, as you say, all agreed that olbermann was wrong in his argument in this issue as I simply pointed out, then, please, show me in this thread where they say that, and then show me on any thread where you have written that prior to this.

    Because if you cannot… “None of what you are saying is news here. We all know this stuff.”… then that comment makes no sense, because that is what I started off saying, and what I ended up saying.

    Please post where I can find your coming to the same conclusions that i did, before this chat.

    Otherwise, it was “news” and you didn’t like it, and your personal attack on me now is no different than those who simply want to silence Obama dissent, like she admitted to in this thread.

  156. Willy, its not the subject, its how you say things and the way you come across. That’s the problem.
    That alone. That’s what I am addressing and responding to here.
    And yes, I’ve had enough. I won’t be responding to any more of your comments as long as this is how it is going to be.

  157. right. ‘the way I come across”.

    since it’s someone else who is demeaning, and someone else using foul language, and someone else who levels personal attacks just to get people (me) to quit talking about things that may present a ‘bad light” for Obama; since someone else does that, it really has to be how I “come across”.

    Please, don’t respond. you didn’t respond in this conversation till you thought I was gone, and you aren’t responding to my request that you show me where you posted the same critisism of Olbermann, since I’m not saying anything ‘new”.

    So don’t respond. Keep your echo chamber. and keep letting certain parties here attack new voices that happen to have a different view of what we need to do. I am not the only one.

    i’ve had enough too, muse trust me. there are sites where open discussions about even Saint Obama are encouraged, not attacked.

    One such site is Obama’s site. Sinking to this kind of personal crap is really dissapointing muse. That’s what you used to do when you compared me to your husband. Been having a little chat with Zooey on Facebook.

    i won’t be back. enjoy your dwindling echo chamber.

  158. FYI, I didn’t respond earlier because I am neck-deep in family stuff at the moment – actually for weeks now. That’s why I haven’t been posting so much or as in-depth. Family issues supersede blogging.

    You are right about one thing. I should not have gotten personal. That was wrong. I never do that. Never. Not on this blog. I should not have done that now. I apologize for that.

    As for the rest, I am doing the best I can. Every day. As is everyone else here.

  159. Willy,

    muse has NOT been having a chat with me on Facebook. She is perfectly capable of independent thought.

    I spent my day driving to Portland to see my sons, and my evening with said sons.

    You make too many assumptions, and read way too much into other people’s motives.

Comments are closed.