READER COMMENTS ON
"VIDEO - Senator Feingold Interviewed on The Daily Show"
(29 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 3/23/2006 @ 11:30 am PT...
Sounds all humble about it in news conference, and then gets bolder on TDS. Tailors his speech for different audiences. Politician. Just a little more reasonable than the others.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 3/23/2006 @ 11:41 am PT...
While I agree with you, out of the 600-700 politicians in washington he's the one most likely to faithfully represent the interests of the american people.
He will most likely run for president in 2008. I doubt the powers-that-be will let him get past the dem primaries.
Even if he does, there's the whole electronic voting issue to make sure he never gets into office.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 3/23/2006 @ 12:06 pm PT...
"marginally"? He's the only one that stood up against the Patriot Act initally.. he's the first one to bring about a Censure Resolution over ILLEGAL ACTS by our President. He fillibustered (or tried) the renewal of the Patriot Act.
Since he stands alone on a lot of these things, he's TONS better than "most politicians".. There are a few Congresspersons who get it, who care, who are still trying to fight (Conyers, Feingold.. a few others perhaps)..
I don't agree that he's "margianlly" better.. not by a long shot. Almost "unique", now that's different. And that isn't gonna get much done in Washington.. I'll grant you that.
Anyone else notice that the Daily Show the day before had one of Saddam's Generals on who wrote a book and is saying "there were WMDs in Iraq when the U.S. invaded"? Says he "saw them" in the early 90s, and was "told by the pilots moving it out to Syria" that it was being moved (not sure exactly when). Funny how that surfaces just about the same time "documents survace showing Iraq had 'interactions' with al Qaeda".. and right about the same time Shrubby declares we'll be there over 3 more years..
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 3/23/2006 @ 12:52 pm PT...
Yup. Just like Judith Millers WMD stories, Powell's speech to the UN, the disinformation from "Curveball" .. et c. that are now seen as part of a clear campaign to get into Iraq, a few years from now we'll understand this as the campaign to keep us there.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 3/23/2006 @ 2:41 pm PT...
I've been battling both of my Democratic Senators, (the "good guys", Savantster, the ones that are going to save us), O'Bama & "Do-Nothing" Durbin from Illinois, who are little more than pampered pets with big ambitions that we keep in Washington, over their lack of support for this Feingold resolution to censure Bush for spying on us all.
Now get this:
In 1999, Durbin not only voted for, but CO-SPONSORED a resolution against Clinton (a member of his own Democratic party mind you), to censure Pres. Clinton over his affair with Monica Lewinsky. (Which was a sexual fling that was a personal failure but only affected his own marriage & embarrassed & humiliated the entire country for a long time)
Now that Sen. Feingold has introduced a resolution to censure Bush for his secret wiretapping & spying--an act that is illegal, takes away citizens' rights, & trashes the CONSTITUTION--& the censure is against a member of the opposing party to his own mind you--he suddenly must "watch" the situation closely.
That's all. Just "watch".
I could poke a pig in the ass with a stick & get more action.
What a hypocrite!!
He had an excuse for not impeaching Bush too. It was that since the Republicans had the majority, it can't be done.
O'Bama's excuse for doing nothing is that he is "considering the options".
Oprah liked O'Bama & had him on her show when he was first elected, but that was when she thought he would DO something.
And Bush's polls are in the toilet, too. When will there be a better time?
Ask YOUR Senator why he won't at least censure Bush. (That's like a slap on the wrist anyway but it's a start.)
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 3/24/2006 @ 7:24 am PT...
The massive psyops (link here) the regime has been conducting, including the NSA spying, is beyond any one person's ability to take in.
The best we can do is stick with common sense. And with individualism.
The government, in order to control, needs to have group think. And at least two groups. This way they can define behavior and limit it to two conflicting ideologies.
The trick comes by way of gray ops. Use a little truth with a little lie, get close to a grey line, and use that to study how solid the behavior is.
When a line of behavior is desired, trigger dialogue within the grey zone, and observe the two ideologies to see how people in the conflicting ideoligies react.
That is what the NSA and UAE port stories are for. These are especially useful for planning for an October surprise.
How did you do folks?
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 3/24/2006 @ 8:31 am PT...
If THIS isn't a GOOD reason for ALL Congresspersons to impeach, I don't know what is.
He's just said, AGAIN, that he "doesn't have to follow the law, he's above the law".
Holy rat shit on whole wheat, bat man.. Open wide and get ready for a tasty treat!
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 3/24/2006 @ 9:01 am PT...
I agree that we need to continue to fight for fair elections--but that's all I can agree with you on.
And, that fight needs to continue to be waged at the federal as well as at the state level. Why can't we change it 'from the floor of the Senate'?
It doesn't make sense that we should WAIT to see if we can get a Democratic majority after the elections to act against Bush. (And, as you pointed out, that may never happen if the elections are rigged again)
It WOULD be great to get a Democratic majority (& hope they see fit to go after Bush--it's not a foregone conclusion that they would)--but since a Democratic majority may NEVER happen--we need the Dems to do all they can right now.
And how would standing up to Bush be akin to the Dems 'standing in line & jumping on their own swords'? How would standing up to him as a group, be political suicide?
We already know the Dems didn't stand up to Bush when the country needed them to--like before he got us into the first preemptive war in our history on false pretenses, when he stole the election from Gore, etc., etc.
We know they have not been doing their job as opposing party. From poll results, about 7 out of 10 Americans know it.
Taking corrective action now is redemptive for Dems!
People will think, well, they fell down on the job--but hey, they're trying to mend their ways now. They really DO care about America & NOT just their own careers--their hearts are in the right place.
It's incredible to me that ANY representative could be more concerned for his own, selfish career goals in politics than he is for saving our country from the mess it's in. I mean, all of these men could get other great jobs even if they never got elected to office again. It's not like they're going to starve.
Look at the horrors they allow to go on, rather than do the right thing, & take a chance they may not be re-elected! Their cowardice is abominable! They're curs. That's the quality of the people we have in office.
I guess the Dems are all going to WAIT until Bush has tanks in the streets to quell the protests & uprisings & the activists all in his torture prisons, & all the Democrats with markers that have "D" on their sleeves--before they say to themsleves "oh hey, I guess I shoulda stood up to Bush's assault on Democracy when I had the chance.
In fact, the Democrats' ONLY hope of getting elected to a majority may be to stand up to Bush--not the other way around.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/24/2006 @ 11:06 am PT...
Dredd said "That is what the NSA and UAE port stories are for."
You are kidding yourself. The NSA issue is the violation of our fourth amendment rights. That's a crime.
The UAE issue is Bush transfering control of our ports to his father's evil collective (Carlyle, and their UAE co-conspirators). That has nothing to do with 'gray ops,' whatever that is.
Get real. If you stand back far enough (which I think you call 'individualism'), the parallax makes it all seem like a giant plan. And it is --- just not to the depth that you seem to imagine.'
Try to break your fixation with your own sense of freedom. POLITICS is about finding COLLECTIVE solutions. It isn't personal --- it goes beyond the personal to ACTUALLY ENGAGE THE CONTRADICTORY FORCES IN SOCIETY.
This coup is producing borderline psychosis on many fronts. That is part of their effort. They thump a Bible, and millions say Amen. Your kind of overblown conspiracy theory is just another side of that same false analogy. Not every cigar is a penis.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 3/24/2006 @ 11:14 am PT...
BEN YOU SAY THE 4TH
AMENDMENT CAME AFTER ARTICLE II?
If you tell anyone, I will declare you an enemy combatant and you can go fly some kites at GITMO, along with Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and those other SOB's who bother me with laws and stuff.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/24/2006 @ 11:19 am PT...
COMMENT #9 [link]
...Charlene said on 3/24/2006 @ 9:01am PT...
"Why can't we change it 'from the floor of the Senate'?"
Because A) voting is a states matter, not federal (except as a general right). There is an exception with HAVA, but since that is a vote-fraud act, it's not really an improvement, and further goes to show why it can't be changed in the Senate.
We DON'T HAVE THE VOTES TO CHANGE VOTING FROM THE SENATE. That should be easy enough to understand.
But beyond that, it is IN THE STATES that we still have power, and it is IN THE STATES that we can and must stop the vote-fraud. Because the states control the elections --- NOT the federal government. That's how our Constitution is set up.
"It doesn't make sense that we should WAIT to see if we can get a Democratic majority after the elections to act against Bush."
We? Of course we cannot wait. But the Dem leadership will NOT go at Bush until after the midterms. That is a FACT. That's what I said. I also said that we cannot wait. So you may not be reading what you are replying to.
"It WOULD be great to get a Democratic majority (& hope they see fit to go after Bush--it's not a foregone conclusion that they would)--but since a Democratic majority may NEVER happen--we need the Dems to do all they can right now."
Nonsense. Not only won't they, they shouldn't. WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES.
In the states, you have power. And that's where the voting is run from. YOUR SecState is the problem. YOUR election rights under your state constitution is the solution.
"And how would standing up to Bush be akin to the Dems 'standing in line & jumping on their own swords'? How would standing up to him as a group, be political suicide?"
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MAJORITY. Therefore, you can only 'stand up to him as a group' from time to time.
Google "Aventine Secession." Understand something about holding a democratic government together during a coup. You really do owe the Dem leadership some respect for succeeding in holding the caucuses together.
"We already know the Dems didn't stand up to Bush when the country needed them to--like before he got us into the first preemptive war in our history on false pretenses,"
It's not the first, by a long shot. House Dems voted SIXTY PERCENT NAY, with change of leader. That's standing up.
"when he stole the election from Gore, etc., etc."
It's the etc., etc. where you go off the track. The coup in 2000 couldn't be stopped from the floor of the Senate. This is a coercive coup, and it is not that difficult to PLAY a democracy. The hard part is holding a democracy together.
"We know they have not been doing their job as opposing party. From poll results, about 7 out of 10 Americans know it."
And if they counted those votes, we'd be fine. BUT THEY DON'T!
"It's incredible to me that ANY representative could be more concerned for his own, selfish career goals in politics than he is for saving our country from the mess it's in."
That is not what is happening. WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES in Congress to stop what is happening. If we line up and vote nay, it just REDUCES our power in the Congress.
"That's the quality of the people we have in office."
We have EXCELLENT people in Congress, lots of them. But democracy can be gamed very easily --- Hitler bragged about that every day.
Have YOU ever tried to put someone into power? Not as easy as it looks.
"In fact, the Democrats' ONLY hope of getting elected to a majority may be to stand up to Bush--not the other way around."
Don't you read this blog? WE HAVE WON THESE ELECTIONS, but they are being stolen. It is not a question of having a better pitch for the public. It's about GETTING OUR VOTES COUNTED.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/24/2006 @ 12:35 pm PT...
"And Bush's polls are in the toilet, too. When will there be a better time?"
This is an election year. The Dems have a chance to retake the majority in the House, in which case they can actually PASS a censure resolution, an impeachment resolution, and hold the investigation and trial that ALL OF US know will put these people in prison for the rest of their rotten lives.
"Ask YOUR Senator why he won't at least censure Bush. (That's like a slap on the wrist anyway but it's a start.)"
It only requires ONE to file a resolution of censure. Without the authority to move it to the floor for a vote, the resolution is dead in the water to start with.
But it is still an important act. Instead of valuing that act in itself, you are turning it into a detriment. Bashing the minority is not going to take Bush out of office.
This blog is CRUCIAL to our achieving legal and fair representation in government --- our most basic Constitutional right --- a right that is right now since 1999 been abrogated. IF we cannot reestablish our voting rights, it's over --- regardless of whether the Dems stand in a line and jump on their swords.
Even if the public votes in Democrats in huge numbers after they somehow rattle their swords in the face of tyranny, WE KNOW that it may simply not be recorded. And that fact is a state and local issue --- it cannot be changed from the floor of the Senate.
We should be pressuring the HOUSE CANDIDATES (including incumbents) FOR FAIR VOTING GUARANTEES if the Dems achieve a majority. And we must fight legally and publically for our right to fair election under our state constitutions --- WHICH STILL STAND.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 3/24/2006 @ 1:57 pm PT...
The Senate could vote to change the wording in HAVA tomorrow so that the e-voting machines are reliable & not hackable--they made HAVA & they could fix HAVA. There is no point in confining our election reform efforts to only the state level.
My Sec of State has to follow HAVA guidelines.
Secondly, it's not a "fact" that the Dems will EVER go after Bush, before or after midterms, majority or no. Maybe you have a crystal ball that tells you future "facts".
Third, criticizing the minority & letting them know voters WANT them to support censure/impeachment may not get Bush out of office, but it sure beats your cunningly clever idea to "wait"!. Dems have been 'waiting for Godot' with their thumbs up their butts for way too long.
It doesn't "reduce our power" when the Dems speak out in the media, loud & often, against Bush & point out what atrocious things he's pulling now.
It INFORMS the majority of the public that do not watch independent news of what is going on. When Dems keep quiet, most of the citizens are un aware. That reason alone should keep them mouthy. The MSM report quotes from Dems.
It damn straight would have made a difference if the Dems all jumped on the censure--whether it passed or not. It would have given hope & increased Dems reputation with the people & therefore, their chances of getting that majority they want come election day.
Right now, except for a handful, the Dems have rolled over & played dead against the Republican neocons.
No, we DON'T have "excellent" people in Congress. If we did, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. If we had "excellent" representation they would have been on the ball, passionately fighting tooth & nail from the gitgo.
Why was Gore oddly quiet when Bush snatched the Presidency right out from under his nose? It seemed as though he didn't WANT the Presidency very much. Why didn't he speak up about the entire thing to the people? Why didn't the rest of the Dems also scream bloody murder (the murder of our Democracy)?
It's not good sportsmanship--it's being afraid to stand up for yourself.
They had nothing to lose anyway.
You ask snidely--if I, myself, have ever tried to put someone into power. Well no dufus I haven't, not personally, on a national level, & neither have most people.
What has that got to do with anything? You're all over the place.
Have YOU tried to? Who do you work for? Sounds like you work for a Democrat.
Then the last dumb thing you said was--'Don't I read this blog?' 'It's not about a better pitch, it's about getting our votes counted.'
Well, if Bush's approval rating drops to say 10%, before the election because Dems have been hammering on what is wrong with Bush & most voters are aware & disaprove of him, maybe calling for impeachment or for his head on a stick in the streets--it's gonna be damned difficult for the neocons to fake a 51% "mandate" again & get away with it.
I don't see how anything you said has validity--except that we need to keep trying to fix the voting system.
You sound to me as if your proximity to a politician is so close you no longer can see the forest for the trees.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/24/2006 @ 11:04 pm PT...
"The Senate could vote to change the wording in HAVA tomorrow"
Gee that's great. So when is Frist going to schedule that vote?
"so that the e-voting machines are reliable & not hackable--they made HAVA & they could fix HAVA."
Yeah, that's nice. But HAVA is not broken. It is an intentional breaking of our voting rights, and it is working fine. Just wait --- 2006 is going to be 100-0 vote for the first time in history.
"There is no point in confining our election reform efforts to only the state level. My Sec of State has to follow HAVA guidelines."
That's true, but your SecState is not C. Rice co-conspirator. They may be a co-conspirator, but will the Bushoviks go to the mat for them? State SecStates can be replaced, if people work to do it. Because even with a legal HAVA etc., if the SecState REFUSES to give a recount, and the DoJ REFUSES to do anything to enforce the law, and the AG won't act, then you're SOL, as we were in Ohio in 2004.
We paid $125,000, for a court-ordered recount, and got bupkis.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/25/2006 @ 1:07 am PT...
"Third, criticizing the minority & letting them know voters WANT them to support censure/impeachment may not get Bush out of office, but it sure beats your cunningly clever idea to "wait"!.
INCORRECT. First of all, the Dem leadership has already said that they will not do what you want them to do. That's because there is an election in 6+ months, after which there is the possibility of ACTUALLY doing it, instead of rattling an empty saber.
This one-party rule is NOT the normal affair. It is the direct act of a voting machine conspiracy, with complicity from the Courts, and the corporate media.
HOW IS ANY OF THAT THE FAULT OF THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS? It isn't, unless you want to WALLOW in blaming them for their failure to stop multi-billion dollar multi-national corporations from walking all over them after such a coup.
"Dems have been 'waiting for Godot' with their thumbs up their butts for way too long."
Go to Minnesota and tell that to the Wellstones. This is a VERY dangerous affair. You don't acknowledge the danger --- you scoff at the people who don't do what you THINK they should be able to do under these circumstances.
"It doesn't "reduce our power" when the Dems speak out in the media, loud & often, against Bush & point out what atrocious things he's pulling now."
If by the Dems you mean the hundred million people, yeah, you're right. But if you mean the Dem leadership, well, no, they have already told you that they WILL NOT, for the reason that to them is sanity, no matter how much you dismiss it.
"When Dems keep quiet, most of the citizens are un aware."
I see. So the Congress has the job of doing what the corporate media won't? And specifically the Dem minority has to perform this duty?
That has NEVER been the case in US history.
"It damn straight would have made a difference if the Dems all jumped on the censure--whether it passed or not."
That's your claim, from the backseat. Unfortunately for you, you are not one of the leaders. And you have no respect for them ANYHOW. So why should they jump because you say so? They are keeping the caucuses together --- that is a major advantage. And they are sharpening their machine in many ways --- Dean is doing a lot for YOUR future.
"It would have given hope & increased Dems reputation with the people & therefore, their chances of getting that majority they want come election day."
See, that's where you go right off the rails. I'm a lifelong, ardent Democrat, but I READ THIS BLOG and I know that they are STEALING OUR ELECTIONS. I don't think what Bradblog readers know is very well known in the country.
Not only do YOU HAVE THE DUTY OF COMMUNICATING WHAT YOU THINK PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT VOTE-FRAUD, but you might also inadvertently educate a few the Democratic representatives.
"Right now, except for a handful, the Dems have rolled over & played dead against the Republican neocons."
And why is that their fault? They are elected to serve in a DEMOCRATIC, LEGAL government --- which this is not. So sorry they couldn't be heroic and get their families killed for you. They are a bit more circumspect, because they actually have something to lose. What's your cost?
"No, we DON'T have "excellent" people in Congress. If we did, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place."
INCORRECT. This mess is the direct result of a CONSPIRACY. Don't you read this blog? So why do you repeat your SCAPEGOATING at every opportunity. You apparently don't know the elections are being stolen, and you apparently don't know that we are in the middle of an act of treason so heinous that it has never happened before in US history so far as we know.
You want to blame the minority, but they aren't a minority EXCEPT through a coup. But you don't see a coup --- you see some politicians who are just 'crookeder.' And that has poisoned your mind.
You, like Bush, see failure in other people, and don't recognize it yourself. You just want someone to blame.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/25/2006 @ 1:22 am PT...
"t's gonna be damned difficult for the neocons to fake a 51% "mandate" again & get away with it."
Oh really. Well, so you think that the 2004 vote-fraud coup was their last hurrah?
A terrorist attack in the United States would have an UNKNOWN effect on our election system. What is its effect on a rigged system?
What is the effect of dropping a nuclear bomb on Tehran? What is the effect of a thousand things that traitors could do to us in order to CONTINUE TO HOLD POWER.
In my opinion, the 22nd Amendment is toast. The crooked SCOTUS will declare it unconstitutional in time of war --- if Bush is still in office in 2007.
Your sense of assurance is NOT matched by the potential facts. You presume that they will continue to maintain pretenses of Constitutionalism throughout --- and that is not at all clear.
So the Dems may be staking it all on the next election. And we here and elsewhere have the facts, but who is going to tell the country? YOU are busy attacking the minority for failing to do symbolic acts. Little Aventine Secessions.
That's some special kind of strategy. Leftists want to slander the Dems, so Uncle Karl will send them a Valentine.
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 3/25/2006 @ 6:21 am PT...
Paul in LA #10
ME: "That is what the NSA and UAE port stories are for."
YOU: "You are kidding yourself. The NSA issue is the violation of our fourth amendment rights. That's a crime."
You have been busy making good comments here, so I am giving you slack on missing my context in this one post. Keep up the good work, I appreciate your posts.
The UAE episode and the NSA public admissions about spying on Americans and the president's own eschewing of congressional "help" for the president by changing the law to fit his view, show that they are not timid to the point of not testing the waters.
There should be no consternation at expecting them to test the waters to see how far they can go.
The cognitive side of the NSA matter does not resonate with the public like the physical side of having foreign governments on our soil in sensitive port locations.
That is why there is less personal revolt on the NSA matter than there is on the UAE matter. The operatives are purposefully probing how the public reacts so they can implement the next psyops chapter.
They know full well that the American psyche resists and tends to reject notions that the government is dangerous and would intentionally harm Americans.
That is why 911 and electronic election machine fraud is difficult to sell. There is much resistance to it because past psyops have conditioned Americans to react in this manner.
It is in plain site and invisible all at the same time. The psyops folk are good at their craft. You under estimate them at your peril.
However, they have not figured out how to change the fundamental mistrust Americans have in governmental power ... so the classic "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" is still believed by a majority of the public.
But the psyops folks have weakened that sentiment by a massive strike of anti-conspiracy theory infusions into the public arena for years now. Your reaction with a "conspiracy theory" one liner illustrates that point. I mean only denial would not allow one go to the links I provide and see the massive evidence of institutional psyops. They are so for real.
These psyops have been debilitating in many areas, and once lost, is difficult to turn around and regain the territory that was lost to psyops. People like to think they are correct, and therefore in general, trend toward support for the status quo. For instance it has become fashionable to blame democrats for not stopping problems even tho republicans rule.
Psyops folks are well aware of all of this, and have untold billions of dollars at their disposal and many military and other universities and schools to use. And with those mental warfare weapons being spread via the MSM each and every day they are free to advance their agenda to new areas.
And they certainly do (link here, link here, link here).
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/25/2006 @ 11:23 am PT...
"The cognitive side of the NSA matter does not resonate with the public like the physical side of having foreign governments on our soil in sensitive port locations."
INCORRECT. What is different is the COVERAGE by the media.
Foreign, ARAB, company wants to run our ports? Yeah, that's an immediate nationalist no.
Shitehouse is spying on all Americans, taking down legal, business, banking, and personal information in large amounts?
Never heard that from their morning newspapers. It's not less cognitive per se --- it's less COVERED. What people are being told is that it's between AQ and bad people. The actual scope is bitterly resented and refused by Americans with half a wit.
As a protester on the West Coast at least, I have talked with many, many ordinary people. The hatred of Bush and what he is doing to the country is ENORMOUS.
It's not the case that the American public en masse is being gulled. In fact, that's Bush's main problem. They didn't succeed in their 2001-2003 coup. They have left a trail of broken laws and evidence --- never a good thing.
And they didn't bring the American people along, mostly because Bush is singularly incapable of convincing anyone of anything for more than a few minutes.
I agree it's psyops, but I don't think it's so effective. We have a seriously good chance of removing these guys through indictment.
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/25/2006 @ 11:24 am PT...
(sorry that was a bit rushed, Dredd. My ride to go surfing just arrived. More later).
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 3/25/2006 @ 12:42 pm PT...
EAT MY DUST
I have been offending some bloggers here because of my propensity to educate and elucidate. Notably, I have been explaining how congress works. Shining light on congress' I-beams, structural members, and current DNA. Yep, I have been offending.
What I have shown is that it is anything but a multi-party, idea-sharing, democratic, and people oriented enterprise. Instead I have shown that it is a ONE PARTY entity, a winner takes all and loser eats shit organ of the US government that has been made into a foreign entity. Yes, I have shown that the ONE PARTY congress of the US loves, embraces, exalts, and deifies only one party ... the MAJORITY PARTY.
It has been that way as long as its current legal underpinnings have been in place. I am resisting the knee-jerk, psyops instilled, urge to blame someone for that, and will leave that to bottom feeders ... what I want is CHANGE.
I care more about fixing congress and looking to the future than I care about blaming someone for the dictatorial reality that the rules/laws of the existing congress has created.
Yes, congress is a dictatorship. A one party dictatorship (regardless of what political party one lusts to associate with that reality). It is the MAJORITY PARTY dictatorship.
Currently, for those who are not yet aware, that party is the republican party.
Those who are drunken and also posting on this thread have no concept of the structure of congress (nor any other structure I suspect), so I offer a link (link here).
This link shows you how Senator Feingold, or any other minority senator, must dance. Said Senator must bring his poetry, war plan, witches brew, or compelling rhetoric, to the chair of a committee that has jurisdiction of the subject matter he wishes to pontificate upon, exacerbate, masterbate, integrate, or berate. Why? Because that is the law of congress.
Those of you here, who are obvious, and are oblivious to the law/rule of congress will not get it. Nor anything else you care to try to wrap your serpent body around.
Because it takes paying attention to the other post, other person, or other opinion. It takes the angelic essence of listening to and caring for others.
Just read the freakin link and weep ... if you remember how.
And then realize that, as I said, Senator Feingold must to the chair of the committee having jurisdiction and, in effect, prostrate himself:
"The Republican-led U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee announced on Friday it would hold a hearing next week on a call by a Democratic lawmaker to censure President George W. Bush for his domestic spy program.
In a one-sentence notice, the panel said the hearing would be held next Friday by the order of its chairman, Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who has opposed censure."
Now tell me again those who blame the democrats for every wrong, who has the majority votes on that committee?
And who allowed Feingold's matter to survive another day or two? A filibuster? ... or was it the chair of a committee of the MAJORITY PARTY?
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 3/25/2006 @ 12:56 pm PT...
Paul in LA #19
Here is your stroke for being a big surfer and going surfing
Paul in LA #18
I wish you had the capacity to discuss things as they exist outside the MSM. In purity.
Instead, you give the MSM too much credit, and therefore do a great disservice to ... your own? I am speaking of the American people!
The MSM, in all its great power, effigy, and adoration you and others give it, has not been able to do in the American public.
They do not like the current dictatorial congress nor the dictatorial presidency.
You can not fool the base of America because they are not fools.
You can fool the republican base, as Georgie has done, but not the American base.
Nothing the MSM can do will change that. Because it is a soul thang.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/25/2006 @ 4:47 pm PT...
I haven't got a clue what you're talking about Dredd.
MSM? I never mentioned the mass media, except to say that it has not told people of the full extent of the spying, per its orders from the Shitehouse.
As for being a 'big surfer,' more to the point is that I hung out with several dolphin, saw a migrating merganser, a flock of migrating flycatchers, picked up quite a few nice pieces of California jade on the beach, and had a blast. The water was ice-cold. And I'd do it again in a minute.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 3/25/2006 @ 10:22 pm PT...
#17 Dredd, & Paul in LA
No, Dredd, you're wrong---"Paul in LA" is NOT making "good comments"!
Don't get all 'gaga' over him.
Paul is surfin the web.
Don't you recognize the poo he slings?
He won't follow an idea to it's logical conclusion.
Instead of defending his point when you challenge it--he quotes you, as if he's GOING to answer, but then, all he does is bring up another question or sidestep what he said. Then he pretends that WAS an answer, like if he does it fast enough you won't notice.
Similar to the trickster with the shell game--he moves the shells around real fast so you won't notice where the answer he was supposed to give went.
He sounds like a politician, or a PR guy for a politician.
When you look closely--& I ask that you do--the only point he hammers home is that the good Dems are not to blame for doing nothing so far & not to blame for doing nothing well into the future. The other point he makes is that the current state of the MSM is no problem.
WHAT A CROCK OF SHIT!
He's trying to CREATE DOUBT & conquer.
Who benefits from a message like that ?
Sorry, Dredd, if I'm a bit rushed but my ride to go base jumping just arrived. More later.
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 3/26/2006 @ 6:08 am PT...
The psyops part of all things republican has caught my interest. One reason for that is the massive effort psyops has become (link here).
It is all out in the open for Paul in LA not to see:
"The Air Force’s Concept of Operations for Information Operations, 6 February 2004, organizes all the facets of information operations into three categories: network-warfare operations, electronic-warfare operations, and influence operations (which include PSYOP). Combining PSYOP, whether offensive or defensive, with electronic-warfare and network-warfare operations can greatly enhance its effectiveness. The Air Force is taking a hard look at the realm of PSYOP and influence operations to assure that its information-operations planners know how to coordinate with the joint PSYOP task force during both planning and execution" (link here, bold added).
If a massive inside job happens anywhere, such as NSA wholesale spying on Americans, there will always be massive psyops to assist in covering up the real scenario. Diversion, obfuscation, and disinformation.
Many statements here are a combination of fact and fiction, which is called grey-ops. Paid government agents pose as civilians, experts, or folk hero types to skew the picture. And to get practice. They practice on us often.
One good thing is that those on the inside are also working for the people.
And they leak info from time to time and we then have another clue. And the picture becomes more clear to some.
They cannot exercise their dictatorial powers if they loose the November election. So the psyops are and will continue to be out in full force.
Don't leave your common sense at home or anywhere else.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/26/2006 @ 1:16 pm PT...
That was pathetic, Charlene.
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 3/27/2006 @ 10:48 am PT...
#25 "Paul in LA"
I accept your apology, surfer boy.
Your comments WERE pathetic.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/27/2006 @ 2:25 pm PT...
It's hilarious that you are so shallow, Charlene.
As for your knocking me over being a surf boy, guilty as charged. If you don't love nature --- that's your problem.
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 3/27/2006 @ 10:51 pm PT...
"Paul in LA"
I don't love liars.
It's disrespectful to this blog that you come here & talk out of both sides of your mouth & spread disinformation.
The rest of the bloggers are sincere.
Go sell crazy somewhere else.
You're a bore.
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
Paul in LA
said on 3/28/2006 @ 1:08 am PT...
And your entirely contentless diatribe is a snoozer too. Are you really trying to criticize me? Because you're missing me by a mile. And you haven't tackled any of my actual posting, so what's the point?