Mark Fiore: Aye, Spy!

[babylonsister]

http://www.markfiore.com/animation/aye.html

[OzarkDem]

1. Classic!

Funny and not funny at the same time.

[alfredo]

2. Send this to your spineless representatives.

[babylonsister]

4. Great idea; it's on its way to my blue dog. nt

[alfredo]

8. I gave mine, Ben Chandler hell a few days ago.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

3. Mark Fiore is simply great. Unfortunately he bought into that only a certain amount of Democrats

did it. The Leadership never had to put Amendments on the floor. I am still so upset and angry over this.

[struggle4progress]

7. My rep voted AGAINST this travesty -- so I can't see why we should blame ALL Dems for this cr@p

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

9. When he counted, he failed to mention Reid and Pelosi, who voted against but brought

the vote to the floors.

My Congressman voted no, and I thanked him.

[struggle4progress]

10. What goes on in the House is typically governed by the Ways and Means Committee

so I'm not convinced that the currently-popular attacks on Pelosi are at all appropriate.

And there's another minor issue here, which has some political importance: if we Dems have (rightly) complained of Repub heavy-handedness in recent years, it's hypocritical to kick and scream if the Dem leadership tries not to be unnecessarily heavy handed.

But the real issue is this: we need to go after the SOBs who voted for this cr@p. They're the ones who are really to blame, and they're the ones who need to be removed if they won't stand down. It's stupid misdirection to attack Dems in general, or Pelosi and Reid in particular, when almost all support came from Repubs and a handful of Dem idiots

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

11. I'm sorry I have to beg to differ about Reid and Pelosi. Protecting our Fourth Amendment

isn't heavy handed. They listened to Bush and they jumped.

They even staged the House Amendment on last Friday night. They had the votes to pass in an up and down vote, and yet suspended the rules, requiring 2/3 to pass. Suspending the rules is used for non-controversial bills.ie renaming post offices, etc. They intended it to fail so the Senate bill could be voted in.

And yes, the Democrats and all of the Repugs that voted for it, must be voted out.

[struggle4progress]

14. Your description of events seems incorrect: the Friday night vote involved

HRes 600, reported by the Rules Committee, which allowed suspension of the rules for a FISA amendment, which on Friday was the Dems negotiated version; HRes 600 passed, but the vote to suspend the rules and pass the negotiated version failed, the Administration having reneged on the negotiations. The Rules Committee then reported two additional rules for a FISA amendment.

But Saturday evening, Hoyer asked unanimous consent to suspend the rules to debate the bill that had passed the Senate. Essentially anyone (except perhaps presiding officers) could have objected; no objection was heard. However, that is probably not unusual, in itself -- and it is not at all clear that Pelosi is more at fault than anyone else. Once Hoyer had thus obtained suspension of the rules, the majority voted Bush's way.

What was unusual is that an Administration had engaged in careful negotiations, then had reneged on them, and I expect all of us should express to our Representatives great dismay that anyone agreed to Hoyer's unanimous consent request under the circumstances. But on a practical level, we may be unlikely to prevail in this regard, because if people routinely challenge unanimous consent requests the ability of Congress of do much of its routine business will be rather limited.

Here's the clearest summary of the events I could find: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/userletter/?letter_id=1351948416&content_dir=congressorg

edit: accuracy

[babylonsister]

13. From digby:

and ht to beachmom:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/its-for-our-own-...

When it comes to the encroaching police state, the politicians of both parties have shown their true colors and their shirts are a disturbing shade of coffee.

The idea that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi supposedly "allowed" themselves to be punk'd again on a constitutional atrocity with scare stories and slick legislative strategy is indefensible and at some point you have to assume that it isn't just political malpractice or even spinelessness. When you see this legislation, on the heels of the passage of the Military Commissions atrocity last fall, you cannot escape the conclusion that the Democrats agree with the administration that the government must have unfettered authoritarian power to "keep the country safe."

Sure, a good many of them voted against it. But the Democrats control the agenda now and no legislation passes without the leadership's approval in this congress. They approved it. The pander wasn't to the red staters. It was those who voted against it who were pandering --- to us. If the Dems had wanted to stop Reid and Pelosi from putting this atrocity up for a vote they could have. They didn't.

And not only did they approve it, they refused to pass the bill that everyone agrees was sufficient to update the FISA rules alone and granted the administration its latest power grab instead. What could have been a real debate about who, in fact, is keeping the country safe and free, they turned into a political failure that makes them appear even weaker than before. And in the process of doing this, they were willing to give Alberto Gonzales the power to eavesdrop on his political opponents -- themselves. (Considering what we know about what he and others have done at the DOJ, it's absurd to assume he won't, isn't it?)

The powers that have now been legally invested in the executive branch, the military commissions and this new warrantless wiretapping authority, can be used by anyone. That means that on one level at least, the unitary executive theory has found bipartisan acceptance --- the fourth amendment is as quaint as the Geneva Conventions. Every single vote along these lines that ostensibly are done to "protect" us, is a step toward the authoritarian power that lies at the heart of Dick Cheney's wet dream. This has been done with almost no real debate or discussion, since our representatives have chosen to also codify the ridiculous secretiveness that continues to hold that even though we know what we know about this from the front pages of the New York Times, they still can't discuss it openly. Certainly, they didn't deem to share with us (again) why there was such a rush after years and years of not moving the uncontroversial aspects of this legislation and ramming through yet another constitutional assault in the dead of night.

[struggle4progress]

16. Tell your Representative that the next time an Administration lackey like Hoyer

wants unanimous consent to suspend the rules to vote on an Administration's proposal, he/she had d@mn well better object

[babylonsister]

17. I have, but I had hope that night until the bitter end. Silly me. nt

[OzarkDem]

18. "the unitary executive theory has found bipartisan acceptance"

Very true, Dem leaders can't deny it. Incredibly stupid.

[Karenina]

5. OH. MY.GOODNESS.

:wow:

[DemReadingDU]

6. Good one!

[helderheid]

12. EXCELLENT!

[burrowowl]

15. Pickeling the Poor was

excellent too.