Lincoln Chafee: 'Holding to the Center, Losing My Seat'

He's one of the few Republicans I can stand - sometimes Arlen Specter, sometimes Olympia Snowe or a couple other of the Northeastern moderate Republicans. I hope he joins with the Independents and votes his conscience in whatever capacity he ends up in the for the future.. He stood up against Bolton - wasn't he the guy who was almost in tears thinking of his grandchildren living in a world where a hothead like that was at the UN representing us? So was I. I appreciate that.

I never liked Lieberman running with Gore - i thought it was an opportunistic way to try to get more Jewish vote in Florida which I don't think worked. Better he's an Independent than a Republican and hope he at least votes with the Democrats. Far be it from me to publicly trash a Democrat - you won't catch me doing it very often, even if I'm pissed. It's a big tent and it just got bigger. Glad we have Bernie Sanders in the Senate instead of Congress and as an Independent in the old seat of Jeffers (who switched from Republican if I remember right) he will vote with the Dems but he's actually (gasp) a Socialist. I'm down with Independents to the left and slight right of center as long as they do what's right and a real big tent can accomodate the spectrum from socialist to slightly right of center. Since we only have one and now maybe two viable parties we have no choice but to be broad-based. We're not like the Europeans or even the Canadians with a coalition government so we must be a humongous tent. Chafee voted against alot of Bush's nefarious budget schemes.

From the Washington Note

September 7, 2006
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of State
US Department of State
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Rice:

I write to you with regard to the nomination of John Bolton to be US Representative to the United Nations. Today, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations was scheduled to have a vote on Mr. Bolton's nomination. The decision on whether to hold that vote is in the Chairman of the Committee's hands. Chairman Lugar decided to hold the vote over to a later date, and I support that decision.

It is no secret that I have serious questions about this Administration's policies in the Middle East. As we tackle enormous problems in the region, most notably with Iran and Iraq, I believe we need to be successful in forging alliances. A critical part of that work is accomplished by our Ambassador to the UN.

One of the key issues with many of our allies is the situation with the Palestinians. I support the creation of a viable, contiguous Palestinian state living side-by-side in peace with its neighbor Israel. I believe progress on this front would be beneficial for the Palestinians, and futher America's, and Israel's security. The President, and you, frequently have spoken in favor of establishing a Palestinian state. On February 26, 2003, President Bush said "Success in Iraq could also begin a new state for Middle Eastern peace, and set in motion progress towards a truly democratic state." On February 22, 2005, the President said "Israel must freeze settlement activity." And on April 14, 2004, the President wrote to then-Prime Minister Sharon, "The United States supports the establishment of a Palestinian state this is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent, so that the Palestinian people can build their own future in accordance with the vision I set forth in June 2002 and with the path set forth in the roadmap."
Phase one of that Road Map states clearly that Israel will freeze all settlement activity. Yet, just this week, it is reported that 690 homes will be built in the West Bank settlements of Maale Adumim and Betar Illit. While the official US policy hs been against settlement activity, no credible observer could think that the US could not do more to stop these new actions.

While I am a strong supporter of Israel, and believer her security is non-negotiable, we should have a more balanced approach -- so that both sides can see that we are an honest broker for peace. I have been a long-time critic of the disparity between the rhetoric and the actions of the Administration on the subject of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. However, now I fear that even the rhetoric is going to stop. Is this expansion of settlement activity a signal that holding both sides to their commitments under the Road Map is no longer official US policy?

It is my hope that answers will be forthcoming about our policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the Committee can reconvene to debate Ambassador Bolton's confirmation.

Sincerely,

Lincoln Chafee

Look. That is a much stronger and more logical approach and with more conscience than many of the Democrats have had the spine to present. I have never to my knowledge voted for a Republican because I believe that someone with convictions like his should leave the party out of principle, so if he does, cool. I think I am going to send him a letter.

This is on MichiganLiberal.com

One major area of concern for the Democrats (which you should know if you've read my last three diaries) is having to build over from scratch every election and the competing factions.
A new site has emerged in an effort to solve part of the first problem:

Democratic GAIN has launched a Talent Tracking and Recruitment Program to record the permanent contact information for every campaign worker nationwide and keep you connected to the opportunities and advantages that will be coming. We have created a resource, the GAIN Directory, unprecedented in scope and sophistication by providing the Democratic Party, national and local campaigns, independent expenditure organizations and unions a place to come to look for staff (that’s you).
But Democratic GAIN can’t do this without you.We need your contact information so that we can keep you informed about trainings, networking events, job fairs, and employment opportunities that will all be taking place shortly. Register today and be counted as one of the official 2006 campaign workers who helped put us over the top!Are you already a registered user of Democratic GAIN?

More after the jump

Nazgul35 :: Institutionalizing our workers
By giving your information, we can build a data base of volunteers and specialist designed to give campaigns access to your talents.
It's kind of like an online dating service for political geeks.

Take five seconds to consider putting in you information and help the party build on the organization that we have started to create.

Join Democratic GAIN today...

More info, following up on battlebob's teaser post:

---------------

Democratic GAIN -- Grassroots Action Institute & Network
http://www.democraticgain.org/

Democratic GAIN is a national membership association for progressive political professionals and organizations. Created in 2003, Democratic GAIN's network of political professionals and organizations is the fastest growing in the nation. Democratic GAIN provides an infrastructure that supports and connects our members across the country through our Career Center, GAIN trainings, Professional Benefits and Networking opportunities.

Democratic GAIN's Career Center aided over 15,000 political operatives last year in their career planning. The GAIN Career Center is working for you online and in person by hosting Career Fairs across the country and maintaining the most up to date job postings site for progressives. Visit our online national job and talent bank for the latest campaign, non-profit, Hill, lobbying, and consulting firms. Members of Democratic GAIN can utilize our one-on-one career counseling benefit. Support Democratic GAIN's Career Center and become a member today.

Democratic GAIN Training Center trained over 7000 political operatives in the last two years hosting comprehensive trainings in Albuquerque, Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Columbus, Detroit, Miami, New Orleans, Las Vegas, Orlando, Philadelphia, Seattle, and Washington D.C. In 2005, GAIN is hitting the road again for trainings across the country.

Additionally, Democratic GAIN hosts a training series in the DC area called GAIN ABCs (Advanced and Basic Campaign skills) for political professionals to broaden their skill sets.

-------------

seems like an intriguing approach to me,
Otter

Are we really expected to fall in line behind Murtha when he is one of the most paid off members of congress there is?

As a matter of a fact, isn't those perks the reason he did not speak out sooner than 5 years later...?

Yes, yes, I do believe that would be the exact same Murtha.

So much for setting standards of 'ethics'.

The weekend before the election I spoke with the Whiehouse campaign and had them fax my office voter lists to call into Rhode Island and implored, actually annoyed many of you here to join me. Many of the voters I spoke with on Monday night were telling me they were still undecided, and my message was that this time we needed a Deocratic Senate and unfortunately could not do that with Senator Chaffee in office. Personally this was one of the most difficult campaigns to have worked on, to defeat Senator Chaffee and it was truly regrettable that Senator Chaffee had not seen the writing on the wall earlier. However I am unwilling to sacrifice Senator Jack Reed in a future election for even a Democratic Senator Chaffee. Perhaps he could play the role of Defense Secy like Sen Cohen did for Clinton in a future Democratic Whitehouse.

I just took the time to read back over the threads from the weekend. Due to circumstances beyond my control, I was AWOL all weekend.

On Saturday afternoon, however, I drove up to Philadelphia with my son. We got there in time to listen to the blogger's discussion of impeachment that democrats.com sponsored.

I didn't have the camera or the notebook, so my impressions are two days old. I also missed the introductions, so I only knew who a few of the eight bloggers were:

Dave Lindorff, Liza Sabater/Culture Kitchen, Rob Kall/OpEd News, Martin from Booman Tribune, Chris from Afronetizen, and others I did not recognize by name or blog.

They all agreed that the Bush Administration were a bunch of nasty criminals and consequences needed to be applied, but they also covered the range of possibilities that the DCPers here have.

Rob Kall represented the go-for-impeachment, but make it about investigating end of the spectrum. Dave Lindorff made the compelling case for putting impeachment high on the list and sooner rather than later. Many mentioned that it is essential to go for impeachment in order to show the world we get it.

What is clear that the netroots do not have consensus and therefore the pressure that would need to be brought to bear is going to be sporadic and labile. What we do have consensus on is investigating and that was clear from reading these threads and hearing from everyone at the event.

If we can all gather in the name of accountability, investigation, and consequences, we will get where we need to get to, without naming it as a particular and perhaps-unattainable destination.

The end of the story has not been written yet. Let's keep on and we will get to help write it.

Oh--forgot. If you want to sign the petition for impeachmen, here it is:

http://democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/88

For those who want to diss Murtha, who didn't know he used to be a warhawk and who ever said he was progressive? The fact that he wasn't and spoke up were supposed to enhance his credibility. It would be similarly easy to stomp on people like Rand Beers, one of the first to leave 43's administration, or any of the dissident generals, or people like Richard Clarke who whistleblew after working for 4 administrations.

It's only possible to have a velvet revolution when some of the dissent comes from within the ranks. We have Brent Scowcroft critical of 43 and now influencing him via 41 (indirectly, like Baker). Both Baker and Gates have checkered histories and I wouldn't trust any CIA in a dark alley but they're what we have.

Speaking out against the war is speaking out against the war.
I am not going to be one to trash a Democrat even publicly. Lieberman isn't a Democrat any more but I've got bigger fish to fry than him. In my state we have Patty Murray, always on our side, yet she also brings home the pork to Boeing. That's politics and that's life.

I will back John Murtha for sticking his neck out. As Kos said when I mentioned Kerry writing there, "Better late than never."

I am not for impeachment. I was for impeachment in 2002. I am for Hague tribunal, for a bunch of them.

The lame ducks are heading back to Congress. Bush is looking to change the course, under pressure. McCain is positioning himself as the warhawk candidate for 2008. Democrats are pressuring for dialogue with Iran, Syria, Turkey and Ohmert says Israel has no plans to attack Iran.

Every morning lately I have to get up and pinch myself. I am seeing the glass more as half full than half empty.

Control of congress was always going to be part of the incremental cycling back toward the right wing losing control.
I worked with a person who used to be with Radical Women and Freedom Socialist Party and worked tirelessly for 3 decades against the religious right, as she is a lesbian but also because she has a free-thinking brain. She then worked for Gore, which I was not prescient enough to do at the time (this was when he was a centrist and his environmental views had been framed by Rove as "environmental wacko" stuff). We worked together for Kerry, and she was a fellow early adopter for Kerry in a sea of Deaniacs (of which we had the largest concentration outside Vermont, and for which we were the only state where they would not concede to Kerry at the national convention). We made a pact that we would support the aforementioned "incremental steps" upward if it took the rest of our lives. We are a short attention, immediate gratification generation. Impeachment will only work if the whole tent forms a mob to do it. We need to take advantage of what's already being given to us, what's on the table. I would much rather see people like Henry Waxman lay out their evidence first. We need to keep media distraction off the lame ducks and on the positive things the Democrats can accomplish before they are even inaugurated into their new positions. We need to keep the lame ducks as lame as possible to they won't pass wiretapping bill etc. If the people have spoken and are for minimum wage increase and against the war, then we need them to know that the likes of McCain are against minimum wage increase and for the war. Now is the perfect time to expose the drug companies.

Channel your anger positively and it will have stronger results.

Keep Your Eye On the Right

Recent headlines at NewsMax:

Lieberman: Call Me a Democrat
Gingrich Sees Hope for Conservative Agenda
Rupert Murdoch Has No Iraq Regrets
Mississippi Rep. Rips Rangel's Smear
Israeli Official: Strike On Iran Possible
One-Third of World: Bad Toilets
Students Ban Pledge of Allegiance
Sen. Lincoln Chafee May Leave GOP
Mexico City Approves Gay Civil Unions
Belly Fat Causes Inflammation, Arthritis.
The DHEA Test — Every Man Needs to Take It.

I agree with Dianne and believe that pushing for impeachment will be counterproductive and make Progressives look like Newt's team out to get Clinton, especially considering that the '08 Presidential campaign will be starting soon. Sorry others don't concur.

Huffington on Murtha

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/jack-murtha-for-majority-_b_33942.html

Talking Points Memo

The history of the 110th Congress is unlikely to rise and fall on whether John Murtha or Steny Hoyer (D-MD) becomes the new majority leader -- a change from the 109th Congress, which was inextricably linked to the fortunes of then-Majority Leader Tom Delay. But that was in part the result of having a figurehead Speaker in Dennis Hastert. Pelosi is no one's proxy and appears poised to reconsolidate the historical and constitutional powers of the Speaker of the House--an effort which may be blunted if Hoyer prevails despite Pelosi's opposition to his candidacy.

Hamas and Fatah agree on a unity government. Ohmert agrees that the US should have dialogue with Iran. Hell is freezing over. This is what happens when the neocons are no longer running the show. More foreign students are even coming back to study in the United States!

DiAnne,

For the record, I have not dissed Jack Murtha for being a lifelong hawk who turned dovish on Iraq. As you noted, it was his known history as an emphatic non-peacemonger that gave his words such weight when he began speaking out against our failed wars of conquest. This was especially significant when those who thought we should get out of Iraq sooner rather than later were being broadly painted as left-wing moonbats who had no clue about what wars are for.

On the other paw, I have clearly expressed my distaste for Mr. Murtha's back-room deal making and its harmful effects on Democratic legislative agendas, most recently at the end of the last thread. I am not going to apologize for taking that position, nor am I going to mediate it in the name of some half-baked principle of not taking Democrats to task just because they're, well, Democrats.

Jack Murtha is a consummate old-school politician, swapping votes for power and pork-barrel payouts in the best time-honored tradition of smoke-filled rooms where the real business of government is meted out quid by quo. He has often skated on thin ice over the years, ethics-wise -- in fact, during the ABSCAM corruption investigations, the ice beneath his feet was very thin indeed.

That's just the way it is. Murtha is a very powerful man in Congress, albeit one who was relatively unknown to most outside the Beltway until he spoke out publicly against the Iraq war. I don't begrudge him that power, either; because I'm jaded enough to recognize that's how government really works behind all the press conferences and pretty red & blue balloons, and I'm cynical enough to be glad that it's one of our guys who's got that much juice to work with right now.

However, since I do believe that Mr. Murtha has put personal power and political gain before partisan party progress on more than one occasion -- on more than a few (or even quite a few) occasions, in fact -- you can expect me to be keep a close eye on his actions in the coming months as he consolidates his power-broker status in the House.

And if he abuses the people's trust and/or works against the party's progressive agenda for his own political purposes, you can bet your deep blue donkey that I'll be right here calling him out for it as many times as are necessary... Big-D Democrat or no Big-D Democrat.

(Oh, and here's a quite recent link to peruse by way of an FYI on the subject at hand: http://tinyurl.com/yblcdm )

capital letters in your title are no guarantee of immunity on planet otter,
Otter

Posted by: Bubba at November 13, 2006 10:45 AM

Count me in with Bubba and DiAnne. Holding feet to the fire re: investigations is something I'm happy to do and support.

And although I posted a link the other day, I haven't seen much discussion anywhere on the criminal investigation against Rummy, Gonzolas and Tenet in Germany. That will be something I'd like to watch and support.

Re: Murtha, again, I agree with DiAnne. No one person will satisfy all areas of disagreement at any one time. Now is the time to deal with Iraq and I'll give Pelosi the benefit of the doubt that Murtha is the one she wants as House Majority Leader to do just that. I'm not going to lose trust and faith at this point... Color me optimistic. I really, truly didn't think we'd be where we are today. We caught the wave, I'm willing to ride it.

It's a brand new world. We have a chance to participate. Part of that participation (for me) will involve trust. As Tug McGraw used to say, "Ya Gotta Believe." Well, I believe we're going to do the right things, both our elected reps and our citizen patriots. ;-)

London Yank at Kos always thinks Iran is going to be attacked.
I hope that it isn't! He makes some good points, though a little given to hyperbole.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/13/73625/672

Just read Olmert from Newsweek, on Iran and maybe he would like to attack but will be pressured to allow talks first. He makes the point that Ahmadinejad has to fear something http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/13/73625/672

Well my mouth dropped open the other day when I heard Ted Koppel interviewed on NPR and he said the thing Iran feared was Saddam Hussein & now he's gone. That's a good point and no one else had the nerve to say it.

Posted by: Bubba at November 13, 2006 10:45 AM

I understand your reluctance, Bubba, but like it or not, Newt's team did a number on the Democratic party, the nation, and the world.

I think to let them get away with what they have done and were about to try to do, is a deadly mistake, because a message needs to be sent loud and clear to the Neocon's, our nation's people, and the world. It must be handled professionally, and with class.

Putting on my tin foil hat for two seconds, I really wonder how much of a change in our policy towards Iraq there is going to be. I also wonder why Rove is being so docile.

Could it be because of Fitzgerald's investigation?

Dubya looked like he was running scared a short while back when he admitted to torture.

Why are they docile all of a sudden? Is a big shoe about to drop?

Cracks me up, remembering how Dubya was campaigning for all those guys last month, talking tough and winking at people. What bubble was he in?

Comes the dawn. Of a new day. With power comes responsibility. I pray we use it wisely.

If I had more time, I'd probably make more sense. The thing is, after last Tuesday and Wednesday, I trust the collective. For a long time I didn't, only trust individuals and their actions. I was disgusted with the collective. Thankfully, for the collective they came up to my standards. ;-b (Yes, I'm that arrogant and pissy.) A majority now, even including Poppy's men, who I won't trust in this lifetime, are pulling in the same direction. I'm grateful and thankful for this majority pull and for now, am going to go along with the flow and trust that together, we will make the right decisions.

And that's about all I have to say about the overview of "what's next." :-)

Keep these photos in case McCain runs:

http://www.upper-left.blogspot.com/

hat tip to Mark Barrett

Truth Shall Prevail

I do hope something happens with the cases under Fitzgerald.
I am also glad the Boehner vs McDermott got appealed on Halloween. I want to know what Henry Waxman has.

KJ

I agree about the collective - this is one of those times where it can be useful. Herds can take on any sort of mentality.

Otter
Thanks for the clarification. Thinking Ted Stevens. Pelosi wasn't born yesterday. Let's hope her judgment is good. What do you know about the other guy Hoyer? It's all going to be interesting.

Nope. Nancy Pelosi for damn sure wasn't born yesterday. She *is* Tommy D'Alessandro's daughter, after all. People who forget that do so at their own political peril.

Oh, and as for Steny Hoyer, I don't really know much about him beyond what anyone can find out pretty easily using The Google and the Wikipedias.

I do know that Hoyer has actively opposed Nancy Pelosi at the back-room level for several years; that Fox News thinks he should be the next House majority leader; and that, hailing from Maryland as he does, Hoyer of all people should understand what's involved in facing off against Tommy D'Alessandro's daughter, ahem ahem.

And as for trusting Speaker Pelosi's judgment, well... let's just note that if I'd've only lived a few miles farther north than I did, I'd've voted for her every time.

go nancy go,
Otter

How embarrassing for Dubya, to have to have Daddy bail him out again.

P. S. -- Shrub is *still* a doink.

truth said "because a message needs to be sent loud and clear to the Neocon's" we need to push impeachment.

That message was sent last tuesday. Had the message last tuesday been vote dems we want to impeach the president, we would not be in control today. This is my belief, but voters on tuesday voted for a change in Iraq, in stem cell research and in economic policies that favor the wealthy. We have spent 14 years in the wilderness. This is our chance to prove that we are not the polar opposite of the neocons, that we as Progressives believe in the collective good of this country and will fight for our democracy and policies that help the common good. If we are seen as only the polar opposite of the neocons, we will be finished in '08 and it will another generation before Dems will be given the opportunity to govern. Bush's impeachment will come in January '09 when a Progressive is sworn in as commander in chief. Bush will be viewed as a very small inconsequential footnote in history remembered for Katrina, a disatsrous war and bungling. We have 2 years to elect a Progressive President, that is where my energy and hopefully the Democratic's Party's energy will be directed.

Posted by: Bubba at November 13, 2006 12:18 PM

Bubba, I don't care if it comes to impeachment. I just believe in checks and balances. A censure would be fine with me, if that's the furthest we could go, but to let it go without any kind of accountability or justice is inviting others to do the same as the Bush cabal has done. That is my concern.

You could be perfectly and absolutely correct, Bubba. I don't know if I am right, but it's the way I see it.

Otter
I was reading yesterday's Seattle P I and looks like when Gephart left, Hoyer opposed Pelosi for House Minority leader and she beat him. Ah politics - it's like running for cheerleader in middle school.

Ohlmert is ready for a prisoner swap? Someone has clout!
It's like Bush I is running the country now instead of Bush II!

The people who assassinated Lebanon's prime minister a few years ago are coming to trial and the government is going along with the UN? Tony Blair is wanting to open up dialogue with Syria and Lebanon? What the heck is going on behind the scenes? It seems like the Democrats didn't just win dominance over the Legislative branch but there must have been a quiet coup within the Republican ranks! Cheney seems to have been overthrown somehow!

John Howard of Australia wants dialogue with Syria and Iran?
Al-Maliki is meeting with General Abizaid and there is pressure to work with neighbors? Let's hope this works and isn't just a prelude to war with Iran after saying all diplomatic options have been exhausted. Bush still has veto power. Is Bush meeting with the Iraq group yet? We were supposed to bbe able to hear something 2 PM Eastern.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=N13268090&WTmodLoc=World-R5-Alertnet-5

Oh man he did meet with the Iraq study group. They didn't lay out alternatives yet and they meet with Dems and Blair tomorrow. Bush doesn't really want to work with Iran and Syria but may be pressured to do so. He is such a jerk.

Bush is going to give a major foreign policy speech and Al-Maliki is going to sack a bunch of "under-performing ministers' - man oh man

On Impeachment: I think we have more cause to impeach Bush than anything anyone dreamed up during the Clinton impeachment! Having said that do I believe we should do it, this is where is comes down to whats right for the country over any personal feelings I may have on the issue. No I do not think it should be the absolute goal of the new house to do this. There will be hearings if things go the way I believe they will during this process the house may have no choice, and that is fine, but should it be the goal I do not believe so. I want to see how things play out. I and many others are however demanding the oversight that we the American People are entitled to by our elected officials. If the Democrats do not do this if they fail to give us the oversight they do so at their own peril.

They need to nip Bush and Companies kingly leanings in the bud fast, it needs to be one of the top priorities in Jan. I am counting on them but still skeptical that they will do it.

KJ is backed by economist Paul Krugman:

True to form, some reporters still seem to be falling for the conservative spin. "If it walks, talks like a conservative, can it be a Dem?" asked the headline on a CNN.com story featuring a photo of Senator-elect Jon Tester of Montana. In other words, if a Democrat doesn't fit the right-wing caricature of a liberal, he must be a conservative.

But as Robin Toner and Kate Zernike of The New York Times pointed out yesterday, what actually characterizes the new wave of Democrats is a "strong streak of economic populism."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111306P.shtml

We need to back Henry Waxman - he is an investigative sort of fellow, like Elliot Spitzer.

As a lame duck with control of Congress still, Bush will try to keep Bolton in, which hopefully won't work. He'll go to Vietnam next week, to try to get a free trade agreement going with them. That might work. Nothing will be decided about Iraq before he goes because the Iraq group won't present their alternatives til next week. Who knows why. He'll probably try to get a guest worker program going, which Dems will be more likely to support than his own party. Other than that, he'll eat turkey and open presents and then in January he'll be an even lamer duck.

"It's like Bush I is running the country now instead of Bush II!..."
"Cheney seems to have been overthrown somehow!"

DiAnne, rode up to KC last Friday with my friend the Prof and his wife. I said I thought Poppy must have orchestrated a coup. Prof's wife thought maybe it was a family intervention. Same thing.
Thanks for the reuters link, off to read. Looking forward to the Iraq Study Group's recommends.

Henry Waxman, go Henry. We'll get the neoconartists, it just may take longer than some of us would like and it may even take a different form (international v national).

FYI, I was so excited about the Missouri Constitution amendment in support of stem cell research, but scuttlebut has it what really put Claire over the top was her support (and the passage) of a state minimum wage increase. Populist economics. People need to get back on their feet.

Oh and Nan was wondering about Cheney's power, if he still had it, or it had been stripped. Sounds like he is a lame duck hunter. b:-)

Yall think I was coming down on Murtha because he is a hawk..?

I am also a liberal hawk, the breed is not as rare as people think.

My problem with Murtha was not even that he waited so long to speak out, although I must say I am seriously disappointed it did take him so long.

No, my problem with Murtha is he has long been one of the top recipients of lobbiest money from the military intrests. They have paid him long and well to influence legislation on their behalf. It is not a secret nor does it happen in a vaccuum.

In other words, he has grown fat as a pig from the very war it took him so long to speak out against. He is in essence a war profiteer.

And any of us are supposed to somehow be comfortable with this man leading up an 'investigation' of georgies wrong doing...? The same wrong doing that brought a hell of a lot of money Murthas way...? I don't think so.

It is a perfectly fair question to ask did Murtha speak out because someone got behind on a payment...? For a few dollars more will he stfu again?

I know he is not the only one. Lets say Fienstien, her husband put how much money in their personal accounts after all his Iraq contracts went through so smoothly...?

I am not inclined to feel pity for any dem who voted for this war, and helped themselves to tax payer money stained by the blood of our finest sons. They have been accomplices all along.

The more I think of Pelosi putting up Murtha, the more it smacks of a whitewash to me.

I have been told I am too rigid, I believe too intensly, but I am getting really sick of subjugating my own ethics for people I know are lying, being bought off, or are just downright cowardly.

I like Pelosi, but Murtha is a serious problem.

And no, it is not because he is a hawk.

There is a big difference between a hawk and a vulture.

... to let it go without any kind of accountability or justice is inviting others to do the same as the Bush cabal has done. That is my concern.
Posted by: Truth Shall Prevail at November 13, 2006 12:32 PM

That is my concern, also, when I hear that 'impeachment is off the table.'

Dumbya has gotten away with murder - literally and figuratively - all his life, and thousands of people are dead because of the lies we've been told, because of the unconstitutional and illegal wars spawned, and the infringement on our rights and our privacy is unconscionable. He's never been held accountable for anything his entire misbegotten life. (You can imagine how badly I wish his mother had miscarried the pregnancy that spawned him!)

If Bu$h and his minions are let go with a slap on the fingers (which is about all the 'power' a Senate censure has), then it's an open invitation to continue the unconstitutional and illegal war in Iraq, and for future abuses of the executive branch (an added reason MCA '06 must be repealed, since it gives him - or any future president - dictatorial powers). And we do all realize that if a Dem had done what Bu$hCo has done, they'd have been brought up on impeachment charges long before this in a heartbeat, yes? Compromising has brought nothing but doing things Bu$h's way - always, every single time. That's only led to the disastrous predicament we're in right now.

Whether Bu$h-Cheney, or any future pres-VP combo, we do NOT need dictators for leaders. We need to restore the balance of powers given to us by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution (bloody brilliant document - and all of it was written in elementary English - nothing in high falutin' legalese so prevalent in the kind of legislation our Congress Critters so love to pass without even reading the contents!).

If we can't impeach, we have no way to punish the errant spoiled little brat who has been rescued again by his daddy, just as he has done all of Junior's life (Gates certainly seems to be just a more mild-mannered version of Rummy, and the Iraq commission with Baker et al. - Poppy's buddies left over from the Iran-Contra days, just as Gates is - will somehow whitewash the whole Iraq mess and just prolong the agony, which will result in more deaths, more destruction for which we will have to pay reparations).

If our Congress Critters refuse to do what's right by the American people and impeach the criminals, refuse to repeal the MCA '06 with it's dictatorial powers, refuse to repeal other crappy legislation that helps Bu$hCo abuse the powers of the executive branch, and refuse to seek justice on the part of the dead who have died in vain for lies and oil, then I hope the World Court takes the matter out of our hands and tries the entire Bu$h cabal for war crimes (and we do know that the illegal invasion of Iraq was a war crime, just as torture and the concentration camps are a war crime under the Geneva Conventions).

Slapping the fingers of the spoiled brat who has thrown temper tantrums and called people names for six years, all while hoping that giving in to him just one more time will make him go away and be quiet for a change and stop embarrassing us is NOT a strategy that works; it just makes him throw more temper tantrums. After six miserable years and thousands of lives lost for lies and oil, I would have thought the Congress Critters would have figured that one out. Doing something over and over and hoping for a different result is the definition of insanity, and our Congress Critters have amply demonstrated that fact.

Seems to me we have two choices: keep giving in to the spoiled brat (which will only allow further bad behavior in the future once he realizes he isn't going to be stopped by a Dem majority in Congress), or punish him for his crimes (and make darn good and sure he can't do those things again). There is no middle ground here (Congress has tried that for six years), because any middle ground will still result in letting him continue his crime spree with the implied "approval" of the American people via our elected representatives and senators, even if the vast majority of Americans (and the rest of the world) are horrified by what we know about already - and I'm sure we'll find out they've done worse things than we know about.

Obviously, I'm not in a conciliatory mood. Come January 4, the day after they're sworn into office, I want the Congress Critters to DO something about the spoiled brat in charge, and DO something about the little gang of bullies who encourage him.... Censure, investigate the known and unknown crimes of the administration, yes... but DO SOMETHING!!! (I'd prefer immediate impeachment, but in lieu of that, let the World Court arrest those criminals in charge and try them for war crimes, even if they are still in office, since Congress has, so far, refused to do anything to stop the criminal cabal, and if they take impeachment off the table, they will continue to do absolutely nothing to stop him and his gang of bullies.)

I'm tired of feeling like Harry Potter hanging upside down in the troll's hand....

BTW Karen,

That was a very interesting post on the impeachment bloggers, for lack of a better word.

I think if we are not able to call georgie for his crimes then we do not deserve the freedoms he took from us.

The faster we impeach him, the faster we can reclaim our dignity. I am sick of the entire world looking at us like we are all the monster he is.

Impeachment is the only option we have short of The Pitchfork Revolution.

Hey, it worked for France.

Murtha - On the Issues

Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record
Rated 50% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record.
Rated 43% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record.
Rated 22% by CURE, indicating anti-rehabilitation crime votes.
Rated 91% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. Rated 45% by the LCV, indicating a mixed record on environment.
Rated 53% by the Christian Coalition: mixed voting record on families.
Rated 40% by CATO, indicating a mixed record on trade issues. (Dec 2002)
Rated A+ by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record.
Rated 89% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record.
Rated 44% by SANE, indicating a mixed record on military issues.
John Murtha on Immigration
Rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration.
Rated 100% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (
Rated 26% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes

If the Hague is good enough for Milosovich it's good enough for W

Steny Hoyer supporters

BARNEY FRANK

JOHN DINGELL

JOHN LEWIS

HENRY WAXMAN

LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD

ELLEN TAUSCHER

JAMES OBERSTAR

IKE SKELTON

I'm with Dianne 100%.

To the Hague!

The Brits may just offer up a sacrificial poodle and join us there.

What a party, count me in.

Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. Rated 87% by the ACLU, indicating a pro-civil rights voting record
Rated 46% by COC, indicating a mixed business record
Rated 56% by CURE, indicating mixed votes on rehabilitation. Rated 85% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes
Rated 15% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-family voting record.
Rated 22% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. Rated F by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record.
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record
Rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration
Rated 87% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. Rated 22% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes

He's cool - don't know why Fox favors him, don't know what's Pelosi's strategy w/Murtha

Now don't have a strong opinion - more research needed

I think Pelosi is taking a risk with the pro-gun anti-choice conservative Democrat in order to draw in centrists and progressives - he's antiwar now after all. If she fails, it will be a faux pas. It's a secret vote. The black and Hispanic caucusses seem to be supporting Hoyer. Pelosi was a Senate page with Hoyer.

The Nation says Murtha is on the corrupt list

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?bid=3&pid=140129

This country floors me.

This country floors me.

Posted by: DiAnne at November 13, 2006 04:06 PM

Since when?

Carpet Diem

Pelosi's alliance with Murtha is based on one simple, very basic fact of political life:

Power. You either gots it or you doesn't.

Pelosi understands machine politics because she was born into it. Murtha understands machine politics because he's lived it.

Both of them know full well that power consolidated is power magnified. They want to make sure that sufficient power is entrenched into the hands of undeniable Democrats that it cannot be dislodged by RoveCo's machinations or the fickle fringes of the electorate's vacillations.

And you know what?

I'm cool with that.

As I noted several otterposts back, I am both jaded and cynical. That is the way things work in Washingtoon, and we forget that at our peril.

Tip O'Neill, who as an avuncular magnate has been lauded and quoted ad nauseum on both sides of the aisle, was also a quintessential machine politician. So was Lyndon Johnson. So was Franklin Roosevelt. And so was -- *especially* so was -- FDR's counterfoil Winston Churchill.

Face it, peeps... it's both surfactantly naive and ultimately self-defeating to deny that the canonical smoke-filled rooms exist, to decry the existence of quid-pro-quo back-door dealmakers, to deny the power and the very desirable value of people like Jack Murtha and, yes, Nancy D'Alessandro Pelosi.

While I made no bones about keeping a close eye on people like Murtha under our watch, I also make no bones about valuing them for the same reasons that I am wary of them.

The Democrats need to consolidate their power over the course of the next two years in order to achieve the things that we need them to achieve over the course of the next two decades.

That's just the way it is in the real world, y'all. And so, while it may seem to some of you that I am being inconsistent here, I am cool with the idea that there are people who are very much at ease operating in the back corners of the smoke-filled rooms in which principles get filtered through politics until they turn into practical realities.

So long as they're *our* dealmakers rather than their dealmakers, and so long as *we* are the ones monitoring them rather than team heffalump, then I am willing to accept the inevitable existence of people like Pelosi & Murtha. In fact, I am willing to encourage the success of people like Pelosi and Murtha, because for the first time in many years the likes of them are working for us rather than against us.

I may be a peacemonger but I'm also a pragmatist,
Otter

OMG yall, I don't even know how to describe it just read it!

That is one busted freeper. Holy Cow.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Fake_anthrax_hoax_by_conservative_blogger_1113.html

Yupperdoodles, Christy. It is to croggle.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/13/01945/776

freepdom's just another word for nothing left to use,
Otter

When Polosi became the head Dem, it was Murtha who sponsered her.
This is plain old payback.

Read this article on the pain felt by the families of those who died.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1113-31.htm

Paul Craig Roberts on the mandatory issue of getting our freedoms back.

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts11132006.html

If those who want to impeach, work thru the process and tell me how 2/3 of the Senate will go along with it?

During the course of hearings, if wrong doing is found we should censure.

But we don't have the votes to do bring any of the Bush cabal to trial and the public will see it as a ploy to harass Bush.

If the Haque can do it fine.

Fix a few broken things first. If we go for impeachment, it will be the only thing that dominates the news.

If we go for impeachment, the Senate will go Repub as well as the POTUS in 2008.

I would like to see BushInc thrown in the darkest reaches of abu Ghraib or Gitmo. It isn't going to happen. We don't have and will never have the Senate votes until Bush is out of office.

This is our chance to give progressive programs the importance and seriousness they deserve. We must not waste the oppurtunity.

You can take two thirds of the Senate by revealing georgies crimes.

His supporters will chew off their own arms to get away from him.

Rats. Burning ship.

Follow the money. It will put the coincident theory to rest forever.

Posted by: battlebob at November 13, 2006 05:21 PM

I don't sincerely believe 2/3 of the Senate will favor impeachment. They're all too entrenched in the financial gain of the oil corporations, pharmaceutical corporations, PACs, etc. (Sadly, yes; even some Dems who have been there for too many years and are not remembering that Clinton was impeached for far less reason; at least his lie about a blow job didn't result in deaths of innocents.)

Even with a Dem majority, I don't honestly believe much will be accomplished on anything in the next two years, least of all repealing all the bad legislation that makes a president a dictator and impeaching him for his known war crimes. I noticed on tonight's BBC news sound byte, Bush said Syria knows "my" position, and talked about "my" administration - no reference to the rest of the country; everything is business as usual, everything is how Bush wants it, and the only "consensus" is how to bow to the will of GWB, as usual.

That's why I hope the World Court at The Hague takes it out of the hands of our Congress Critters who have proven they can't get a consensus on anything other than how to follow Bu$h's dictatorial rule. Already there's nothing but talk, talk, talk, and no action whatsoever about getting the troops out of Iraq, and meanwhile, people are still dying for the sake of lies and oil. The new people in Congress may have won only because voters are against more neoCon "strategy" that gets us nowhere, but the elected Congress Critters will still have to prove they can accomplish something. If those accomplishments do not include repealing bad legislation and impeachment for known war crimes (invasion, torture, concentration camps), plus other crimes we know about or suspect, and others we don't have a clue about yet, then the 110th Congress will be just as ineffective as the 109th Congress. They mostly act like a bunch of children trying to jockey for power positions on the playground, and that accomplishes nothing.

I personally believe the 110th Congress will be another do-nothing Congress, so the only solution to seeing JUSTICE done for those who have died for the sake of lies and oil will have to be if/when the criminals in charge of this nation are brought to trial at The Hague.

Pelosi's agenda? Fine. Those bills can be written now, which is enough time for everyone to read them. They can be voted on in the House on January 4, and in the Senate shortly thereafter. All of Pelosi's things can be accomplished in less than a month, if the Congress will DO SOMETHING other than bicker and vie for playground power.

But there MUST be an accounting for the criminals in charge of this nation; if not, let the grown-ups at The Hague do it for us....

Lieberman refuses to close door on switching parties
http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2006/11/12/lieberman_refuses_to_close_door_on_switching_parties/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm so sure... like he would walk away from his committee chairmanship

Posted by: battlebob at November 13, 2006 05:21 PM

2/3rds may not agree at this very minute but when investigations start, and the media starts reporting things, then momentum will change.

I have to agree with Christy's comment on it.

By time investigations are rolling, the Republicans will either stand with a known war criminal and be damned themselves (for re-election) or they'll "chew off their own arm to get away from Bush/Cheney."

Administration Opposes Democrats’ Plan for Negotiating Medicare Drug Prices
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/13/washington/13medicare.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1163430334-QM+q+ykfPFDSWPy8WPoV0g&oref=slogin

Changing the subject to something we can all agree on...

Fixing the economy by investing in America
note: Clinton did most of this and it worked pretty well.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/11/13/investing_in_america.php

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/11/13/no_exit_strategy.php
No Exit Strategy
Ray McGovern
Those expecting the Baker-led Iraq Study Group to propose any kind of pullout will be sorely disappointed.
Excerpt:
The Iraq Study Group is headed by former Secretary of State James Baker and the always eager to co-chair, co-star of the 9/11 commission whitewash , former Democrat Congressman Lee Hamilton. Other members of the Iraq Study Group are: Lawrence Eagleburger (who just replaced Robert Gates), Vernon Jordan, Edwin Meese, Sandra Day O’Connor, Leon Panetta, William Perry, Charles Robb and Alan Simpson. Also “bipartisan” are the group’s “Expert Working Groups” and “Military Senior Advisor Panel.” There sit a truly remarkable congeries of ideologues, think-tankers and captains of industry—sprinkled all too lightly with non-ideological former government officials with substantive expertise—like Larry Diamond, Chas Freeman and Wayne White.

We are told that all are sworn to secrecy on the substance of ISG discussions. But some are speaking openly about the issues at hand. Baker has said publicly he thinks it would be wise to include Syria and Iran in discussions on Iraq. And Panetta has commented on what he learned from U.S. military, intelligence and diplomatic briefers when the ISG spent three days in Baghdad in early September. “We left some of those sessions shaking our heads over how bad it is in Iraq,” said Panetta, adding that private assessments are “much more grim” than what one hears from the administration in public.

{{{Here's what I don't get: WHY are these armchair generals sitting around "discussing" anything about a war that was a lost cause from it's inception, since the invasion itself was a war crime and therefore no "victory" was possible...? Bring our guard and reserve troops home where they belong! Too many have already died for lies and oil.}}}

Jacques Sapir | What's Not Going to Change: After the Electoral Earthquake
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111306H.shtml
French political analyst Jacques Sapir warns Le Monde readers that the American political tendencies that produced the Bush administration are neither dead nor altogether absent from the Democratic Party.

William Fisher | Arrogant to the End
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111306A.shtml
William Fisher writes: "... even in the event that the president announces some major new initiatives to extricate us from our Middle East quagmire, his government appears to lack the competence to execute those new initiatives. On the basis of this administration's record, all of us can be excused for being just a tad skeptical - and very afraid."

Excerpt:
One final thought about the Baker-Hamilton Commission: Can anyone imagine that it would ever have occurred to Franklin Roosevelt to outsource the decision about the Normandy landing in World War Two?

Truthout: Impeachment and the Table
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111306Z.shtml
Truthout believes that by stating flatly that "impeachment is off the table," incoming Speaker Pelosi and incoming Chairman Conyers appear to have erred rather substantially. Impeachment, of course, is a matter of Constitutional law, not personal discretion on the part of individual lawmakers. The pre-emptive nature of the decision by Pelosi and Conyers stands in sharp contrast to every principal of law enforcement. Congress - whether controlled by Democrats or Republicans - has a solemn duty to uphold and when necessary enforce the law.

Excerpt:
The Constitution provides impeachment as a remedy for "high crimes and misdemeanors." It is important to note that the category at issue is high crimes. We are mired in a military operation, with no end in sight and a human toll approaching catastrophic in proportion. Impeachment raises its head in this dialog because evidence exists that Mr. Bush and other White House officials may have deliberately misled the nation on the road to Baghdad. Deliberately. If true, the law itself mandates action under due process. Such action is expressly non-discretionary.

During the Iraq Resolution debate, a white-haired Robert Byrd of West Virginia stood on the floor of the Senate and argued with a haunting passion that the Congress did not, under Constitutional law, have the right to reassign war-making power to the president. It was, he implored, an abandonment of Congressional duty. Maybe that old man knew what he was talking about after all.

I think Pelosi was wrong also. The idea is to investigate the run-up to 9/11. The no-bid contracts, the cooked evidence, the absurd low estimates of troops and costs...
A bottoms-up approach should be taken. Have the hearings to find out the scope and how to correct the problems. If during the hearings to solve problems, bad stuff is found then by all means go after the evil doers.
But the idea of just deciding to impeach without even considering other problems is wrong.
The smart way is to try and solve problems and deal with illegal stuff along the way.
In this way, the public might support us in 2008.
It isn't hard to show just how messed up Bush is. It maybe harder to turn Bush’s actions into impeachable offenses. There is a big difference and Bush will drag it out as long as possible to force Dems to divert attention away from fixing problems.
I want Dems to stay in power for a long time. If they can nail Bush, great but it must not be the primary goal. The primary goal must be to solve problems.
Think of throwing Bush in the slammer collateral damage. Sorry George, we meant to fix problems, but you just got in the way.
We really need to be very calculating on this to both do real progress cleaning up Bush's actions and go after the legality of Bush's actions.
Both are equally important. I think we start with clean-up and see where the legal road takes us.
It would really help that we show how immoral Bush was at every step of the way as we work to solve the problems. We must have lots of public support on this.
If we start with impeach first, the media will ignore everything and the only task will be impeachment. After two years, the public will kick us out.
What may be the most important goal is flushing conservativism down the drain. Because if we don't do that, we will be facing smarter conservatives.

There's a couple folks in the IRC if you want to come join in.

Won't guarantee how long they'll be there but they're chatting away right now.

Giuliani - ho hum. 300 million people in this country and the same candidates keep popping up.

Excerpt:

Politics - not religion - lies at the root of a growing divide between Muslim and western societies, according to a report presented to the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, yesterday.
An international panel of scholars, politicians and religious leaders warned that cultural stereotypes were turning negotiable disputes into "seemingly intractable identity-based conflicts" and that the clash-of-civilisations theory has obscured "the real nature of the predicament the world is facing".

In their recommendations the 20-strong panel, which included Nobel peace prize winner Desmond Tutu and former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami, suggested steps towards defusing the crisis, including an urgent reinvigoration of the Middle East peace process and initiatives aimed at the young.

Read the rest at http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1946956,00.html

"I'm going to leak something to the Iraq study commission, with Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton. Why stop at asking Syria and Iran to help us out? Why not go all the way? Ask the North Koreans for some assistance. Bring in Hugo Chavez."

Rush Limbaugh

Talk about out of touch.

It seems everybody's posturing, just like they're campaigning. No one's genuine. You've got Blair and Ohlmert trying to act tough, insisting they won't talk to Iran. You've got Howard and Blair, insisting on diplomacy. The Iraq Study Group won't have all it's recommendations ready til after Thanksgiving. There is always somebody who has to try to look tough.

Panacea Of Pelo...see-a...nothing.

Nancy...get a grip.

I just had a client pay 1.8 million dollars to a group of 15-20 citizens represented by a lawyer procured by a city councilman to avoid having a rezoning permit denied by the councilman's "people".

The councilman, James Carter, is also a decon in the church who he (behind the scenes) defended all because his revererand, Reverand Wardswaorth demaded it be so.

So...oh yes my lovelies, it gets better...now the investor/developer wants me to design and get permitted a plan so loathsomely less than what was previously designed and approved that I am about to turn states evidence against my boss, my client and the bastard councilman.

Keep looking towards New Orleans...

We never cease to amaze.

Indy

Posted by: aimzzz at November 13, 2006 07:22 PM

As I have said before, let Liebermann vote for Reid, and then refuse to let him caucus anymore with the Dems. Nearly every vote in the Senate is going to be close, but if Lieberman is seen as siding with the Republicans on oil drilling, judges, choice, wages, social security, education and health care his Senatorial career will be over. The main reason he was re-elected was he is considered to be a moderate with Democratic leanings. If he walks away from that role, he is done, and he knows it. His career is what matters most to him.

Don't give him any power. He can't be trusted.

Any thoughts?

Posted by: Indy at November 13, 2006 11:19 PM

New Orleans sounds like the Chicago of the South, but with a little more flare.

Don't give him any power. He can't be trusted.
Posted by: oncall at November 13, 2006 11:22 PM

What oncall said... I agree.

Lieberman has consistently voted with neoCons. That tells me he's a DINO. So far, I've not seen one single thing where any DINO can be trusted.

Oncall:

I'm with you on Lieberman, but how would you address this? Here's a guy that, as far as I can see, has no loyalties to any person or any principle, and here he is in a position to "take my ball and go home" if he doesn't get his way (i.e., flip parties). My gut tells me to call his bluff, give him nothing, and if he does switch parties then it may well be the nail in the coffin of every national GOP politician from New England and make life living hell for Joe Lieberman. So, Joe, make my day... How lucky do you feel? My two-cents anyway. That guy just steams me but thanks to the good folks of Connecticut that is who we have to deal with.

Chuck in Houston

There must be a more constructive way to deal with "Joe-mentum" (otherwise known as no-mentum) than the one I suggested above. Got to think of a postive solution. Just can't live that negative way, if you know what I mean, make way, for the positive day.

Chuck in Houston

Give Joe the job of rooting out pork-barrel riders -- that's it! What do they call those things anyway? There is some term of art for that which I can't recall. Keep him away from foreign policy! Let him prove is creds jin domestic issues! There's a win-win!

Chuck in Houston

How odd that a thread on Chafee ends up being about old Joe. There is some deep irony in that which I am still pondering.

Chuck in Houston

Hah! I've got it! Let "Old Joe" switch parties in exchange for the "Chafee Down-Easters" -- let's flip Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe --I think they would be much more comfortable as key players in a Democratic Senate than in a Republican Senate controlled by Old Joe. And I think Maine would reward them. (When is Snowe up for re-election?) Or maybe I'm just crazy.

Finest kind!

Chuck in Houston

OK, I think I've got it:

Old Joe/Warner on Armed Services
Biden/Hagel on Foreign Relations.

This gives Baker/Gates a chance and we can't do that in a partisan manner and we can't screw that up.

Meanwhile, back in the states...

Kerry on Intelligence because Rockefeller just hasn't carried the ball (remember, Kewrry has a law degree and is a former prosecutor).

Leahy on Justice? I'd prefer Barbara Boxer but I'm open to suggestions -- needs to be a legal-eagle. Maybe Hillary Clinton? She's a good lawyer and tough on cross-examination.

As per the law of the jungle, the real accountability of the Bush administration at law will come from investigations into illegal wire-tapping and strong-arming the Department of Energy into hushing up their findings with respect to those stupid tubes while leaking to Judith Miller an opposite impression -- domestic jurisdiction pure as spring-water. While tying up these loose ends, we'll just see where the evidence leads.

Anybody savvy that?

Chuck in Houston

Enough of my stupid arm-chair quarterbacking already! We'll just have to leave it up to our Senators to work out the intricacies of the Senate. Not my pay-grade.

Chuck in Houston

I can see clearly now the rain is gone.
I can see all obstacles in my way.
Gone are the dark black clouds that held me down.
It's gonna be a bright, bright, bright sunshiney day.

Posted by: Chuck at November 13, 2006 11:51 PM

Can a state recall its Senator? Maybe the good citizens of Connecticut will decide they really did not want a Republican after all.

Oncall:

As I understand it, unlike states (e.g., California), federal elective offices (e.g., Senate seats) are subject to rules prescribed in the Constitution. In other words, as I understand it, we don't get "do-overs."

Or, as they say, CT errs in haste, we repent at leisure....

But this can't be a principle issue. We'll get around it. Vox populi and all that....

Chuck in Houston

Posted by: NonnyO at November 13, 2006 06:53 PM

Excellent post Nonny.

I think you touched on exactly what we all sense to be true and that is really nothing is going to get done legislatively for the next two years.

You know it is real good and nice to take a deep breath and say something to the effect of, 'Lets fix some of the broken things first'.

But to say that you are under the assumption that georgie will just LET YOU fix what he has broken.

Even with a majority, slim or not, he has spent all this time usurping the powers of the House and Senate and he already has backdoors built into all the firewalls of this once great republic.

Pelosi, Murtha, Reid, none of them can 'fix' anything until the actual problem is dealt with, namely george w. bush.

Even with both chambers in our hands, the Supreme Court is still stacked with his and his daddys friends.

It is all good to be hopeful that he will ALLOW you to fix something he deliberately broke, but it is just not very realistic.

Georgie is going to spend the next two years grinding this nation into the mud as he desperately avoids being called to account for ANYTHING.

One thing he will not be doing is respecting the new leaders of Congress, or helping them in any way undo the damge he has caused.

Bipartisian consensus only works as long as georgie is willing to be usurped.

I think all of us know deep down that will just never happen. His daddy and his daddys friends will not allow that to happen.

The only way to begin to 'fix' anything he has done is to impeach him and get the damn trials over with.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111306M.shtml

The Unfinished Story of Election 2006: We Get to Choose the Ending
By Ira Chernus * Sunday 12 November 2006

"Election statistics are like pies. You can slice them up any way you want. And the way you slice them depends on the tool you use. My favorite tool is a nugget of wisdom from Democratic political guru Stanley Greenberg: "A narrative is the key to everything." The party that tells the best story wins. And the recipe for a winning story is simple: Take a few handfuls of fact, throw in a large dollop of fiction, and stir."

more at link

Chuck, I enjoy reading your posts. :-)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14health.html

Health Insurance Industry Urges Expansion of Coverage
By ROBERT PEAR * Published: November 14, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 13 — The health insurance industry proposed an expansion of Medicaid and new tax breaks on Monday with the goal of guaranteeing coverage for all children in three years and for virtually all adults within 10 years.

More at link

DiAnne, I think the Guardian article you linked on November 13, 2006 10:05 PM and the Truthout article I posted on November 14, 2006 08:16 AM are complimentary when read in full.

Already out-of-date, but I found these snapshots of what could end up on the Democratic agenda interesting:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6464897

New Timetables, Phased Pullout Likely for Iraq
~~by Tom Bowman
Rethinking Direct Talks with Iran, North Korea
~~by Michele Kelemen
How Will a Democratic Congress Approach Taxes?
~~by Chris Arnold
Health Care: A New Beginning
~~by Julie Rovner
Renewed Push to Raise the Minimum Wage
~~by Frank Langfitt
Finding Common Ground with Bush on Immigration
~~by Jennifer Ludden
Revisiting the Sept. 11 Panel's Recommendations
~~by Pam Fessler
Climate Change to Get Congressional Hearing
~~by Elizabeth Shogren

Tonight I watched an American documentary called, "Lost Year in Iraq". I think at some point it was mentioned that there had only ever been two presidents impeached - Andrew Johnson in 1867 for a few illegal practices. Acquitted. Not responsible for human deaths or mental and physical disfigurements?

Bill Clinton - impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice. Yeah - he lied about the sex between himself and Monica someone. They weren't the first, nor will they be the last. That's really no one's business except the two people concerned and their families. Again, no human deaths or mental and physical disfigurements. What a waste of public money that was!!

And now, with more than half a million "collateral damage" Iraqi civilian deaths and plenty of mental and physical disfigurements, in Iraq alone; plus, thousands of Americans who died in Afghanistan, Iraq and on 9/11; what I'm hearing is "let it go." George Bush isn't concerned. He is so dumb that he doesn't have a clue that he's wrong over heaps and heaps of issues.

How do you say sorry to the dead and their families, if you don't impeach?