I'm a little surprised

Frankly, I'm some what surprised at the number of dems who voted for the abomination that is the FISA bill, not however that it passed.

Let's see: The chief of police comes to me and says that someone in my town is making meth and getting guns together, perhaps to shoot up the town while on their meth high. He asks me to break into every house in town so that he can be sure that is the case. After I break into every house I'm found out, but the state legislature passes a law that says that as long as the chief asks me to do it, it's ok. So I'm off the hook.

Ok, "I'm not here to say that the government is always right, but when the government tells you to do something, I'm sure you would all agree that I think you all recognize that is something you need to do," so says congressman Kit Bond and apparently the leaders of the Democrat (can I now use that nasty slur?) party.

So let's see the president, or prime minister, or primer, or Il Duce, or Fuhrer, or King tells me what to do and then I "need to do" it. Even though the law says otherwise. But in the end it turns out that the law is really only what the president, etc. says it is. Isn't that a text book definition of the totalitarian or fascist state?

Just askin'.

FISA Again

Once again it looks like the Democrats are prepared to cave on FISA and give blanket immunity to the phone companies who broke the law at the request of the administration. I do appreciate Digby's position, but it doesn't make me much happier.

I am beginning to think that we are in the same place the later Roman Republic was just before the Sula and Marius. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we are going to end up in a bloody civil war. On the other hand, I think that is because there is no one who is even close to getting power who believes in anything.

One of the interesting things is that the excuses and reasons given by the Democrats are simply not believable to anyone who cares. We see right through there statements. They are liars and care not for our country, but only for those who they consider are in their ruling class with them.

Giving the corporations legal immunity because they did what the president wanted even though that was against the law is the text book definition of fascist. A state run by the corporations and those they place in office to do their bidding.

Hey who needs the Fourth Amendment if you have nothing to hide. I guess those assholes in powdered wigs just couldn't understand how scared a few guys with box cutters can make us.

Second Rate Benedict Arnolds

Within the last couple of weeks there have been several stories describing how strong and brave the Democratic leadership was last year. Those stories described the fight over Social Security. Nancy Poelsti and Steny Hoyer were right there in the fore front of those fighting to save Social Security. I thought those stories were unusual at this point. Now I know why they were out there.

Their purpose was to give the leadership cover when they caved on FISA and retroactive immunity to the telephone companies.

Given the firestorm that has exploded now that the rumors are out about the "compromise," apparently those "hero" stories didn't do what they were meant to do for our very own second rate Benedict Arnolds.

Them what pays the piper calls the tune I guess. Apparently just working and voting are no longer enough.

The interesting thing about this whole process is the way the leadership is trying to cover their collective asses: Work out a behind the scenes deal so that the leadership can vote the "right" way when the final bill comes up, but have the result fixed so that they appear to be on the losing side.

Interestingly enough this seems to be precisely what has managed to fool NARAL and HRC all along. You would think that people who make their living lobbying congress would understand what is happening ------- wouldn't you?

Hey why do you think that Obama and Clinton haven't spoken out about this? You don't suppose that they are in on it do you?