My party has no principles.

we can still work with this…. all we need to do is to find a way to convince them that doing their jobs is in their own best interest. don’t see how we can do that wrt to impeachment (doesn’t mean we should stop trying though), but fisa ought to be doable if we don’t let them fool us with their fancy costumes and play-acting.

Well, I’ve been trying. It ought to be a no-brainer: What better way to hold Republican’s feet to the fire than by starting impeachment hearings? Make them defend the Bush-Cheney gang’s illegal acts. Watch them twitch and squirm as they draw a bull’s eye around themselves and try to explain.

The problem is that our Dems have bought the Republican meme that investigations always mean “Gotcha!” politics and can therefore be dismissed as partisan attacks. Well, yah, when cops go after robbers it is kinda a partisan thing, I guess. When are Democrats going to stop reading from scripts prepared for them by Republicans? I mean, get a clue, maybe?

Bob in HI

My party has no principles.

we can still work with this…. all we need to do is to find a way to convince them that doing their jobs is in their own best interest. don’t see how we can do that wrt to impeachment (doesn’t mean we should stop trying though), but fisa ought to be doable if we don’t let them fool us with their fancy costumes and play-acting.

It is a little harder to tell in the House

climbing back on my soapbox… *g*

some evidence:

1. august paa kabuki
2. burying holt’s fisa bill in committee while pushing the seriously flawed restore act version 1 (conyer’s and reyes’ bill).
3. playing games with holt to get him to not block the restore act version 1 in committee (youtube)
4. only fixing the worst of the restore act when forced to by the progressive caucus (who defied their own leadership to join with the Rs and defeat passage).

imo, we knew the house leadership was in the tank on fisa long before reid showed his true colors this winter.

This may be close to the truth. I think that before this Congress took office back in January of 2007, they made a strategic decision to (a) take impeachment off the table, (b) sit back and watch the Republicans screw up, (c) blame everything on the Republicans (without actually doing much about it), hoping that the net effect would be (d) more Democrats elected in 2008.

In other words, nothing for principle, everything for power.

Oh, wait, is that supposed to be the Republican playbook?

Color me disgusted. My party has no principles.

Bob in HI

good point re motivation.

i just have this (probably crazy) idea that if pelosi, conyers et al. couldn’t get away with fooling people they were on our side – without, you know, actually delivering – they might put more effort into getting results and less into the kabuki.

and that, is part of what motivates me to argue for keeping the spotlight on pelosi and conyers as well as hoyer and the blue dogs.

btw, i do think we have allies in this fight – holt is one.

they have also not been herded strongly enough by the Dem Leadership.

this is my only point of disagreement – but it’s a big one. because it rests on the assumption that the dem leadership has any wish to heard the blue dogs and the problem is not that they are attempting to deceive us but that they are incompetent, or lazy or something. i don’t buy it.

my hypothesis is that the dem leadership LIKES the fact that the bluedogs want to side with the Rs. it gives the leadership maximum flexibility – if they choose to support the administration’s policies they can cast a fake vote knowing the bluedogs will give them the outcome they have planned for. if they choose not to support the administration’s policies they can pretend they are heros for getting beating up on the bluedogs.

what i want to challenge is that the are any members of the house dem leadership that are fighting on our side. i know that pelosi and conyers want us to think that – but not only am i not convinced, i think it is very likely the opposite.