Ah, now we learn that Speaker Pelosi has power ...

Amazing, she can work to save the California coast but not the Constitution of the United States which she has sworn to uphold.

A plan to lift the ban on coastal drilling is stalled on Capitol Hill, for one simple reason: A Californian who opposes President Bush's proposal is calling the shots in the House of Representatives.

Despite growing public support for ending the ban, even in California, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she won't allow a vote.

"I have no plans to do so," Pelosi said Thursday.

It's an example of the vast power placed in the office of the speaker, who sets the agenda for the 435-member House. Members can force a vote if enough of them sign a petition, but that's a rarity because it requires rank-and-file Democrats to line up against their boss.

I agree that there is no reason to end the ban (not that, based on passed history, she won't cave on this). This demonstrates even more that Nancy Pelosi needs to be fired as she will not fight for the Constitution. She is part of the problem and complicit in moving the US to an authoritarian state with UNequal justice for all.

LINK: Power of one: Pelosi vows to block offshore drilling vote by Rob Hotakainen, McClatchy Newspapers

Reid is still a guilty party ...

In fact Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi head the list of guilty parties to the FISA capitulation by a weak kneed, craven, cowardly, putrid, morally bankrupt, weasely, slithering Congress.

No matter what their individual votes Reid and Pelosi had the power to keep this disastrous bill from even coming to the floor of their respective houses. These two just do not get the credit they deserve for handing over to Bush even more than his 'republican' congress would give.

Nothing gets through to these insular wagon circling throw backs to pre-guillotine France.

Do they even understand why their popularity has plummeted. Somehow the words they spout that get them elected as Democrats never make it to the reasoning portion of their brains. Their brains must be so barricaded that concepts of Constitution, Treason, Betrayal, Integrity, Truth never come in contact with each other. They are exceptional at giving speeches about Freedom and upholding the Constitution and then voting for excrement that utterly defies both concepts.

There are too few exceptions to the 'Congresspeople as slithering snakes' portrait. Russ Feingold is one of the exceptions and expended great effort to educate a mostly hidebound and unresponsive Senate.

For a rational, reasoned and polite analysis of the FISA betrayal read Glenn Greenwald:

Congress votes to immunize lawbreaking telecoms, legalize warrantless eavesdropping
Today's coverup of surveillance crimes and Barack Obama
Aug. 8, 1974 vs. July 9, 2008
Beltway myth: "The left-wing base" vs. "the American people" on Iraq
The political establishment and telecom immunity -- why it matters
The Al-Haramain ruling and the current Congress
Obama advisor Greg Craig: Adding insult to injury

And on and on ...

Liberal Oasis argues that Obama FISA stance is no big deal ...

Obama's FISA stance is 'reluctant.' He doesn't want to give those big bad law breaking telecomms immunity. No he doesn't. But he reluctantly must. He must, don't you see. He must because he must spy on Americans without warrants so we will be safe from ... something. Not safe from being spied upon secretly, whenever, with out warrants or recourse, but safe from ... something. Something the government, including Obama, wants us to be safe from. But that's OK because it's Obama and we TRUST (with a capital T and that rhymes with P and that stand for patootie) him and we're sure he, and not McCain, will be elected so that it will be Obama's administration who is spying on us and not the McCain administration.

So even if Obama votes to undermine core Constitutional principles it's OK because his vote doesn't necessarily mean he shares Bush's disrespect of the Constitution:

2. Is it fair to extrapolate the position to fully undermine the core principle?

Consider Obama's position in offering reluctant support for the FISA bill even though he disagrees with the provision effectively granting immunity to telecom companies.

Core principles of constitutional check and balances, as well as privacy rights, are involved. But does Obama's vote necessarily mean he shares Bush's disrespect of the Constitution, and would act in a similar unconstitutional manner if he assumed the presidency?

Oh, I feel so much better now. I see the light. We don't need no stinking Constitution. We have Obama. Yae ...

I do have one little question. Will Obama put the Constitution back together before he leaves office?

My God, a conservative who still has a brain ...

... and writing lucidly, oh my. The GOP hasn't turned them all into robots as yet. This made my day.

[Please note, I think many Dems are also brainless. Seems to be a genetic problem associated with leadership, or maybe it's follower-ship that's the cause. We could blame evolution, unless of course you believe in creationism, then you already know Who's to blame.]

Daniel Larison at the American Conservative writes about Obama's FISA fiasco:

Think about it from their perspective: they see a tremendous opportunity in an overwhelmingly pro-Democratic year to win an election that also could provide something like a mandate for a progressive agenda, and in the interests of winning they have swallowed their objections to Obama’s relatively less progressive platform (as compared to Edwards or Clinton) only to be betrayed on an issue as fundamental and central as constitutional liberties and derided in the process as part of the problem with our political system. “Be practical,” someone says, “we’re trying to win an election.” To which they might reasonably reply, ”To what end, if our candidate caves in on major issues?”

via Glenn Greenwald

Let me count the ways that US Today is ...

... is full of crap. [Ok, I broke down and used modern day vernacular undoing years of training and conditioning and usage.]

Here's a couple paragraphs from US Today's article: Obama faces online backlash for centrist views

Obama, rated last year as the most liberal senator by the non-partisan National Journal magazine, said he supports the domestic wiretapping bill because it is "a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement" over a previous version. His aides insist Obama is not tempering his positions.

"Over the course of his career, Barack Obama has made decisions not on party or politics, but on what he thinks is best for America," spokesman Hari Sevugan says.

Clues to US Today's moronic style of journalism: National Journal is non-partisan. Good grief. Obama the most liberal Senator. A Moronic Journalism Award for US Today for passing on the National Journal's proclamations as if they were in any way credible. Obama, even in the primary phase of this campaign has never appeared to be very liberal. He seems to hover around the center of the Democratic Party. Progressive issues don't really seem to inspire Obama very much. Clinton herself is a centrist but at least she does care about universal health care. Obama is even further right than Clinton. Most liberal Senator indeed.

Repeatedly we keep hearing/reading that Obama, and others, are supporting the FISA capitulation because it is an improvement over a previous version. How is this a reason to support a bad bill?

The leaders of the Democratic Party (Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer), which is the majority party in both the Senate and the House, in case you can't tell by their behaviour, are telling us that all they can do is produce bad bills and that that's OK because they could really produce even worse bills?

According to the quotes presented in this article, Obama thinks that warrantless spying on Americans is what is best for America. Funny, he said he didn't think that before the Senate completely caved to Bush and his GOP mafia even though they are some of the most unpopular people in the whole US of A.

Next US Today lectures us with Obama talking points that sound like they've been channeled to him via the D.C. people-in-the-know - that is in the know as to how to help Democrats pull defeat from victory.

Some political strategists, however, note Obama is making a calculated shift to win over voters in a country where neither major party claims a majority.

"His supporters should understand this," said Emory University political scientist Merle Black. "He needs to reach out."

So Obama is making a calculated shift to disregarding the Constitution so he can appeal to who? Hard core Republicans? They aren't going to vote for him no matter what he does? Just who wants to be able to spy on Americans? Obama is either one such person and/or he's being very careless with our freedoms and/or he's being conned. Reach out, my foot. I don't know what Obama is thinking with FISA and telecomm immunity, but whatever it is it is NOT good for America and it is probably NOT good for him. For a smart man he is doing a very stupid thing, so stupid he can't even explain it coherently.

The title of the article itself starts the journalistic bouncing ball of errors rolling. Obama faces online backlash for centrist views How is spying on Americans a centrist goal? How is giving freedom from prosecution for crimes to telecomms and BushCo a centrist goal? These all seemed to be extreme rightwing GOP goals? When did they become centrist?

UPDATE: Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right posts at Obama's community blog (via digby) are quite compelling.

Well, maybe Senator Reid may be allowed to stay for awhile ...

UPDATE: ... but not for very long.
-----------
About FISA legislation Senator Harry Reid is reported to have

announced not only that he would co-sponsor the Dodd amendment to strip immunity out of the bill, but would also vote against the bill on final passage: ...

Does he mean it? And will he just vote no but speed the bill on its way otherwise? This kind of deceit is not unknown to Harry ...

Massimo Calabresi, in line for the Aromatic Journalist Turd Award ...

Massimo Calabresi writing for Time Magazine (Behind the Compromise on Spying) is a sterling example of a Journalist who qualifies for this fragrant and sought after award. Glenn Greenwald documents Calabresi's outstanding Orwellian approach to masticating and regurgitating government propaganda. Kudos to Massimo Calaresi and Time Magazine. We expect to see more excellent writting in support of the authoritarian corporatist state, as well as further assistance in dismantling that pesky US Constitution, as you continue to massage and transcribe all truthiness emanating from our country's deserving leadership.

How Arizona Representatives Voted On FISA Amendments Act of 2008 ...

There are eight Congressional Representatives from Arizona split evenly between Democrats and Republicans. Two (Gifford and Mitchell) are new 'hires.' This is a very poor showing for these two new Democrats in Congress. Right off the bat they vote to exempt telecomm corporations from any crimes they may have committed and institute blanket, unconstitutional warrantless spying on American citizens. This is a power that Bush illegally usurped and was unable to get Congress to pass UNTIL the Democrats became a majority and with the help of new 'hires' who were supposed to be better than their Republican predecessors. You can see how that worked out.

The two other Democratic Reps (Grijalva, since 2003 and Pastor, since 1991) both voted against the abomination that is the FISA Amendments Act of 2008.

Of course we expected the Republicans to vote for spying and immunity for the rich and they did.

I would like to thank both Raul Grijalva (who is my Rep) and Ed Pastor for their votes in this matter. I hope they both tried to sway their cohorts in the House to stand up for the Constitution. Over half the Democrats did but too many, 105 Democrats, voted to pass this GOP written legislation which was then rushed through by the Democratic 'leadership' in a manner reminiscent of the Republicans. Closed doors sessions, secrecy, failure to give any time to study the legislation. The kind of behaviour that Pelosi stated would NEVER happen under her watch.

The 105 Democrats, including Pelosi and Hoyer, and along with Reid in the Senate need to be excised from House and Senate.

=======================
Rep. Rick Renzi [R, AZ-1] - Yea. Voted to destroy the Constitution, give lawbreakers (rich lawbreakers) a get out of court free card and blanket, warrantless spying on US Citizens.

Rep. Trent Franks [R, AZ-2] - Yea. Voted to destroy the Constitution, give lawbreakers (rich lawbreakers) a get out of court free card and blanket, warrantless spying on US Citizens.

Rep. John Shadegg [R, AZ-3] - Yea. Voted to destroy the Constitution, give lawbreakers (rich lawbreakers) a get out of court free card and blanket, warrantless spying on US Citizens.

Rep. Edward Pastor [D, AZ-4] - Nay. Voted to protect individual rights and to hold communication companies liable under the law for any crimes they may have committed to be determined by judge and jury.

Rep. Harry Mitchell [D, AZ-5] - Yea. Voted to destroy the Constitution, give lawbreakers (rich lawbreakers) a get out of court free card and blanket, warrantless spying on US Citizens.

Rep. Jeff Flake [R, AZ-6] - Yea. Voted to destroy the Constitution, give lawbreakers (rich lawbreakers) a get out of court free card and blanket, warrantless spying on US Citizens.

Rep. Raul Grijalva [D, AZ-7] - Nay. Voted to protect individual rights and to hold communication companies liable under the law for any crimes they may have committed to be determined by judge and jury.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D, AZ-8] - Yea. Voted to destroy the Constitution, give lawbreakers (rich lawbreakers) a get out of court free card and blanket, warrantless spying on US Citizens.

Now digby doesn't write many stupid things, but ...

... I think this may qualify (or maybe I'm reading too much of Arthur Silber).

He [Obama] does say that if he wins, he promises not to abuse the power it gives him, so I guess we should feel good about that.

Really? He won't use it. And he didn't even swear an oath to that! But he did swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. And he's breaking that one. So we should feel good about his promises but he can break all the oaths he wants to?

Then she says in the next paragraph that he had to have been a party to this in the first place. But he won't use the power. Right!

What gets me is why would the Republicans want this much power in the hands of the President when they don't know who that will be?

It's really difficult for intelligent, informed loyal Democrats at this point. Obama is expecting you to fall in line like any good Republican would ...

We already know that Obama doesn't respect the blogosphere. He wants this entity to shut up. He, and the Republicans, can't control it. I suggest, given the manner in which the House was subverted by a Democratic majority, that both Democrats and Republicans will soon start looking to shut down online freedom. That could happen quite speedily if they employ the GOP rule book like they did for FISA.

I hoped I was wrong about Barack Obama, but he capitulated on FISA ...

Obama's full statement on the House's spying capitulation (via email).

Barack baby supports the compromise that isn't a compromise. He supports passing legislation that didn't need to be passed. He pretends the legislation is protecting us little people when we know who just got the power they usurped made legal and who gets to get all those law suits thrown out of court. He supports making the crimes of corporations and presidents un-crimes. He supports doing whatever the Bushie baby says because Bushie baby is pres. So when/if he's president, he's all of a sudden going to change?

Say again. What's the reason it's so important to elect a Democrat as president? Because they believe in civil rights, the constitution, the rule of law? Was that it?

How's that working out for you?

Sorry, you had me convinced. But I don't see it any longer. I don't think he'll protect SS. I don't think he'll stop US warmongering. I don't trust him any more than I do Bushie baby. Why should I? Oh, but he's going to put better judges in. Really? What makes you think so?

ADDED:

Obama has obviously calculated that sacrificing the rule of law and the Fourth Amendment is a worthwhile price to pay to bolster his standing a tiny bit in a couple of swing states.

ADDED II:

From EmptyWheel - In case you couldn't parse the three bolded sentences yourself, here's my take on them.

1. I will make a showy effort in the Senate on Monday to get them to take out immunity. I will lose that effort 32-65. But hey! I can say I tried!
2. But don't worry, little boys and girls, Inspectors General are an adequate replacement for our third co-equal branch of government!
3. Nice little bloggers! Aren't you cute! After you demanded accountability we gave you piggy lipstick and fig leaves and told you it was time to move on while we important Senators told you--in polite terms--to fuck off.

Still waiting for Barack Obama to lead on the FISA issue ...

Silence ...

So the Democratic House deliberately passed a law violating the Constitution.

WhyNow? writes:

Here’s the House votes page, so you see the names of the Stalinists, including Nancy Pelosi, who approved violating your rights under the Fourth Amendment and allowing criminals to walk free.

Nice leadership on this issue from the “presumptive” Democratic nominee for President. I guess the supporting the Constitution would have interfered with his “bi-partisanship”.

From Obama, still silence ... I didn't really expect any leadership from him, but I did 'hope.'

Contribute to www.thestrangebedfellows.com. Or at ActBlue.

The Democratic leadership and the 105 Democratic Ratfink Representatives who voted 'Yes' on this abomination just spit in our faces. We need to hold them accountable.

Yesterday's QUOTES ...

I'm sure glad we elected a Democratic Congress. Otherwise we would be seeing rubberstamping of Bush Administraion all over the place.

FISA vote could come as early as this evening. No one outside Hoyer, Bond, Rockefeller, WH negotiators and a select few staffers and lobbyist pals have seen the bill.

I'd like to underscore the fact that in 2006, when the Congress was controlled by Bill Frist and Denny Hastert, the administration tried to get a bill passed legalizing warrantless eavesdropping and telecom amnesty, but was unable. They had to wait until the Congress was controlled by Steny Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to accomplish that.

... The utter reality is that John McCain has evolved into a master kiss-ass, a sellout who abandoned core principles on torture and immigration simply to politically survive in a Republican party run amok in disastrous radicalism. ...

... But what makes it all the more notable is how repeatedly Gingrich invokes this same deranged formulation in order to argue for a whole array of policies he supports -- we better accept what Gingrich wants or else we'll "lose a city" ...

I don't know who John Pilger was, but he certainly hit the nail on the head. I saw this quote in an article about Barack Obama and his support for the American empire. No, there will not be change coming from him. As always change will come from us, or not at all. Actually I take that back. Good change will come from us. There is going to be change, the only question is whose and who will it benefit.

... In fact, whenever a national crisis has occurred, Bush has been conspicuously absent. ...

... Arbitration: "Set up to squeeze small sums of money out of desperately poor people" ...

It's still hard to believe we've descended to the point where we're relieved when the United States Supreme Court rules in favor of a restraint on the executive that is clearly spelled out in the United States Constitution, rather than marching in the streets to protest the fact that four of its members actually failed to join the majority and instead wrote insane dissents.

Let's fire Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid ...

... revolting toads, or is that turds, that they are.

They've been shamed and beaten, the Republicans are crowing, and the lies keep coming.

Pelosi submits to whatever.

Glenn Greenwald reports that

Several readers have emailed to say that they called the Obama campaign and were told that Obama and his staff are "literally reviewing the bill right now and will make a statement shortly." This Kos diarist reports the same thing.

This wasn't my experience as you can read in the previous post. I was not able to get anyone on the phone (others had the same problem) and the response to my emails was not encouraging coming from the leader of the Democratic Party. Shall we 'hope.' [I'm having just too much fun with that word, but I will willingly trade the 'fun' for 'results.']

Republicans crow, as most would who change defeat into victory.

Remember, the Democrats are the majority party. This cannot be pulled off without the Democratic leadership's cooperation. This is a plot by the Democratic leadership to betray those they represent and conspire with Bush, the GOP and the Telecoms. This was a betrayal, a plot hatched behind closed doors, a conspiracy that bypassed committees and reviews, organized right out of the corrupt GOP playbook. It is not compromise, not a negotiation.

Obama, MIA? ...

This is the response to my message to the Obama campaign about the FISA abomination Steny Hoyer is about to pull off.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting Senator Obama. We're glad to have your comments. Barack greatly appreciates the outpouring of messages expressing different views he has received from across the country and from Americans around the world, and we appreciate hearing from you.

We're on the way to creating the changes we seek, but we will only get there by uniting tens of millions of Americans around a new way of practicing politics and a set of sensible solutions to the great challenges we face as a nation.

Thank you again for contacting Senator Obama.

Sincerely,

Obama for America

I think the second paragraph makes it very clear that it will continue to be business as usual while Obama holds out 'hope' for "a new way of practicing politics" somewhere in our future. He's sounding more Republican by the minute.

Strange Bedfellows ...

Simon talks to some of the members of Strange Bedfellows, a group which is trying to remind some wayward elected Democrats of their oath of office, you know the one where they swear to uphold the Constitution, not to fold, spindle or mutilate it.

Strange Bedfellows: Bloggers from the left and right team up with the ACLU to fight telecom immunity

On a 'lighter' note read

Right wing bloggers employ investigative journalism skills to “skim” documents

Disappointing that we have to fight the Democrats in Congress ...

... as well al the Republicans.

Strange Bedfellows Unite to Fight FISA Deal

Steny Hoyer changes his lies ...

Lying then and lying now. One set of lies didn't work, so he tries another.

Plainly, Hoyer -- who spent the last week emphatically (and falsely) denying he had negotiated a bill with telecom amnesty -- engineered this bill because he wanted to, and as was indicated here yesterday, now that negotiations are complete and this campaign against him has begun, he's trying to distance himself from it and pretend that it wasn't his doing.

Notice that Pelosi is doing nothing to keep a FISA capitulation from happening. She's just keeping her distance so she can claim it wasn't her fault. By doing nothing she's making it clear she also wants to continue the Republican agenda. She's the leader. She can't claim she has no power to stop this. If she's really that powerless then she should be replaced.

Hold these elected officials accountable for the actions.

Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer ...

UPDATE below. UPDATE II below.
------------------------------------------------
With these three so called Democrats the US is in no better hands than with the corrupt Republicans. Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, and some others Democrats, are following the Republican Constitution destroying and illegal warmongering agendas. They are just doing so at a slower pace while attempting to keep their manipulations secret. That means they want the same things Bush wants. There's no other believable explanation. Working in secret against their own. I thought Reid and Pelosi were incompetent and weak. Instead they were Judas.

So here's your choice. Destroy the country at breakneck speed with the Republicans or at a slower pace with the Democrats (and not all that much slower, a fact they're shoving in our face this week).

That doesn't seem to be much of a choice after all. And where does the saviour Obama stand in this. 'Leading' somewhere off to the side exuding hope but 'above' the fray ... ? Speaking of hope, I was actually hoping he might do something. But I guess that's the wrong kind of hope ...

For the dirty details read:
Targeting Steny Hoyer for his contempt for the rule of law
and
A Competely Totally Shocking Headline That Leaves One Slack-Jawed in Disbelief

Reid, Pelosi and Hoyer have to go. Conspiring to pass de facto telecomm immunity legislation, along with the rest of of it, while pretending they are not doing so. Setting up legislation to pass in such a way they will be free to vote against that very legislation is weasely, deceitful, corrupt and beyond the pale.

UPDATE June 18 - Here's a very succinct version of what's going on with the Democratic Congress: FISA sellouts under fire

UPDATE II June 18 - As usual, a writer at The Left Coaster expresses my disbelief and horror better than I can:

... as we all can see, if telecom immunity passes under the “leadership” of Senator Obama all bets are off. I’m terribly sorry, my own leadership has been lying to me horribly for months—I thought we had the brains and character as a Party to lead this country well again. We don’t. If we win in November I don’t know what will happen in any critical policy area, I just don’t, we don’t have the character to implement any core principle. I’m really sorry to make it appear we did.

[ ... ]

... It appears that Daily Kos, at this point, generally would be described as acquiescent to betrayal and utter disgrace in abandoning core principles. I’m truly sorry, that’s precisely the message conveyed with silence.

That will not be my path. The Democratic Party and Senator Obama will likely never see another dime of mine for at least a decade, I don’t enable psychosis and betrayal. A vote and a voice for the Little People will fulfill duty quite enough, oh yes. I don’t know what I’m going to do with the yard signs.

[read paradox's entire post]

I'll support the ACLU. Any other money I give to political organizations will go to efforts to force accountability upon these betrayers of our trust.

The corruption of Steny Hoyer ...

One needs to ask why he is so set on selling us out ...

Steny Hoyer’s Offices Lied to Me Today.

This morning, I opened my email and found a bulletin from Democarts.com. It looks like Steny Hoyer is up to his old tricks, and selling out our Fourth Amendment rights to that bastion of ethics, George “mr. 28% Approval Bush.

Of course, it's not just Hoyer.

Really, the Democrats are worthless ...

They may not be as outright evil as the Republicans, but they are trying real hard.

Bill Of Rights OK'd For Destruction By Independence Day

The link has another call for Obama to step up and defend the Constitution and, just generally, act like a leader should. Don't expect it to happen. It would be real nice to be wrong about this ... but the Democrats in Congress have let us down time and time again. Social Security was the only item they held the line on.