Right. If all he had done was to have "proposed creating a bipartisan panel" then you wouldn't even be talking about it at all!

Also, if "Mr. Bush has acknowledged violates the 1978 surveillance law" then what is there to investigate???

Moron or shill?

Come see TV from the reality-based community at RealityBasedTV.com

1. An up-or-down vote on the censure resolution.
   
2. A genuine investigation into the illegal surveillance programs.
   

I'm not saying that I'm against Feingold's resolution, but I do believe that pushing for a real investigation is far more vital for the American republic.  The Times seems to think that this is the priority.  Censure should be a secondary option.

With so much still unknown about the domestic spying, the censure resolution merely allows the Republicans to change the subject to fairy tales about Democratic leaders' trying to impeach Mr. Bush. They are also painting criticism of Mr. Bush as unpatriotic. That's tedious nonsense, but watching Mr. Feingold's Democratic colleagues run for cover shows how effective it is.

It ALLOWS them? Like Republicans need the permission of Dems to change the subject? Like the Dems weren't running for cover already? Yet again we hear the sad song of the frightened liberals: If only Feingold hadn't made his resolution, the GOP wouldn't have called Bush critics unpatriotic. If only everybody just kept quiet, the Bushies wouldn't attack us. If only we keep our eyes closed, the monsters wont' get us.

The Dems DID call for an investigation and got predictably shot down by their GOP colleagues. Big surprise. The only mystery is how this simple fact escapes a supposed journalist like Collins.

What is it with people like this? Bush has gotten thousands killed with his self-serving lies. His henchmen have slandered everyone who opposed him. They've shredded the constitution, cheated their way to power, and grown so arrogant that they don't even bother to try to cover up their lawbreaking. And yet the Collinses of the world, over and over again, keep on telling themselves, and us, that he won't hit them again if they can just not make him mad. America doesn't need frightened neurotics like this telling us how to behave.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

No BooMan.

It is YOU who are missing the point.

The NY Times is a bought and sold corporate entity. They were the ROOT of the anti-Dean forces on the so-called "left" in 2003/2004, and produced edition after edition of that paper with large AND small, overt AND covert attempts to diminish Dean's chances and to inflate Kerry's. I was still reading and watching the news then. In fact it was an image on the front page of a Sunday Times the late summer of 2003 that was the initial shock that started to awken me to the fact that the whole media system was rotten. That there essentially WAS no real "liberal" presence in the big-time media. The image was large, in coolor and right on the front page. Kerry hovering over Dean like a hawk about to pounce on a fat little mouse. I had been in Europe for about a month, and my receptors had been wiped clean of their usual accumulation of media bullshit as a result. I opened that paper...I remember the very instant...and the light dawned.

"Why...they're in on the fix!!!"

Duh.

And 6 months or so later...after CAREFUL preparation, after Dean was repeatedly painted as a "flake", as a loser on BOTH sides of the media aisle ...

"ARRRGGHHHH!!!"

GOTCHA!!!

Well...they still are.

In on the fix.

The same corporate forces that were afraid...rightfully afraid...of Dean are afraid of Feingold, too. BET on it.

And the Times will twist and tgurn in an attempt to seem "liberal" while simultaneously running the consensus centrist...meaning corporate-approved...DemRat up the flagpole.

In the spirit of "winnability".

Right.

In the spirit of the corporate fix.

Two candidates, one plan. (With minor variations. BushCo and BushCo Lite. Nice)

You can bet on that, too.

NEWSTRIKE!!!

Pay these assholes no mind.

Maybe they'll just fade away.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

A Solomon-like Moose offers an alternative to the Feingold resolution.

Yesterday, the Moose indicated that he is not too keen about censuring the President over the NSA program. But, rather than curse the darkness, the Moose lights a candle.

If Democrats want to express their displeasure over the NSA intercepts and the rest of the Bush Presidency, they have a tremendous opportunity. Unlike the Feingold resolution, this alternative has teeth. It is not merely a symbolic protest, it can change the course of history.

And what, Mr. Moose, is your alternative?

November 7, 2006, election day.

Democrats, remember the Hippocratic Oath, First do no harm.

There is only one force that stands in the way of Democratic control over Congress. That obstacle is known as the Democratic Party.

Since he doesn't allow comments, allow me to, for the sake of argument, assume he is running for re-election as a democrat this November, and is following his own advice.

Reporter: Mr. Moose, when the administration broke the law regarding torture, what did you do?

Candidate Moose: (proudly) I did nothing.

Reporter: And when the president outed a covert CIA agent dealing with WMD, what did you do in your congressional oversight role?

Moose: Not a thing.

Reporter: And when the administration started spying on Americans without a warrant, your position was?

Moose: Nothing.

Reporter: Your opponent in the primary election has made the following statement. "All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing." How do you respond?

Yes, Mr. Moose. Ho do you respond?

--Don't ask others to do, what you are unwilling to do yourself.