it was just a weazle-out.  

This has been a shameful day for the Democratic Party.

Interestingly, John Dean on Countdown tonight was holding out hope that since the "Protect America Act" removes the phone companies from civil but not criminal jeopardy, it is possible that Obama is cleverly waiting and will use that "oversight" in that bill to go after the phone companies with criminal prosecutions after he is elected president. That's one of the most absurd suggestions I've ever heard on Countdown.

Do you think that I undermine my party's nominee by strenuously disagreeing with the position he took a few hours ago?

On a blog?

On a fucking blog?

Seriously, get some fucking perspective.

Until I'm informed otherwise, I think I still have the right to give shit about my Fourth Amendment rights. Until I'm informed otherwise, I think I still have the right to give shit about a law that would, in effect, shield the executive branch from accountability for a very specific breach of the law.

But, whatever. Let's not get abstract on your stupid ass.

Even though you're a fucking moron, I still feel as though it's incumbent on me to protest against any abridgment of your right to be secure in your person, house, paper, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

That probably doesn't make sense to you. Pity.

Since you did me the favor of feeling sorry for me, I'm trying real hard to feel sorry for you.

It isn't working. Go fuck yourself.
 

I tend to think BooMan was just poking a little fun at me and trying to rile up some people who may have enjoyed some of my posts from way back when. When I wrote "Since BooMan asked, I suppose I should provide something in the way of an answer," I was just poking a little bit back. Don't read into it. It was just some shit between friends.

"Of course, one does wonder why you need to quote Lincoln to indicate something that has been patently obvious to all of us for the last 40 years"

One does wonder why I would need to quote Lincoln to indicate something so obvious to all of us. A good point. It's interesting that something so clear has been rendered, through some strange magic, opaque to all of the celebrated pundits and all of the well paid Democratic strategists.

I have no answer other that to write that Lincoln said it well. Why not use his words when they fit situation?

"The premise you offer, however, seems to have escaped your preferred candidate, who has offered up his birth certificate and has decided he will sacrifice the netroots to indicate how macho he is. At least twice, he has decided he will give in to placate the opposition, which seems totally to oppose your point."

Huh? Do you know me? Considering how your comment began, that would surprise me. Nevertheless, if you do, tell me the story about how the panda posts came about. It's actually relevant to the issue at hand. I'm interested in your take on it. Maybe I should start doing them again. Let me know.

So, remind me again, why we should vote for Obama

Seriously, not my job. The dude has plenty of money, so maybe he'll send some outreach workers your way. If not, send him an email asking for a sales pitch. I try to avoid that sort of shit myself, but if you're into that kind of thing, knock yourself out.

Obama wants this spying power? The Repubs are nearly unanimous in wanting to GIVE Obama spying this spying power?

Does someone see something wrong in this? How come everyone's analysis keeps avoiding the obvious? Who actually gets the power? What have they been doing to lobby for that power?

Fudgelady, who is going to be satisfied? Who gets the power? Who has the power to push this legislation through?

Cowardice in the face of whom? Bush, who has no power among the voters, or the Republicans, who are heading towards the biggest drubbing in decades?

Who wins with the passage of this bill? A little structural analysis here. Qui bono? Why is everyone incapable of pointing to the obvious?