There are two major issues I’m concerned with, getting the country back from the Neo-Cons and having an aggressive Democratic Party that works towards that end.  They say that propriety is more about the perception of propriety than anything else and, as far as I’m concerned, my perception of Nancy Pelosi is that she’s a disaster… an old school back room hack who seems to have an all give, no take relationship with the White House.  The Democrats need to clean house and do something about this millstone and her near obsessive crusade to take ALL forms of Republican accountability “off the table”.

I just got this in an email. Great timing - Pelosi and Reid lead the Democrats caving in on FISA and Nancy immediately sends out a self-congratulatory email looking for more money.

And this isn’t the first time this has happened.

What the hell is wrong with you people?

Greetings, I am agnostic. Senator Obama needs to understand that my Bible is the United States Constitution and I have thirteen commandments, not ten. They are known as “The Bill of Rights” and I firmly believe in and will defend all thirteen including the first, second, and fourth amendments.  I own and carry a handgun. I will not side with the left on this issue any more than I will side with Bush on the Patriot Act. I want it abolished! On some issues, there is just no room for compromise.

Thank You!

You are absolutely right Heather. I am SO not voting for John McCain. However; I worry about this “Let’s cooperate with the Republicans” attitude of Obama’s. On some issues, I will not budge one inch to either side. Maybe it is time for an independent. Unfortunately, there’s no one running who I consider to be a viable option. Sure wish Hillary had won the nomination. At least she has a spine.

I’m with you, Mike. This two-party system just isn’t working.

I am in agreement with Annette. Please keep me posted on who are the Real Democrats and who are the Republicrats. I will not support the latter. I think if everyone follows this simple rule, they will change their tune mighty quick. Just STOP donating money to any Democrat who supports legislation which deviates from the Constitution and vote them out at the very next opportunity.

I am highly upset with Nancey Pelosi for her SEXIST behavior and allowing it to continue. I am also planning not to waste my vote just because of the DNC --- IT IS TIME FOR A CHANGE: Brazel, Obama, Pelosi, and the TWO PARTY BS. I will continue to help Hillary pay down her debt.

PEACE OUT

See you all in Denver
Hillary 08

I am with you Theresa.I voted for Hillary on Super Tuesday. I am a 49 year old white male who is a devout liberal except for my right to defend myself and my family by any means necessary. I would have to side with Jeb Bush on this issue. 

Please elaborate on why you call Pelosi Sexist. I don’t understand. She has certainly done a lot of things that I am not at all happy with; but Sexist? I don’t get it. She’s a woman.

Goodbye Democracy; Hello Dictatorship!!! In my opinion, we had better do something while we still can.

Thanks for the update on FISA Jim. I knew I was right to support Hillary for President. Too bad the pundits didn’t agree. If I had the power, I would fire every last one of them for the hatchet job they did on her. I promise I won’t forget it!

Maybe Harry read our comments just before he voted. HEE-HEE!

I agree wholeheartedly with Steven however, one thing we all need to remember is the Democrats do not have a substantial majority in the Senate; where most of the “Move America Forward” legislation gets tied up by the Republicans with the help of traitors like Joe Lieberputz. He is the first one we should throw out on his duff first chance we get!! Listen Up Connecticut!!

I would point out to those who will still vote for Obama, that he is not nominated yet. How about a rally to get Hillary in? I won’t vote for him, or McCain. Who else is there?

Elaine, I share your frustration, but that would be guaranteed to sink what little (in my opinion) chance the Dems have of actually winning (they’re already working hard to blow it on things like FISA) and might even take down some “real” Democrats.

William: Utah is a solidly Republican (dare I say nearly Fascist?) state. The fact that something’s “going around” there almost in itself guarantees its untruth, given the level of [dis]honesty we see in Republicans. I have no facts other than these, but since the Republicans have all but eliminated the tax, doubling it probably wouldn’t amount to much for those affected, anyway.

I agree with most everything you say except that it took Democratic congresspeople to allow this to happen.  My congress person is Gabrielle Giffords, a freshman Dem., from a conservative district. I’ve told her what I think of this vote; I’m very upset about her tossing the 4th Amendment under the bus.

As Ed points out, it’s really the people in the House who made FISA happen, and there’s a clear Democratic majority there.

Mike, if you haven’t already read it, you might enjoy Sam Harris’s Letter to a Christian Nation. If you’re a hopeless heathen like I am, The God Delusion or God is Not Great might be the ticket.

I currently have a conservative (with religious underpinnings) idealogue for representative - I rarely even bother to write him - who unfortunately is retiring. I say unfortunately because the lady who very nearly beat him last time is running again. But his replacement in this strongly Republican district is at least not a nut case (yet). Fortunately, both our senators voted against the FISA bill, though I don’t know if they voted to support the filibuster.

I understand the right-wing attack machine, and the Dems are right to be scared of it: IT WORKS! I’m not an optimist about this, and I think that even if you’re right about the 70%, the attack machine is going to change many of them, no matter what the Dems do. My point is that the Republicans know what they want, and do it, consequences be damned. And they haven’t done badly at all pursuing that; in fact, they have essentially conducted a revolution which it would take Dem Congresses and presidents decades to undo, assuming Dems could maintain control that long.
Our Dem “representatives,” on the other hand, keep going for “bipartisanship” and compromise. To the Republicans, compromise means “you give me everything I want, and I’ll give you nothing except maybe (if you’re good) some sort of window dressing to hide behind.” FISA is only the latest of such “compromises.” The Dems never learn (an influx of cash from the same lobbyists bribing the Republicans certainly helps “grease the wheels” of the betrayal, if I can mix metaphors).
The Dems ARE WEAK, but not in the way they fear to be shown. When they gain control, but proceed at a leisurely pace (where they proceed at all) as if they have forever; Clinton obediently appointed ancient people to the Supreme Court, while both Bushes appointed young neo-Nazis who will be with us for decades to come. This is not to slight justice Ginsberg, who I admire, but when she retires, you can bet President McCain will have some 40-year old right-wing hack to replace her, and even if the Dems control the Senate, the nomination will speed through with minimal unpleasantness.
To your earlier point: I like Hillary, but I really think Obama was right: if she won, things just wouldn’t change that much. Bill was very conservative; his presidency was more that of a moderate Republican (before they became extinct) than a real “liberal,” even though he was constantly accused of being one.

Sorry Mike; I’m old, angry, and disgusted, and I just don’t see it changing. You say the American people are smart, but I have to disagree. This goes back at least to 1968, when some one asked who he was voting for replied “Johnson, if he runs; otherwise, I’m voting for Wallace.” I see no hope for a nation where one week the president’s approval rating goes up, even though he’s been just as arrogantly dishonest and incompetent then as he was the previous week when it was low. I realize our polls are often flawed or even dishonest, but it’s hard for me to understand how any nation composed of even moderately intelligent and informed people could vote nearly 50% for some one so obviously lazy, ignorant, dishonest, and proud of all three in 2000, and - even more incredibly - in 2004. I happen to think the Repubs stole the election in 2000, and I understand that there is strong evidence they did the same in 2004 (and why not? no one really protested too much the first time), but the fact that it was even close enough for there to be a chance to steal it, that there was any doubt at all who would win from the moment the first vote was cast, says everything I need to know about the much-touted “wisdom of the American people” pundits are always blathering about. On another topic on this blog, writers objected to the use of the word “dirtbags” to describe some Republican fat-cat donors because they felt the crude language would turn off “independents and swing voters.” And - much as I hate to admit it - they’re absolutely right. Americans in overwhelming numbers seem unoffended by lies, torture, mass murder, destruction of the constitution, sale or giveaway of the nation to corporate malefactors, at least compared to how they feel if some one says a “bad” word. And, despite the childish and vicious - not to mention dishonest - name-calling campaigns by Repubs over the last few years, these “swing voters” obviously haven’t been offended enough to swing from the Repubs to the Dems.

In a society of ignorant people with simplistic world views, those who admit that something other than black and white, pure good and pure evil exists - something that true liberals are wont to do - suffer a HUGE, HUGE disadvantage from the get-go. Those who can reduce an incredibly complex issue to a catchy, three-word slogan will almost always humiliate the “pointy-head” who tries to explain complexity to an unappreciative and largely anti-intellectual audience, and - even if the live audience listens - the six o’clock news will cover it as they did Bill Clinton’s confrontation with Chris Wallace: not that a politician responded with indignant, but reasonable arguments to a transparently fabricated charge of responsibility for 9/11, and this is what he said, and this part is accurate, this is a stretch (and this is why). No, the coverage said “Clinton lost his cool,” “Clinton went ballistic,” with barely a word about what he said, or even why he was angry.

Sorry, but I don’t know how to turn it around. I feel like some one standing on the railroad tracks trying to stop the 100-mile per hour bullet train by physical force. I had hope that electing Dems to Congress would slow it at least, and that Obama might even be able to change it, though - based on the above - I never thought either he or Hillary had much chance of winning (not to mention certain other characteristics each has which won’t usually be mentioned to pollsters, but strongly influence a lot of people’s votes), but I feel Obama has surrendered before the election has even gotten started, and the Dems in Congress have been an embarrassment.