One ringy dingy too many

[archenemy]

Senate committee clears way for vote on NSA wiretap program

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- On a party-line vote, the Republican-majority Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday approved a White House-backed bill to formally legalize the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program, clearing the way for floor consideration in the coming weeks.

 

At the same time, the committee blocked Democratic amendments aimed at curbing the reach of the program.

 

The bill, written by Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and agreed to by the White House after lengthy negotiations, would allow -- but not force -- President Bush to submit the secret and controversial NSA program to a special court to determine if the overall program is constitutional.

 

Bush has promised to do that if the bill is approved by Congress without substantial changes.

 

If the court determines the program is not constitutional, the legislation allows the administration to modify the program and resubmit it to the court. --From CNN Congressional Producer Ted Barrett (Posted 12:08 p.m.)

from here

[olyclimber]

And in another developement, the Republican-majority Senate Judiciary Committee creating a program to allow criminals to arrest themselves and send themselves to prison without parole. The program will be optional, and will feature a fast track for white collar criminals.

[olyclimber]

hahahahahhahahaaa

[archenemy]

Hell, I'd be the only one left at the office.

[catbirdseat]

If the Republicans lose their majority in Congress, the proverbial substance will hit the fan at supersonic speed. It would be great fun to watch as all the skeletons fall out of the closet at once.

[archenemy]

I would pay to see that.

[catbirdseat]

I would pay to see that.

Vote to see that.

[Crux]

I would pay to see that.

Vote to see that.

[tivoli_mike]

I would pay to see that.

Vote to see that.

 

vote early and often

[archenemy]

I'll vote when a woman runs for President.

[kevbone]

Hillary will run and probably win.

[JayB]

If the Republicans lose their majority in Congress, the proverbial substance will hit the fan at supersonic speed. It would be great fun to watch as all the skeletons fall out of the closet at once.

 

This makes a ton of sense. Clearly if the Democrats had strong, factual evidence to implicate republican lawmakers in illegal or scandalous activity, they'd take pains to suppress any hint of either prior to the mid-term elections, just to make the race to secure the congress that much tougher, and so that they could delight in breaking the news in the midst of the-always-heavily-watched committee meetings, rather than doing things the easy way and airing the information via press conferences or leaks to the press.

 

"We've got information that will bring down the administration and restore our control of Congress, but by God, we're going to make both the people and the press work HARD to pry it out of us. If they're not paying attention to the minutes of sub-committee meetings, that may or may not occur depending upon whether or not we actually win the election without the assistance of this massive scandal, then they just don't deserve to know!"

 

[cj001f]

This makes a ton of sense.

Of course it does JayB! The political process is entirely transparent!

[ClimbingPanther]

Hillary will run and probably win.

 

Dude, kevbone just said something coherent AND likely true!

Way to go man, keep it up!

 

I'm a little apprehensious (sp?), but as someone who's lost confidence in our current president, I guess she couldn't be THAT much worse, right?

[JayB]

This makes a ton of sense.

Of course it does JayB! The political process is entirely transparent!

 

I see. Now that the genius of the "keep the explosive scandal that will devastate your opponents quiet until after the election" strategy is apparent to me, it's equally clear who the political mastermind behind the Democratic party's stunning electoral triumphs since 1999 has been. One of our very own.

[selkirk]

Hillary will run and probably win.

 

Hillary will run and probably get nominated by the Dems.

 

Then she'll be blow out the water by a somewhat moderate Republican.

 

The first women president will almost certainly have to be Republican.

[archenemy]

I vote for Joan London.

[Crux]

Congressional oversight is a necessary and sufficient condition for the exposure and censure of the alleged abuses committed by Republicans.

 

Congressional oversight will exist if and only if Democratic representatives fill a majority of seats in Congress.

 

If Democratic representatives fill a majority of seats in Congress after the midterm elections, then here will be Congressional oversight.

 

Therefore, if Republicans lose enough seats in Congress during the midterms, alleged abuses will be subject to oversight and Republcans consequently held accountable.

 

Given that our federal courts have already specified the criminal nature of some of those allege abuses in recent decisions, it is reasonable to conclude the shit will hit the fan -- to paraphrase the assertion made by CBS.

 

.

[lI1|1!]

The first women president will almost certainly have to be Republican.

 

i was actually thinking this to myself earlier today. maggie thatcher and angela merkel were/are both conservatives.

[ScottP]

I vote for Patsy Stone

[Crux]

I'll vote when a woman runs for President.

Rationale?

[JayB]

Congressional oversight is a necessary and sufficient condition for the exposure and censure of the alleged abuses committed by Republicans.

 

Congressional oversight will exist if and only if Democratic representatives fill a majority of seats in Congress.

 

If Democratic representatives fill a majority of seats in Congress after the midterm elections, then here will be Congressional oversight.

 

All of which explains the Democrat's otherwordly reticence vis-a-vis the staggering scandals that their entrepid volunteer intel analysts have unearthed via collective electronic seance. "Psssst. SssssssssHHHHHH!!! Keep that shit quiet until AFTER the elections...."

 

Maybe you can keep busy drafting a list of TV execs that you'd like to see fined and imprisoned for airing docu-dramas that you disagree with until the said hearings get underway.

[underworld]

I'll vote when a woman runs for President.

Rationale?

 

because it makes sense to judge a candidate based on gender alone.

[archenemy]

I'll vote when a woman runs for President.

Rationale?

One ding a lingy too many

[StevenSeagal]

All of which explains the Democrat's otherwordly reticence vis-a-vis the staggering scandals that their entrepid volunteer intel analysts have unearthed via collective electronic seance. "Psssst. SssssssssHHHHHH!!! Keep that shit quiet until AFTER the elections...."

 

Perhaps the democrats believe it will be easier to expose scandals when the current government propaganda machine has been neutered and a balance in power in the government has been restored. At the moment, anything critical of government policy is immediately and aggressively dismissed as "liberal hysteria", "sour grapes", and "anti-American rhetoric".

 

It would also be political suicide to pursue scandals just before elections, wouldn't it? If the dems did that, you don't suppose the Republican reaction would be to accuse them of playing politics in an election year? At the moment, the democrats best move will be to simply be quiet and allow the Republicans to hang themselves with their own threadbare accusations of anti-Americanism, et.al, coupled with the shortcomings of their policies. It would also be a great help if the Democrats would, for the first time, start elaborating to the public exactly HOW they intend to do a better job than the current administration - or do they even have a plan?-- and knock off the pessimism and whining. American voters respond to optimism, which is why Clinton and Reagan got 2 terms.