FISA and Immunity is going to make me leave the Dems.

[Stoic]

I know. Who cares. I'm listed as a "Democratic Activist" in the voter database. I was a Dean Meet-up coordinator here in Maryland and volunteer in Iowa for the Dean campaign. I went to Ohio on election day for Kerry. I've given thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates and give $50 a month to the DNC (at least, until Howard Dean is no longer running it). Until this year, I was a regular volunteer for the local Democratic party. I'm an officer in a local Democratic club and designed and run their website.

I have been a Democrat for all of my life and have voted Democratic consistently for 34 years since I turned 18 and could vote.

But if the FISA bill passes with immunity for the telecoms, I'm seriously considering switching my voter reg to Independent. Oh, I'll vote for Obama, even though he sold us out over FISA and I will still support, donate and volunteer for true progressive Democratic candidates like Donna Edwards, but the Party can go to hell if they weasel this one through.

Oh, and Steny Hoyer and any Maryland congressman can expect my active participation, etc. in their defeat when they run for re-election.

I believe the Republican Party is on it's way to oblivion and evidently, the Dems are trying to follow them off the cliff.

God, this sucks.

[John Q. Citizen]

1. You aren't alone.

[ThomWV]

40. I made the decision yesterday - this one was the deal breaker for me.

The majority of Democrats in the Senate turned their backs on the Constitution today and they did so knowing full well what they were doing. Fuck every god damned one of them. I will not support a Party that does not support me.

[John Q. Citizen]

43. Actually it was a minority of Dems who voted against the amendments today.

The majority voted for the amendments.

In the house, a majority of Dems voted against the FISA bill.

[ThomWV]

44. Sorry, my mistake, I missed it by 2 non-traitors, or was that 1?

[John Q. Citizen]

45. The Dems vote about 2 to 1 for the Dodd Feingold amendment to strip immunity.

something like 32 or 34 Dems voted for it.

[katty]

57. me too - no representation AT ALL from Dems - I'm done

[Political Heretic]

42. But you're close.

:eyes:

[leftofthedial]

2. there are hundreds of thousands of us.

[defendandprotect]

12. ...and . . .?

[leftofthedial]

23. I don't think the Democratic Party really cares about losing the votes of their base

There are only hundreds of thousands of us, maybe a few million. They think they've triangulated us into irrelevancy. They believe they can safely take our votes for granted, or at least a huge majority of them. After all, what is a real liberal, old-school Democrat going to do? Vote for McCain? Plus, we've always been such idealists that we can't imagine not voting.




Until now.



I think many liberals will hold their noses and vote for Obama, but I think millions of us will no longer vote for FISA-immunity-illegal-wiretapping-illegal-occupation-supporting "democrats." I wouldn't count the gains in Congress before they hatch. Unless I see something of value from the Democratic Party coming out of the convention, I will not vote this year. The candidates in my state and districts are all "new Democrat/DLC/blue dogs." Might as well vote for a repuke, which ain't gonna happen. Obama doesn't interest me. He was my fifth choice or so at the start of the primaries and has now actually fallen in my estimation.

[defendandprotect]

48. Agree you can certainly look at it that way . . . voter suppression . . .

When you have the Democratic Party deeply infiltrated by corporate control over two decades

and more, the interests will, IMO, extend to just that --- suppressing liberal/progresive

participation. Certainly they are doing nothing to appeal to the 82 million eligible

voters who have lost confidence in voting.

HOWEVER, they will not want to lose the MONEY that this base represents ---

they just don't want the interference.



As the DLC has moved the party to the right, it has produced positions on issues and

put legislators in place who are more concerned with protecting corporations and

increasing their hold on power than working in the interests of citizens.


And you're pretty much describing where I am . . . "hold my nose and vote for Obama" . . .

I had been hoping that he would be a candidate that I could be very enthusiastic about.

Sad.


And obviously this . . .

The candidates in my state and districts are all "new Democrat/DLC/blue dogs."

is the work of the traitorous DLC.

[LynneSin]

32. I'd think you'd be suprised that your number is a bit bloated

Don't go by what is happening here at DU vs. what actually happens in real life.

[leftofthedial]

46. you don't think that hundreds of thousands of the 72 million-plus registered Democrats

in the US are "far left" enough to oppose the current FISA fiasco or are further left than the DLC?

Interesting.

I'd guess the real number is more like 10 million.

[LynneSin]

47. You put alot of assumption that all democrats are exactly like what posts here

Because I could find 20+million voters who vote democrat and wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about.

Seriously, I learned this during Howard Dean's run for president. I swore up and down the guy was going to win based on the popularity of him throughout the internets. Then he tanked and I realized that a vast majority of voters really aren't that politically incline or get involved with internet groups like DU. But they will pay attention to all the slandering shit that goes on like what happened with Kerry in 2004 (re Swift Boats).

And BTW, the DLC once tried to list Obama as a member and he asked that his name was removed.

I'm pissed about the immunity thing but then something dawned on me. We start throwing lawsuits against the Telecoms and someone is going to have to foot the bill for the Telecom's legal service, which is us. And since my gas, electric and a host of other things are going thru the roof, something that real voters who don't bother with the internet to get their political information care about, the last thing I want is to be the cause of another service going thru the roof.

The rewrite has enough protection for in the future but what pisses me off more is we got this shithead in the White House, what are we going to do to prevent McSame getting elected and doing more for of the Same.

Remember, no matter how you vote in 2008 you will either have McCain or Obama.

[leftofthedial]

51. I bet you could find *50 million* registed Democrats who wouldn't know what FISA is.

Much less agree with me on it's importance.

That's my point.

The "democrats" completely do not care about the left-most quarter or so of the hitherto Democratic bell curve. They always believed that by positioning themselves between us and the fascists, they effectively "owned" our votes and did not need to earn them. Through the non-opposition to Reagan and George the First, through the repuke-lite Clinton years, through the last seven-plus years of unmitigated co-conspiratorial hell, the "democrats" just moved relentlessly farther and farther away from their base. Trying to expand the right side of their "bell curve," they became more and more and more exactly like what used to be considered the radical right-wing fringe. Their "Centrism" has become "fascism." (Never mind that the centrist strategy has been an abject political failure.) They abandoned the poor, the environment, workers, the country's infrastructure and every element of the New Deal except for Social Security. Now they've abandoned the Constitution itself. They may still be between me and the fascists, but now both "democrats" and repukes are tiny little dots on a distant totalitarian horizon, so which one might or might not be slightly nearer to me is completely irrelevant.

Recent votes, beginning with the PATRIOT Act and the IWR, and culminating today with the effective elimination of the Fourth Amendment, have crystalized the truth for me. For the first time since the mid-70's, I won't be pushing a single "D" button on the voting machine in November. In fact, I won't be pushing a single candidate button at all. After 35 years as a loyal member, the Democratic Party in 2008 no longer represents me AT ALL.

And I'm not alone.

I'm still a Democrat. It just doesn't mean what it used to mean.

Oh. And thanks to you I now have the guiding principle of American justice going forward. "Let's not hold any corporation accountable for anything ever. After all, they might --GASP!!-- raise their prices!"

[LynneSin]

71. That last statement you totally misread me

First there was alot of pressure on the telecoms to do this since it was done so closely after 9/11, which at the time the level of support for Bush was still above 50%. Yes, it was wrong what they did but on paper they felt it was the right thing to do.

Second, I do believe in holding corporations accountable; however, we are in a very very vulnerable position with this economy. Personally I think this bill will go to the courts and be decided, it's the best place to be done NOT in Congress. But yes, it does concern me that there could be something else that may trickle back down to the consumers with another escalated utility skyrocketing in price.

This may sound almost defeastists on my end but at this point I just want to get thru these next couple of months with Congress just doing two things only: Making sure we don't start a war with Iran and ensuring that any further judicial nominations get postponed until AFTER Bush is out of office. At this point I have very little expectations, even if our congress did grow a bit of a spine Bush would veto everything we did anyways.

Personally, I think this administration was doomed the moment we allowed John Ashcroft out of committee. I find irony that it's Russ Feingold who is very vocal about the FISA bill when personally I still blame him for this mess. Ashcroft was our very first test to show Bush he had to work with congress and thanks to Feingold's attitude that "The pREsident should have the staff he wants to work with" we got stuck with John Ashcroft, who was the architect of the Patriot Act. Perhaps if we showed our balls back then and all 12 Judicial Senators stuck together instead of just 11, we would have had a tie and his nomination would have died in committee but instead we told George we'd give him whatever he wanted. Thanks Russ.

[Bake]

64. "Someone is going to have to foot the bill for the Telecom's legal service"

That's the point. Potential civil liability CAN force a corporation to consider and/or reconsider the possible COSTS of illegal actions, just like the threat of product liability lawsuits can keep dangerous products off the market. The bill passed today gives the telcoms a free "pass" on civil liability. So they don't have to consider that anymore, they can just go ahead and give George anything he wants.

Since the cost of legal services and payment of damages can be passed along to the end-user/consumer, do you suggest that we just ban all civil lawsuits?

Bake

[mikelgb]

3. thank you

I look forward to seeing Hoyer go down in flames, I sadens me so that our house causus voted this piece of shit Repub to me their majority leader, dumb fucks

[defendandprotect]

13. Hoyer has been around a long time doing a lot of damage over the years . .

[bdamomma]

33. his constituents should vote him out.

[TahitiNut]

4. We imprison more of our people than any other nation on earth ...

... and we not only turn a blind eye to war crimes but our legislature invests HUGE amounts of time agonizing over protecting the HUGEST corporations from any liability for their part in violating our Constitutionally-explicit civil liberties.

The Congress has the time to debate and squirm and maneuver endlessly over this blatant violation of the rights of the people ... but doesn't have the time to impeach.

Talk about completely FUCKED UP priorities! :grr:


As a life-long independent liberal, I've understood the conflict with conscience that partisanship presents for a long, long time. I eschew "brand loyalty" and eschew the corruption of brand integrity that comes from an insatiable appetite for market share.

[ClassWarrior]

5. So what's your alternatives? The Rape-Publican Party? Total political impotence?

Feh.

Thank you for your concern.

NGU.

[Stoic]

6. What part of...

"support, donate and volunteer for true progressive Democratic candidates" didn't you get, (explicative deleted). You can continue to be the Establishment Dems bitch, but I'm not.

[debbierlus]

7. I care. Don't stop fighting. Change is a slow thing.

I am with you. The dems are another wing of a corporatist government.

That is why we need people like you who see the truth. It is very hard to keep fighting, but that is what we must do. Work to elect true progressives and fight back.

We must ACCEPT the truth of our party before we can change it.

[defendandprotect]

10. We don't have a lot of time --- we're knee deep in fascism now . . .

Global Warming is reaching knock-out states -- re our own species and re the planet's survival.

[madokie]

8. where're you going

to the re:puke:s, I doubt that

[defendandprotect]

9. Many share your concerns . . . we have no power over this party . . .

and therefore no power over the platform or the candidate ---

That said, we do have power and we're going to have to decide how disillusioned Democrats

can best work together to gain control over the party before it really is too late.

That's a subject that has to be discussed if we want to protect our nation and deliver

our citizens from fascism.

[Individualist]

14. The only power we have is our vote

Few elected representatives listen to the people anymore. That was a lesson well learned with all the phone calls we made, marches, and protests prior to the IWR vote.

As long as voters continue using the only power they have to elect and re-elect enablers, nothing will change.

[defendandprotect]

49. Well . . . if you remember . . .

some of the great changes of the 1990's. . .

I remember Vacal Havel -- Czechoslovakia -- talking about the "power of the powerless" . . .

and I think we saw the truth of it at that time.


As I've mentioned, they may wish to ignore us, but they are interested in the money ---

a lot of money went to Obama this year from Democrats ---


A lot of money went to the party ---

I'd suggest we get some strong rope attached to those dollars ---



Additionally, we have to have IRV voting --- in that way we can vote for third party

candidates, if we wish --- and not have to worry about those votes working to help

a Repug ---


One of the problems I think we have here is that while so many of us recognize that

we have no leverage over the party and the candidate, too few are discussing ways to

to gain leverage. We have to have a Plan B . . . it's silly not to!

I'm sure other Democrats would have good ideas if they began to think about it!

[LSK]

11. Im sorry but theres nowhere to go

We are stuck with 2 choices:

1 Party does the wrong thing 100% of the time

1 Party does the wrong thing 50% of the time

Thats the choice we have.

[defendandprotect]

16. You have choices for action . . .

We need to rid the party of the DLC ---

and blue dogs --- and stop their putting up more blue dogs to run against

more liberal/progressive Dem candidates ---

Rid the party of Pelosi, Reid and Hoyer ---

and any more like them coming up ---


We need public financing of campaigns ---

IRV voting ---

If we simply had IRV voting, you'd have some place to go without worrying that you're

electing a Repug ---


and I think Democracy.com had it this week when they advocated raising money for OBAMA

and holding it until we see changes that we want.


All of these ideas --- and more --- need discussion --- but rarely do we see conversations

here about how to gain control over the party. We're making a lot of phone calls and

mailing a lot of e-mail, but it's money and voters uniting which gets their attention.

[berni_mccoy]

15. Your choice is Obama or McCain, Democrats or Repubs.

[Greyskye]

24. Didn't actually READ the OP, did you?

Let's hear it for short-attention-spans. :eyes:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

17. I feel you. :(

I have been big D voter since I first registered to vote at 19. The last seven years have been hard to watch, but the past few years have been unbearable. The capitulation, and now, the collaboration -- it turns my stomach. :(

I have a few Democratic heros left who continue to fight the good fight and inspire me, but I have been on the fence for a few years now about my party designation, and I think it may be time to reevaluate my choice.

If I do go Independent, I will make a point of faxing Chairmen Dean, my representatives, and other Party muckie-mucks with my new voter registraion and a leter on exactly WHY I made that decision. They need to know there are consequences for shit like the FISA cave.

It sucks, doesn't it. :hug:

[merh]

18. The illegal monitoring began within the first months of GWB's 1st term,

they began before 9/11 and ARE NOT COVERED by the bill.

Please remember that.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

19. And remember that no one (even the Most Progressive Democrats) mentioned this on the Senate Floor.

[merh]

29. Oh sure, tip their hands

They want to be able to go after the bastards, they just need the majority and the DOJ in the hands of a reasonable person to have that happen.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

39. What majority? We have a good majority in the House and what has that meant?

[merh]

41. Hell the house is full of DLCers, my critter is a DLCer, if it weren't

for his fighting for us after Katrina, I'd have to dislike him because of his votes that are so tight with this admin (on non-Katrina things).

I can dream, can't I - I don't think very many of the congresscritters have read this bill, they get a hold of a sound bite and rip it to shreds.

[bdamomma]

36. what do you mean?

no mention on the floor about wiretapping before 9/11? does anyone else think the Repigs were wiretapping the Dems illegally too, just like us?

[Leopolds Ghost]

66. It began under Clinton. The monitoring infrastructure cost $$ billions to install. Wake up.

Mikulski and Clinton were architects of this program.

Bush I first proposed it before the computing power
existed to wiretap everyone yet.

Orwell never dreamed of what Obama actively supports.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

20. I am in complete agreement with you except that the nails in the coffin started for me almost a year

ago, last August. That's when the "Democratic" leadership brought FISA to the floors of the Senate and House. They have control of the horizontal and vertical and they chose to do it. That was the next to the last nail. The final nail is being hammered in very deftly today.

[redqueen]

21. Perhaps we should have a Liberal Democratic party here.

[Phillycat]

26. We do. It's called Canada.

Bring your mittens!

[mdmc]

22. The GOP is strong

Their message "we got ours and will fight to protect it".

The dems might be better off going the way of the whigs.

I would like an independent coalition to replace the dems. This IC would advocate for free health care and education, and all the things that the Greens want.

The GOP+DLC have a pretty close relationship. The CONS and lefty third parties have a hard time breaking through.

[mike_c]

25. my watershed moment was the IWR....

I remain utterly committed to democratic ideals, but the democratic party leadership has lost my support until the party realigns itself with those principles.

[cascadiance]

27. Nader should run on "Put in Instant Runoff Votings Dems, and I'm out"...

If Ralph Nader FOCUSED on one issue and that is getting instant runoff voting the law across the land for federal offices, that would do a LOT of good, and if he then pulled out so that the Dems could win in the interim, in the long run, it would hold these FAKE so-called progressive Dems' feet to the fire that would have to risk losing to indpendents without the stranglehold of the two party system.

Nader, PLEASE don't try to reach the unreachable and not accomplish anything. Focus on this one issue and you can do something that we forever would be grateful for in the future!

[defendandprotect]

52. Instant Run Off Voting is one avenue of gaining leverage over the party and

candidates ---

Obama also raked in a ton of money from citizens --- there should be some strings on that
money to keep the party and candidate in line.

I will have to look and see if there is an organization trying to move the issue of IRV
voting --- certainly the Dems are against it because it does give Democrats other options!

However, keep in mind that Gore WON in 2000 according to the press recount -- and they
emphasized any way you count it.

And Florida specifics to think about . . .

300,000 "DEMOCRATS" voted for Bush
More than 3,000 "butterfly ballot votes" designed by Democrats went to Buchanan ---
More than 6,000 votes went to Libertarians and Socialists ---
And, more than 600 "illegal" military ballots were counted for Bush --

We had a GOP fascist rally to stop the counting of votes in Miami-Dade Country with
no interference by police ---

And Supreme Court -- Gang of 5 -- decision to put Bush in Oval Office

What did any of that have to do with Nader?




PS: Did you happen to see ...

Nader on C-span the other day --- it was a 15/20 min interview --- he was amazing!

When you watch, it really makes you wonder why in the hell our own Democrats can't

say these things!! And, for anyone who doesn't understand his complete involvement

in our political history and political information over the past decades, I think

it would cure their confusion.

[cascadiance]

56. Nader is right on so many things. It's just that his strategy of fighting the system ...

... that troubles me and I don't think is ultimately going to work.

I really think he needs to take a step back and stop just being a "protest" vote that could potentially give us McCain for four years, and focus on a more narrow goal that he perhaps can help us accomplish (much as I know he wants to help us solve many of the other issues on his mind). But the system needs fixing first. Being a one issue candidate on IRV would hopefully perhaps help him win there where he might not trying to just "win" or be a protest vote in the presidential election.

He by himself can't take on the corporate elite as he so accurately characterizes them all. He needs to find some way of allying himself with people that can help him affect some change, and narrow the focus to something that could make a big difference.

IRV won't happen this election, but if one can force the Dems hands to enact it for subsequent elections, a BIG victory for the people will have been won. It is clear that the corporate Democrats are going to stand in the way of this, and the rest of them probably don't have much courage to start it on their own. So it's going to take someone like Nader to push it so high on the radar of the American people that it can't be avoided. I think if he focuses on that he can do something with that much like Gore has with putting a complicated issue like global warming on the table.

[defendandprotect]

63. It's not only that . . .

Nader provided the information and warnings of where all of this would lead us.
He wasn't alone of course -- Sen. George McGovern warned us of the attack on our civil rights.
But many don't understand how voluminous and in depth Nader's information is.
I'm trying to find his platform from 2000 -- it was personally his. He didn't run on
the Green Party Platform - his was more extensive. The platform was like a dream of
heaven --- he discused EVERYTHING you'd ever want to see discussed.

At the same time . . . I have to say that I think he, too, has been shocked at actually
looking this fascism in the face. You know, you can predict things --- and yet it's still
a shock!

Nader's usual methods of fight for citizens have been blocked ---
so he is rather left simply in the role of complainer --- or, as he chose to do -- candidate.

Needless to say, there's no way Nader will effect this election ---
and I think you can see from details of 2000, he was simply scapegoated.

Probably more than anyone else, Nader has informed us of the options of IRV voting --
way back --- and he has lawsuits which endeavor to improve and protect our elections.

Nader long ago spoke about corporate buy out of government as "corporatism" which is fascism.
Nader has always been involved with all human and civil rights --- no less than that.
I also thought that his alliance with the Green Party was a wonderful match.
The idea of a "spoiler" vote frightened the international Green Party.
Also, the Green Party has had to fight its own battles against Dem/Corporate take-over.
As far as I know, Nader has always worked with EVERYONE. And was welcomed by EVERYONE.
This smear of him has actually hurt all of us in ways I don't think many understand yet.


IRV won't happen this election, but if one can force the Dems hands to enact it for subsequent elections, a BIG victory for the people will have been won. It is clear that the corporate Democrats are going to stand in the way of this, and the rest of them probably don't have much courage to start it on their own. So it's going to take someone like Nader to push it so high on the radar of the American people that it can't be avoided.

Again, Nader has long been pushing this idea --
and I trust he is continuing. I will look around, including on his websites,
to try to see if there is any action group.

Re this . . .
I think if he focuses on that he can do something with that much like Gore has with putting a complicated issue like global warming on the table.


Keep in mind that during the 2000 candidacy, Gore barely mentioned Global Warming.
And, in fact, he was taken off even his populist comments by the DLC.
In listening to them he made a great mistake --- as Kerry also did in 2004.

Gore did a great job in bringing the issue now to the public . . .
but he didn't recommend we nationalize the oil industry -- nor even mention Electric Cars!
Lightbulbs are not going to do it.

See the movie . . . "Who Killed The Electric Car?" . .. your library probably has it.

What I'd like to see happen is people like Gore and Kucinich and others who understand the
catastrophe we're facing with GW join the Green Party ---

[defendandprotect]

68. HERE's information on IRV action groups . . .

This probably should be a separate thread . . .

Common Cause which has action groups in every state --

http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=880439


Instant Runoff Voting action group

http://www.instantrunoff.com/


The Center for Voting and Democracy

http://www.fairvote.org/index.php



Coalition for Instant Runoff Voting

http://cirv.org/

http://www.fairvote.org/activism/index.html

[robinlynne]

28. The ONLY bad thing about leaving the party is not being able to vote in the primaries,

which is REALLY important. that is how those sobs got into the senate.

[Pastiche423]

30. In most states

a voter can switch parties to vote in a primary, then switch back for the general.

That's what I did. I wanted to vote for a senatorial candidate to oust Gordo. I'll switch back to Independent next month.

[Lance_Boyle]

37. In NC, voters registered 'unafilliated' can choose which primary ballot

they receive - D, R, or I(ndependent). No need for registration switching. I've been registered "una" practically forever, since I don't want either party of corrupt baboons thinking it has a lock on my vote.

[Joe Fields]

31. When caring and active people, such as yourself are driven to this point,

then the party seriously needs to reconsider just what it does stand for. To me, this is a huge flashing red warning light. I am witnessing more and more of this, and I feel it myself. I won't equate it with a death in the family, but the feelings are quite similar.

[NattPang]

34. Where were you when Democrats voted for the Patriot Acts 1 & 2?

that is when we lost the constitution,
including the 4th Amendment.

You are a bit late leaving the party,
aren't you?

[defendandprotect]

53. What are you suggesting, that he leave RETROACTIVELY . . . ????

[bdamomma]

35. would changing to Independent help.

no matter what, we should not roll over for these SOB's no way am I going to.

[KoKo]

38. If many of us switched to "Independent" maybe our Party would listen to us?

I've thought about that.... Seeing how they are behaving, I will probably switch after November. I'll vote for Obama...but I realize that there wont be a "change" when a gang of 14-17 Democrats vote with the Repugs every time. Neither Hoyer nor Reid needed to push this bill before the Election.. That they did so means they don't expect any "change" and that the two Parties are now essentially the same in most respects.

I also got active in 2004... but, I could see the problems in my State Party who really frowned upon the activits while proporting to welcome them to "re-energize the Party. They underminded us more than they supported us.

It's been a sad time for many of us seeing what Election '06 has revealed...

[defendandprotect]

54. REGISTRATION numbers do have an impact on the parties . . .

probably someone else here could explain the ways and the impact ---

but if you register with a specific party --- Green or Libertarians, it will help them.

[spanone]

50. where ya goin?

it' my ONLY hope ...there needs to be a new party....but it's too late now

[defendandprotect]

55. It was always the dream of feminist leader Susan B. Anthony that women and labor would

come together --- sounds like a natural, doesn't it --- !!!

women . . . labor . . .

never happened.

[KoKo]

58. Well...they did for awhile...but then the Big Business destroyed Labor ....and

the "Women" sort of lost their way....although many did support Hillary. We see how that went.

I guess the OBAMA COALITION is the next new movement. :shrug:

[defendandprotect]

67. I never heard discussion . . .

of a new party with women and labor organizations ---

but, you're right . . .

the patriarchy quickly counter-attacks and women are now out in the world everywhere without

much benefit -- EXCEPT helping to keep their families afloat -- that equates to having more

power at the table of government or hierarchies.

Same for African-Americans and other people of color ---

Same for labor organizations which were hit in every way possible -- including with Mafia.


Everyone has been under attack in this backlash by the GOP in their sexist, race, homophobic

agenda --- their corporatist agenda.


They immediately deprived women of true political leadership -- and that's still true --

Just as they deprived African-Americans of leadership --

They refuse to permit leaders of opposition groups to even arise.


I would have loved to support a female for president ---

but it was impossible to support someone who is part of DLC leadership.


Sad to say but there are many women in Congress who haven't quite found themselves, IMO,

and too often play the male-power-game.

[Occam Bandage]

59. So, after 34 years, you have decided that the issue that will cause you to stop supporting

the Democratic party is that a narrow minority of Democratic Senators disagreed with you that your opinion on whether telecommunication corporations will have to field civil lawsuits regarding improper sharing of personal information in a government-sponsored program that was later found to have overstepped its Constitutional limits ought override the recent bill to return oversight to FISA.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. Then you don't really care about the constitution.

And I doubt you ever really did.

[Leopolds Ghost]

62. Do you? If you did you'd realize the penumbral right to privacy just got overturned

I laugh in the face of your jingoistic remark.

It's false even if you apply it to non-Dems.

"anyone who doesn't vote for the Dems doesn't care about the constitution...
because if they did, they'd support warrantless wiretapping like we do."

And oppose Roe, apparently, since that's also rooted in the penumbral
4th Amendment / 9th Amendment prohibition on what Obama and McCain
both support and pledge to do in office -- spy on you.

Or is your single issue something else?

[defendandprotect]

65. Interesting re the right to privacy . . .

I didn't even think of that --- and didn't notice anyone else commenting on it it!!!


And oppose Roe, apparently, since that's also rooted in the penumbral
4th Amendment / 9th Amendment prohibition on what Obama and McCain
both support and pledge to do in office -- spy on you.

[LVjinx]

69. People are knee-jerk defending this now. In time they might wake up. Unfortunately, too late.

[Leopolds Ghost]

61. It doesnt suck. Its a healthy cleansing, like an enema. I'll oppose anyone who supported this.

Easy for me to do since as a left-libertarian populist,
I stand with the Framers and oppose the party-based system.

But they still cater for my vote and solidarity against the "worse evil".

No solidarity with treason!

The supporters of this bill lost my vote or even quiet support forever.

They are traitors in a very literal sense.

Sorry, Obama. I no longer have any interest in 2008.

Throwing our bodies between the gears is what we have now.

(For those who wonder "how can you stand aside in the face of
such an historic opportunity?" I say: MLK would agree with me.)

[LVjinx]

70. "MLK would agree with me."

Considering he was a victim of government spying himself, I have no doubt that you're right.