The Dems DO NOT have full control of both houses! Wake up!

[loudsue]

This post is partially in response to what some of the D.C. war protest threads have been talking about.

To hear (a few) DUers continue to holler about what the Dems are, and are NOT, doing about the war, please remember this:

Senator Johnson is NOT back to work yet since his brain hemmorage. This brings the Dems down ONE vote of their majority in the Senate. So we currently have a senate with only 99 voting members. This makes it roughly 50 Dems, and 49 republicans.

Also, Joe LIEberman, and some of the DLCers, will vote with the republicans on many issues, but especially the war in Iraq, and possibly the (proposed) war in Iran. So, even if it was ONLY holy Joe that would vote against stopping the war, that would make the vote 49 Dems, 49 republicans, and...you guessed it... here would come Cheney to break the tie.

There are a few republicans who are leaning to go against the war, but for every republican who leans away from it, there are some DLCers who would lean back toward supporting the war.

On a side note: Joe LIEberman, also, WOULD NOT vote to impeach the Dictator-Tot in the White House. (I love that title....Dictator-Tot...got it from a post on another DU thread, but can't remember who said it! Whoever you are, I Love it! :hi: )

The reason I'm making a special post about this, is because it is VERY IMPORTANT that the mainstream media (even Bill Maher and Jon Stewart) pick up on this. But it's even more important that bloggers get it clear in their minds. We don't exactly want Americans to think we have the control over this situation that they INTENDED us to have, since the 2006 elections. We didn't get enough seats in the majority to pass much hard-hitting legislation, and WAY too few seats to override a presidential veto.

It's a small and subtle point, but the truth is, IT'S THE WHOLE POINT!

The Senate Dem leadership has been walking very softly about what they're willing to pursue, simply because there just aren't enough votes AVAILABLE to them, for them to go around arrogantly beating their chests.

And it is important that, even if joe six-pack doesn't get it (joe six-pack thinks Dems have "control" of congress..we DON'T), that at least DUers DO get it.

IOW, we're still not out of the woods on the congressional control of congress. The House is in fairly good shape, but the Senate majority is too narrow (and too tenuous) for the Dems to just rush in where even fools would fear to tread.

I went to the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) convention that was held in San Francisco in February. One of the talks that was given was entitled "Are We A Democracy Yet?", and it was lead by a panel of scientists who had looked at the election results around the country for the 2006 election. They concluded that, due to electronic voting machine programming and "glitches" AND disenfranchisement (that was a direct result of republican shenanigans), the Dems would have won ANOTHER +/- 20 SEATS in 2006.

The republicans are still controlling the message in the mainstream. Between the media, the electronic voting machines, the serious drive by the republicans to disenfranchise Dem voters (see the new U.S. attorney scandal), and the very tenuous majority in the Senate, Dems hands are pretty well tied, in reality.

Could Dems be fighting for more face time with the media to get their message to the masses? Hell yes! Could the Senate Dems be hammering harder on some of the more egregious and illegal actions of the republicans from the past 6 years, and forming more committees to investigate? Hell yes! We should be rubbing the republicans noses in every mess they've made, and make sure the illegal activities are communicated clearly through the press. And do we need to get Sibel Edmonds' case in front of committees in both the House & Senate? You betcha! Should the Dems at least START talking seriously about impeachment? Oh yes! There has been a mountain of evidence already that far too many laws have been broken.

The House has been doing a great job, and Waxman and Conyers are working what seems like 24/7 to do their part. I wish we had a whole party of LEADERS like them that would follow suit.

But at least Americans need to know that we didn't get enough of a majority in the Senate, AND that one of our Senators is out recovering from a brain hemmorage, and that right now, our hands are tied there. I wish the few DUers who keep trying to second guess what the Dems are doing would understand.

We may have possession of the ball, but we're still not playing on our home court, and the officials still have their money on the other guys.

(Ok... March Madness and all that. I couldn't help myself.)



loudsue

[ComerPerro]

1. thing is, the "landslide" people think took place in Nov 2006 never really happened on the scale

that they imagine.

[LSK]

3. I recall in Oct 06 that taking control of the Senate was a long shot

What is needed is another landslide in 2008. But getting impatient and slamming the barely in control Dems is counter-productive.

[ComerPerro]

6. but we barely have control, and even if we did there is a Repig President

[loudsue]

8. Exactly!

However, Bush's veto, should legislation ever pass far enough to get there, would sure be another nail in his coffin!

It's nice to think about!

:kick:

[loudsue]

7. My feelings, exactly.

We still need to hold their feet to the fire....after all, WE ARE "THE PEOPLE", and holding their feet to the fire is our JOB... but we can't slam them for not passing legislation they have no way to pass.

:kick:

[jaysunb]

21. Right ! it plays right into the hands of the MSM

and the morally bankrupt Repubs.

They've been on this little train since Nov. 8th : " Well, why haven't the Democrats _______ ?(fill in the blanks)since they're in charge."
So by the time 08 rolls around and we've had our hands tied by the " Empire " for 2 years, Democrats look like a bunch of weenies that can't get anything done.

Gotta tidy up all loose ends and frame the debate where people understand who's who, and what's really going on.

[loudsue]

28. That's what I've been noticing, too.

We have to keep the bigger picture in mind, and not let the idiot talking heads frame the issue that way down the road. And we know they certainly WILL, if we don't take control of it NOW!

I hope our stellar Dem presidential candidates will make a point of that while they're giving speeches around the country, and even those running for the Senate and the House in 2008. Our candidates have to be sure and nip the obfuscators in the bud.

:kick:

[sandnsea]

79. Look how close VA, MO and MT were

I don't think people are remembering that either. These Senators barely won. We've still got a lot of grassroots work to do in rural America.

[Pawel K]

87. But you have to admit it was quite a victory

I don't think most around here predicted how great it would go. We picked up what, over 30 house seats and we took the senate (keeping in mind the point of the op).

It will probably go a lot better in 08, we just have to make sure to pressure the dems to stop evoting.

[Joe Chi Minh]

89. You mean it was fraudulently minimised, don't you? Don't kid yourself it was not a landslide.

[LSK]

2. Filibuster = 60 votes

[loudsue]

5. And that is a big point. I doubt the Dems are inclinded to "go nuclear".

It was never a good idea for the republicans to do that, and it is wrong for the Dems, too.

:kick:

[The Doctor.]

30. And the MSM would crucify them if they did.

If it were the Republicans doing it, then it would be; "Republicans vote to eliminate obstructionism".
If Democrats it would be; "Democrats change law to gain more control".

There is no question the Dems have to walk on eggshells with the MSM, but that doesn't mean they can't hold a new 'Fairness Doctrine' above the MSM's collective heads.

For your perusal;
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Dr_eldritch/13

[loudsue]

35. That's a great idea, too. I think the Dems need to start dropping hints

about that.

It might even gain some traction from the masses. Given what we've seen of the media being so involved in the Plame case, and the media cheerleading us into war, that there may even be PUBLIC support for reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine.

:kick:

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Fairness doctrine

and break up of monopolies

[MiniMe]

69. Couldn't happen. Cheney would have to be a part of it, and I don't think

he would allow it to happen now.

[Robbien]

4. You only have to see that we have not yet passed one bill into law

to see that Dems control diddlysquat.

[loudsue]

11. And that is disheartening. The thing that is GREAT is that we have

been getting to see (Waxman & Conyers, in particular) waging some very telling investigations!

:kick::kick:

[LSK]

14. sometimes I think we need the definition of filibuster sticked to the top of GD

[AshevilleGuy]

17. Yes. That and "It Takes 67 Votes to Convict and Remove a President or VP!"

[loudsue]

31. LOL! You think it would help?

Nah. There would still be those who just wouldn't read it....

:kick::kick::kick:

[AshevilleGuy]

15. Whhat happened to minimum wage? I thought that was going to happen n/t

[Robbien]

33. No. It is weighed down with a bunch of taxcuts in the Senate

and even with all the giveaways to the wealthy, the bill is going nowhere.

[rockymountaindem]

9. No! This is eating away at my sense of betrayal and outrage!!!

I was so happy being mad! :sarcasm:

[loudsue]

13. That wasn't funny.

:rofl: Now, are you mad again? :hi:

:kick:

[rockymountaindem]

25. Don't tell *me* what's funny!

I'm ten times liberal-er than you. Can't you tell by my outrage???

[loudsue]

37. Ok. You're funny!

But I'm a brazillian times more liberal-er than YOU!!

:kick:

[rockymountaindem]

44. But how outraged are you? n/t

[loudsue]

48. Well, looking down thread

at posts #41 and #45, I don't guess I'm outraged enough.

:freak: Is it just me, or....?

[jaysunb]

10. I couldn't help myself either ( LOL) so

here ya go...K & R.

Good stuff...as per usual. :thumbsup:

[loudsue]

36. Thanks!

What a nice thing to say! :hug:

:kick:

[ClintonTyree]

12. I agree, every time I hear one of the talking heads on TV....

saying the Democrats are in control in Washington I want to scream. And every time they say it I immediately think of Joe LIEberman, the war mongering Republican from Connecticut. Nice going, Joe. I'm sure the people of Connecticut have a bit of buyer's remorse every time they see your Bush ass-kissing face! :grr:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. I Fear That Your Sound Logic And Reasoning May Hurt Some People's Brains Here To Hear. Great Post!

[loudsue]

23. I think sometimes it just helps to make a point of the obvious.

So much mainstream propaganda crap swirls around us so much of the time, it just sometimes hard to get people to see the obvious. And, more important, to get really CLEAR on what is really going on. Republican efforts at obfuscation and propaganda are intended to retard clarity. We have to make every effort to stop those attempts.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Cha]

18. BUT! Unholy joe did

vote to impeach Clinton..pious hypocrite-pontificator. Prude about lyin' about S-E-X but Bloody Hell bent on Murdering our Soldiers and Iraqis for his Blood Lust.

[loudsue]

52. His "morals" only go so far, Zidzi!

He's a sick & twisted mind. I hope his constituents are fed up with him. We tried to tell them in the primary!

:kick::kick::kick:

[MonkeyFunk]

62. No he didn't

First off, he had no vote on impeachment, being a Senator.

But he voted Not Guilty on both charges.

[madrchsod]

19. i think johnson can vote

[loudsue]

39. No, Johnson can't vote unless he's there.

Senators can't vote by proxy.

:kick:

[Cerridwen]

20. Off to the Greatest Page with you.

Thank you, loudsue.

:hi:

[loudsue]

26. Thanks, Cerridwen!

:hi: I appreciate that!

:kick:

[Shoelace]

22. true! In '08 we must target Dems who vote with Repubs

like Senator Bob Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas who voted against the Iraq withdrawal plan. Then fight like hell to get them out.
Dunno what to do with LIEberman except to topple another weak Repug senator in anther state state (go Howard Dean!!).

The media? They are solidly in the pocket of the Big Money boyz so forge them for help. We gotta do it right here on DU for starters.

[AshevilleGuy]

24. Nelson was just re-elected last year. Pryor in 2004, I think. n/t

[Shoelace]

27. thanks, was wondering about that

so that means we have to zero in on all the weak Repugs, get them out - get us in. :kick: :kick: :kick:

[terip64]

29. kick and recommend! This is so important! n/t

[karlrschneider]

32. If a post ever deserved a recommendation...

:D
:toast:

[loudsue]

42. Thanks, Karl!

:hug: You're the best!

:kick:

[karlrschneider]

49. Naw, I'm really a grumpy old phart who wants to stick with facts and reality

even when they don't flatter us Democrats. It's a crappy job but somebody's gotta do it. :D
:toast:

[JackRiddler]

34. This is no excuse ... being in the minority was no excuse.

Okay, so you might not pass what you intend. You can still push it, if you mean it.

No, Congress does not have anything better to do. The republic won't collapse for a lack of new laws, if the two parties can't agree on any. We'd probably be better off than with whatever foul compromises they come up with.

Serious people fight for what they actually want (assuming the Democrats actually want to get out of Iraq, of course).

There is no excuse for not initiating impeachment proceedings of the most criminal regime in American history. This is a matter of re-asserting the primacy of the Constitution against tyranny. Even if impeachment fails, it is a far better thing than to letting these bastards leave office rewarded.

What the opponents to impeachment ignore is what may be shaken loose by the inquiries. Any Congressional investigation can discover new facts that change the realities on the ground. There are crimes for which the Bush regime can come down - impeachment proceedings and other investigations are the way to make these crimes known to the larger public and build the pressure so that it might actually succeed in taking the bastards down.

The situation they have created is intolerable. Anyone not working to bring them down now is only interested in their own election later.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. SHHH trying to educate people on how this works

if they wish to blame anybody, go ahead, Maddison, Franklin, you know the framers

[leeroysphitz]

40. Good points and a good job pointing this out. NT

[Greyhound]

41. Making the stand is far more important than the outcome.

The weakness and fear so frequently displayed by our representatives is the reason that so many don't vote for them and, more importantly, why so many more don't vote at all.

We must give American citizens something to vote for, just being "the other guys" is not now, nor has it ever been, enough. What's so damned hard to understand about that?

[loudsue]

46. I totally agree with "making the stand", and that's what the original post was

about.

We should definitely keep on them to make their stand, to keep having inquiries, and hold hearings, and maybe even bring up the impeachment word more often. Hell yes!

They HAVE to make a stand, and they have to do it loudly and often. I was only addressing the fact that they can't LEGISLATE that stand at this point. I'm with you all the way on making it hell for the republicans, in any way they can possibly, effectively do so.


:kick:

[loudsue]

43. Made a mistake in the original post:

"Senator Johnson is NOT back to work yet since his brain hemmorage. This brings the Dems down ONE vote of their majority in the Senate. So we currently have a senate with only 99 voting members. This makes it roughly 50 Dems, and 49 republicans.

Also, Joe LIEberman, and some of the DLCers, will vote with the republicans on many issues, but especially the war in Iraq, and possibly the (proposed) war in Iran. So, even if it was ONLY holy Joe that would vote against stopping the war, that would make the vote 49 Dems, 49 republicans, and...you guessed it... here would come Cheney to break the tie."


It should read: 49 Dems, 50 repubs

Lazy Saturday brain fart. Cheney wouldn't even need to come out of his hidey hole to break the tie.

:kick::kick::kick:

[LWolf]

45. So I guess

as long as I'll never "win" by doing the right thing, because there are more people doing the wrong thing, I should just join in with the rest, and justify it because "everybody else is doing it?"

I'd like to see some politicians who will act with integrity whether the rest of the Congress joins them or not.

[Peace Patriot]

47. Only 1/3 of the Senate was up for reelection in 2006. Keep that in mind. That

particular provision of the Constitution--a compromise with the elite, landed class--was, very unfortunately, not designed for a crisis like this one.

The other important factor influencing the '06 elections--and the future--is that Diebold/ES&S have the capability of putting a 5% to 10% "thumb of the scales" for Bushites, warmongers and corporatists, leaving no trace, and I'm quite certain used this capability to keep Bush/Cheney in office and to manufacture a phony endorsement of the war, in 2004, and used it in 2006 to limit the antiwar victory. Presently, all our votes--even Absentee Ballot and other paper votes--are "counted" on electronic voting machines run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations (mostly Diebold/ES&S). One third of the country has no ballot at all, to recount--zero audit--and the best states--the best!--have a completely inadequate 1% audit. This was all agreed to, with near unanimity in the Senate, and only 60 no votes in the House, in the Anthrax Congress, engineered by Tom Delay and Bob Ney, abetted by corporatist Democrats like Christopher Dodd and by the MIND-BOGGLING silence of the entire Democratic Party leadership, to this day. With the grass roots screaming in their ears, what the Democrats in Congress now propose is a measly 2% audit* and maybe getting rid of the most egregious election theft machines--the touchscreens--but continuing to lard billions of taxpayer dollars into the pockets of Bushite electronic voting corporations to "fix" the election system that they deliberately broke--with computer upgrades, "patches," printers and other expensive doohickeys. The "trade secret" code will remain in the optiscan machines and the central tabulators, and recount rules remain such that citizens will have to prove who didn't win an election, rather than election officials having to prove who did.

Outrageous!

It is important for us to realize that our own Democratic Party leadership utterly betrayed us, when they supported "The Help America Vote for Bush Act" of 2002--partly the result of all those billions of taxpayer dollars trickling through everybody's fingers for these highly expensive, highly insider hackable voting systems. And their silence since then, and reluctance to undo this mindbogglingly outrageously unamerican voting system, is related to its beneficial effect on continued war.

It's a very simple. Count all the votes in the US, and you have a 75% mandate to stop this war now. Don't count them all, and you have a 50/50 Congress that may have a Democratic coloration, but can't do a thing to stop it. And if all the votes had been counted in 2004, judging from the polls in Feb. '03--56% of the American people opposed to the war--and in May '04--63% of the American people opposed to torture "under any circumstances"--the war could not have been continued, because somewhere between 55% to 65% of the voters actually voted against Bush and against the warmongers in Congress. IF the American people had been listened to, in Feb. '03, the matter of the Iraq War would have gone back to the Senate after the UN turned Bush down, for further debate--and the WMD lies would have begun to emerge. Instead, in the confidence of a fixed election in 2004, Bush proceeded with the war, and many Democrats voted for it, despite 56% opposition in the public.

If you're gong perpetrate an unjust, heinous war, in a democracy--particularly in one with the Vietnam War in living memory--you have to fix the elections. That's what they did.

Diebold/ES&S is not the ONLY factor in fixing our elections, but it was the critical one in 2004, and again in 2006, when the people, in their anger, had to outvote the machines just to get a half-decent Congress.

It's very important to keep our eyes wide open, and know fully what we are up against. Our first priority must be restoring transparent vote counting.

------------------

*(Venezuela handcounts FIFTY-FIVE PERCENT of the votes, in an open source electronic system. 55%! We should be doing at least that. And the fact that we are counting 0% of the votes in many places, and only 1% in others, tells you just how bad our system is.)

[loudsue]

51. And if something isn't done in a BIG HURRY, it's going to happen again

in 2008. This issue is behind every other issue that we discuss on DU... We HAVE NO LEGITIMATE ELECTIONS in the United States.

We can't change:

The War(s)
Global Warming
The Health Insurance Crisis
Bleeding of our tax dollars into the pockets of government contractors
Bleeding of our jobs to other countries
Poison in our pharmaceutical drugs
Poison in our food
Poison in our water
The breakdown of our infrastructure (roads, dams, bridges, schools)
The lack of decent education for our kids and the skyrocketing price of college
The "privatization" of our government agencies (prisons, military, vote counting)

and right now, we can't stop the CRIMINALS in the republican party, all because they own the voting machines (AND the media).

But if we COULD vote them out, and legitimately vote IN good candidates, we could change EVERYTHING! But we can't vote 'em out if they're counting the votes!

It ALL....EVERY BIT OF IT...goes back to the fact that we haven't really elected the people that represent us -- the ones who are making the laws to tie our hands.

I wish the protests in D.C. right now was totally about the voting machines and election fraud. If we could vote these assholes out of congress, we could STOP the war. But the vote has to come first.

:hi: Thanks, PeacePatriot! You're always right on the money with your posts!


:kick:

[Peace Patriot]

74. Hi, LoudSue! Sorry to get back to you so late. (Had to eat dinner. Had a guest.)

Thanks for the compliment. And I agree with you about the anti-war protests--but just in the sense that "Hand-Counted Paper Ballots" should be a prominent sign in every demonstration. It should be the upfront theme for PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION of the will of the people. We can complain and protest all we want, but if rightwing Bushite corporations are "counting" all the votes behind a veil of corporate secrecy, we are severely handicapped. We end up with a 50/50 Congress, when it should be 75/25, if the people were being listened to.

I honor all war protests. That witness is very powerful and very necessary. It resonates through the world. And it helps people ask the question: WHY is this war continuing? What's wrong with our system?

But we have to think practically and strategically as well. The issue is not Bushite fascists and War Democrats perpetrating unjust, heinous war. What can be expected of such people? The issue is WHY, with 75% of the people opposed to the war, it is not being stopped. And the answer to that is very, very important, strategically: It's because they DON'T feel BEHOLDEN to the people. And why is that? Yes, it's money. Yes, it's the war profiteering corporate news monopolies. But our filthy campaign system, and the corporate news monopolies, and other grave ills, can all be reformed, IF WE HAD TRANSPARENT VOTE COUNTING. Voting is the means by which we exercise our sovereignty as a people. Without it, we are not a democracy. And our voting system is so compromised right now, that we are only barely a democracy anymore.

What the Democrats in Congress have proposed as a remedy is almost laughable. A 2% audit, and maybe get rid of the touchscreens (the worst of the election theft machines), not only leaving Diebold/ES&S in charge of our election system--with "trade secret" code in the optiscan voting machines and the central tabulators--but larding these corporations with more billions of taxpayer dollars to "fix" an election system that they deliberately broke.

We cannot count on Congress to change this. A 2% audit, on a transparency scale of 1 to 100, is just what it looks like, a 2. 98% of the votes will never be counted by human eyes. An improvement over ZERO percent, yes. But still wide open to fraud. And that's the BEST that Congress might do. So where we need to bring pressure is in state/local jurisdictions, where ordinary people still have some influence. And one strategy is to demand that the Absentee Ballots be counted by hand, and results posted BEFORE any electronics are involved. There was a huge increase in Absentee Ballot voting in '06--a sort of peoples' boycott of the machines, people trying to get around the rigged electronics. And with that large a constituency for transparent vote counting, we can pressure local officials. If we can get them to handcount the AB votes, everyone will want to have their ballot counted. It will snowball. The corrupt officials can keep their expensive crapass machines, for the time being--and use them for data storage and reporting--but we will have created a transparent vote counting system by default. Corruption is the problem--these millions of dollar in contracts. This strategy circumvents the corruption.

I just wanted to add this practical note. I believe in protesting injustice and wrongful war in the street, in the public arena. It's good for all our souls--and for the souls of all who see it or hear of it--whether it's one lonely person or a small group with signs, or half a million. Doesn't matter. Protest is a sacred act. It ripples through the universe. But we also have to address the practical question of WHY they are not listening, and HOW to get them to listen. It's a question of power. The power in a democracy should be ours, the people. It is not. What is blocking our exercise of rightful power? It seems so obvious to me. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT, with rightwing Bushite corporations "counting" all the votes with secret code? What do expect from Democratic leaders who support this egregiously non-transparent voting system?

So this matter should be visible and highlighted in every protest.

-----

I also want to say that I agree with your OP, LoudSue! We have to think realistically and strategically--and with our eyes open. This Congress is an improvement, in a very tilted and handicapped system. It means that the people outvoted the machines, in many cases. It is refreshing to actually have hearings on the most corrupt regime in our history, and to see efforts by very sincere and intelligent representatives--people who would have been elected anyway, rigged machines or not--addressing the real and numerous crises that our country is facing. It gives people hope--a very important gift--and some feeling of empowerment.

This democracy was not upended in a day, and it is not going to be put right in a day. We need to think long term. I agree with the poster upthread who said that even this handicapped Congress can stop the war--by obstructing every spending bill in the House--and can lay out a very compelling case for impeachment that MIGHT attract the votes of Congress critters who are afraid of retribution by the people, who have proven that they can outvote the machines. But we also need to understand why this is not happening. We may rail against it, but we need to understand it. We are dealing with an extremely corrupt--not to mention dangerous--situation, in which good people--good representatives--are trying to get their footing. We have never seen such corruption. We have never had such dangerous and unscrupulous people in the White House. We need to have compassion and patience and understand the handicaps THEY are working under--even if they have brought some of it on themselves. It is NOT SAFE to oppose Diebold and ES&S. Look what happened to Kevin Shelley, the CA Sec of State who tried to oppose them--railroaded out of office on entirely bogus corruption charges, with the collusion of many Democrats, corrupt election officials, and the war profiteering corporate news monopolies. The Bush Junta is spying on everybody, and no doubt using blackmail and every dirty tactic. I'm sure we can't see the half of what is going down. To be courageous in these circumstances--to fight off the corporate media, the war profiteers, the Bush Junta and its remaining "pod people" in Congress, the rigged elections, the corporate lobbyists--and to do this with inadequate compadres in Congress--must be very difficult.

Don't blame the GOOD people in Congress. Pressure them, yes--without let. But don't revile them. Don't take your frustrations out on them. Don't exacerbate the bad guys' "divide and conquer" tactics. And if you want faster change, probably the best path to it would be down to your local county registrar, to demand transparent vote counting.

[loudsue]

78. That sentence should be posted at the TOP of every DU page:

"Don't blame the GOOD people in Congress. Pressure them, yes--without let. But don't revile them. Don't take your frustrations out on them. Don't exacerbate the bad guys' "divide and conquer" tactics. And if you want faster change, probably the best path to it would be down to your local county registrar, to demand transparent vote counting."

:applause: You did it again!! :yourock:


loudsue


:kick::kick::kick::kick:

[TheConstantGardener]

50. All they need to control is THE HOUSE

Block funding -- you have the votes!

[thethinker]

53. We have some members of congress

trying very hard to do the right thing. We have other members of congress with Ds behind their name, blocking their efforts. We need to figure out how to bring pressure on them to vote according to what the people want. I will make no excuses for democrats that get elected to congress as democrats, and do not support the party on important issues.

I do not think it will take until 2008 to change that 49/49 problem. With all the investigations coming up I hope a few more republicans will resign. We got rid of a lot of congressmen in the last year with scandals, even with the republicans in control. With the power to do investigations and hold hearings we can make a lot of changes.

So, I do not accept the idea that we are going to live with a "do nothing" congress for two years. I say they can do plenty. We need to be concentrating on how we can help them.

[BlooInBloo]

54. Thanks entirely to the dipshitfuckwipe Connecticut electorate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Not quite

We would still have 51 senators

We need 60 for cloture

And 67 for impeachment

Those numbers may still gell up... assuming you, me and everybody else to a point demands the right thing is done

You see... there are 22 GOP senate seas for graps in 2008

They'll have to choose, job or stand behind chucklenuts... same faustian choice they had during Watergate after the people led.

[BlooInBloo]

59. Oh fine. I retract the word "entirely". :)

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. And I made a mistake

we have the simple majory in the House for Impeachemnet, what we lack are the votes in the Senate to convict

Impeachment = Grand Jury

Senate is the court

[BlooInBloo]

63. Impeachment = indictment. House = grand jury/prosecutor. Senate = jury. Chief justice = judge.

Unless I'm mistaken.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. Yep

I made a mistake

But it will not happen until we push them hard.

me, have a letter to write, given the revelations of last friday....

(Yep I watch the SPAN)

[Hekate]

56. KnR. Great post -- a voice of sanity, reason, and logic has spoken!

:hi:

Hekate

[loudsue]

60. Thanks, Hekate!

I think there are still those on this thread who interpret my OP as saying that the Dems are without fault, or that they're doing all they can. That wasn't my point, as you know. I merely said we don't have a majority large enough to ram through ANY legislation, like the republicans had until two and a half months ago.

The Dems, as a WHOLE, are NOT doing all they can, and we need to stay on them to push harder, and push further. They definitely need to take control of the microphone and force the administration's hand at every turn. There are some Dems who are working like frieght trains (Waxman, Conyers, Kucinich), but there are others who are just trying to play nice w/ politics as usual.

It's the politics as usual crowd that we have to continue to hammer.

:kick::kick::kick:

[WiseButAngrySara]

57. Excellent and informative post. KNR. ....n/t

[MadHound]

58. But there is enough control that the Dems could stop this war

Hold up each and every single war funding bill in committee. Defund this war, force the troops to be brought home. Since the Dems control all of the committees in both houses of Congress, this could, and should be done.

But whoopsie! The Dems took defunding the war off the table before they even took their seats:puke:

Sorry, stop the rationalization people. First the anti war left was told that the Dems couldn't do a damn thing because they were out of power(and pay no attention to all of those Dems who voted for the war, and continued to vote in support of it). But the Dems at the top, our so called leaders said wait, we'll stop this war if you will only deliver us a majority in at least one, preferably both houses of Congress. We put forth the effort and we did this. Now the Dems are saying no no, we can't stop the war, we don't have a filibuster proof majority, we don't have control of the White House, we barely have control of the Senate. Sorry, you're going to have to wait until '08, and then, if you deliver us the White House, and increased majorities in both houses, then we can stop the war.

Bullshit. Plain, pure bullshit.

It is simply a matter of will at this point. Will to bury the war funding. Will to put your goddamn political career on the line to stop the killing, stop the madness. Will to go to the people(who, after all, are overwhelmingly against this war) and explain to them that this is why they're defunding the war, this is why they're taking these action. Will to fucking stand up and do what is right before one more person dies in vain.

The Dems have the means, the Dems have the support of the public. I suspect that the Dems even have the support of the majority of the military, up to and including those in high places. Now all the Dems need to do is stand up, stop being goddamn politicians and do the right thing. The time to do so is now, let's see them get it done. No excuses, sorry but they don't cut it anymore. We all can't afford to wait.

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. No, it is not a matter of will

it is a matter of getting 60 votes together

The beauty is... given how many repukes are up for reelection, they will come together... called saving their political skin

Alas it will take time

[TheConstantGardener]

75. For the LAST TIME they don't need 60 votes in the Senate

They just need the House to fail spending bills.



I explained this to you over many posts; do you not buy the logic or what?

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. I just happen to know the procedure

and given how these bills come together, yes, they NEED both houses. And if they are going to do it EFFECTIVELY they need to overcome that veto pen... I know reality

I know it is hard to understand... for the pollyanas...

I am quite the Cassandra... and a realist

I hate the reality of this, since... it will lead to at least 2000 more US troops killed, oh 20K injured \ disabled, oh at least 20K Iraqis killed and 100,000 injured.

I hate that reality and I wish I would take my wand, go ooogah, ooogah, ooogah and none of this happened

Alas I live in reality... as part of the reality based community

So unless you are wishing to do something quite dramatic... you will have to work with what we have...

And what we have is far better now than it was on November 6th, 2006

You might disparage hearings, but all those hearings you disparage are part of the process to end the war, so is horse trading and alliance building, and... my pestering my congress and senate critters with letters, talking to my neighbors getting them to do the same, and essentially building coalitions. This is politics... and it is dirty and at times there is high theater, but chiefly, go blame the Framers, IT IS SLOW.

You understand it now?

[MadHound]

83. Ummm, did you even read my post?

If so, what part of "bury war funding bills in committee forever" did you not understand? And yes, all the Dems need in order to do this is the will. No committee approval, no trip to the floor, no vote, and no funding for the war.

For a person who is supposedly so knowledgeable about procedure, well:shrug: I would think that you would recognize this tactic.

[ToeBot]

64. If we wait for control of the Senate, we'll be waiting forever...

It will never happen. Control of the Senate would take 60, plus however many are going to side with the Republicans - let's say 65, give or take a couple. When will the Dem's have 65 Senators in office? Yeah, they will really get things done then wont they!!

[nadinbrzezinski]

67. Hmm you do kow that there are enough repukes up for

reelction in '08 that those numbers could possibly happen, don't you?

Not saying it will happen, but it COULD happen

[nolabels]

68. Thanks for telling people about reality

It looks to me like the Dems are doing just fine if one considers everything.

Some of the Cons and fascist are starting to self-destruct which is also good

My glass is half full :-)

[loudsue]

70. Thank you, nolabels!

Mine is half full, too.

The Dems have been in the majority for 2 1/2 months, and we've been seeing a LOT of work done to try to clean up the mess the republics made for 6 years. The country has never been in this kind of mess in recent history.

We still need to keep pushing the Dems to clean up more, and quickly! There's still a whole helluvalot to do! And they mostly still lack backbone, so we have to really push them.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Land Shark]

71. K&R, thanks for the reality check loudsue! nt

[MasterDarkNinja]

72. I agree, our control is very slim at best in the senate

It seems whenever impeachment is discussed that some people here forget all about that, and think we can impeach Bush & Cheney at the same time and get President Peloski, we don't even have the votes to impeach either one of them at the moment. And even if like some speculate we could gain momentum and make their impeachment inevitable the repukes would never let us kick out both of them at the same time so a democrat could become president.

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. Nitpick here

we have the votes to impeach, you need a simple majority in the House

Waht we don't have are the votes to convict in the senate...that is why they are not pulling the trigger on impeachment.

If they impeached but did not convict, joe six pack would go, see... he ain't done nothing... so quit the belly aching!

[loudsue]

81. You're right about that, Nadin. And I'm beginning to think that

it might not be a bad idea for the House to go ahead and do it. By the time all the testimony came out, we might even have enough pressure on the republics in the Senate to convict.

See, during the Clinton impeachment, Clinton still had a 70% approval rating. But the Dictator-Tot is somewhere in the 20's or 30% range. With Clinton, there was TREMENDOUS pressure (on the Senate, in particular) to "censure and Move On" (which is when MoveOn.org came into being). There wouldn't be so many cheerleaders for the bush cabal...ESPECIALLY when people become completely aware that he lied us into a war, KNEW about 9/11, spied on us illegally, used his office illegally for political gain, spent us into a hole we'll never dig ourselves out of with "no bid" contracts, and left the Katrina victims in the HORRIBLE mess they are STILL IN! So, we MIGHT be able to get rid of bush's sorry ass, in spite of a small Senate majority. I think some republics might cross the aisle due to pressure from their own constituents.

The investigations that are going on now might just make enough of a ripple to do that.

When I first posted this thread, I was mainly referring to some of the Bills that are before the Senate, and how, short of impeachment, we really can't get enough votes to pass, or override a veto. But impeachment might be the way we can actually get some republics to cross over with their votes. If their guy is going down, they may be more amenable to voting to stop the war.

Who knows?! I can't wait for Sibel Edmonds to testify. When all the dots start getting connected, we might get some movement.

:kick:

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. Look at Watergate

the votes were not there either

Why did Nixon quit?

They materialized

that is what all them hearings are about

The problem we have is... media blackout, unless you are watching the SPAN, as some of us do

[ellisonz]

73. Bingo.

:yourock:

[mmonk]

84. They have the numbers to start the wheels of justice turning.

Not all have the desire to do it and Lieberman for all practical purposes is against the party in any attempt to bring sunshine on the republicans. And we don't have enough votes for any 60 count votes to ensure justice in America from the senate. However, we do in the House have enough to bring sunshine on the situation that once done, would make protecting the administration politically difficult.

[MasonJar]

85. A lot of pugs are up in the Senate in 08; we must get rid of the voting

machines as soon as possible because this time Rove will be ready to steal on a bigger scale. It is also important to remind the election workers over and over that the Ohio crew is going to jail.

[Morereason]

86. Thank You for adding clarity to what is certainly a frustrating situation

I agree. I do admit thoough, that does not explain some of the votes that have gone forward.

[RestoreGore]

88. Always an excuse.

How convenient, but it won't excuse them for not doing anything at all. And if a war begins in Iran, I will hold them just as responsible as I will Republicans. And perhaps Democratic members of Congress shouldn't have lied to the people making them think it was a "landslide."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/08/pelosi.speaker/index.html

[Joe Chi Minh]

90. A well-needed post.