Thursday, June 19, 2008

I Might Be Moving, But I Haven't Packed My Shitlist Yet

Tomorrow seems to be the day when Steny Hoyer and the House Democrats sell-out on Telcom Immunity in a "compromise bill" that actually gives the President everything he asked for.

Livid doesn't begin to describe me.

Steny Hoyer and any Democrat that supports this is fucking dead to me. Done. I will will join the thousands of bloggers/online people who have already poured $225,000 to fund challengers for Hoyer and the rest of these motherfuckers.

Soon-to-be-President Obama, it is time to lead your party. You have long held the right position on this, but that ain't good enough. As the party's Presidential nominee, you have the power to impact this.

Now.

Do it.

Not simply a vote "NO" next week when this is in the Senate, but a forceful fucking stand. These cowardly fucks need the Lieberman treatment—let them all know that you—and the rest of us—are paying attention. Remind them that Hillary Clinton's War Vote bit her in the ass five years down the road.

Prove to me that you are actually CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN.

[As usual Greenwald has the ugly details]

10 comments:

Toast said...

I hate to say this, my man, but I... think... I disagree.

Obama's job right now is to get elected. The odds of him exposing himself to damage by wading into this long-running fight are pretty good. I'm not saying it would be the wrong thing to do, but I can understand if he's reticent.

I blame this on Hoyer and the rest of the Bush Dogs, and I do blame Pelosi for not keeping these shitstains in line. They can all go fuckthemselves circular style. This behavior is exactly the sort of shit that sours so many people on the party. But I'm not putting this on Obama. He has one job and one job only between now and November.

Mr Furious said...

I hear what you're saying, but if there truly is a new sheriff in town, he's gotta go into the saloon and crack some heads together. Next year is too late for this issue, and I consider it a matter of significance.

I'm sick of worrying about electoral blowback. This is Rule of Law / Constitutional stuff here.

Too important.

Rickey Henderson said...

Obama's job right now is to get elected.

Agreed, but between this and pulling out of public financing, he's definitely opening himself up for a lot of attacks from the GOP.

Rickey Henderson said...

Upon further review, Rickey's last comment sounded like something a jackass CNN commentator would say. Please accept Rickey's humble apologies and assurance that it will never happen again. Go 'Bama.

(PS: Sorry, but that stupid fucking fist bumping thing has got to stop. You should devote a post to this at some point.)

steves said...

I don't like the domestic spying either, but people should be suing the main party responsible, and that would be the gov't., not the company that was bullied into providing the information. I am not saying the companies are without blame, but it just seems unfair to only hold them to being responsible.

Mr Furious said...

It's a punitive damages thing, steves. They need to learn they have a responsibility to the public. The only way to do that is to hit the bottom line.

They broke the law, and I don't care if Bush's team of crony lawyers promised them it was legal or they were immune. It was as clear as day it was wrong, and one company—Qwest—saw it right away and said no.

Holding the companies responsible in no way means letting the gov't off the hook. They are BOTH guilty.

steves said...

No, but it just doesn't seem fair if they did it under the premise that it was legal. I know that doesn't justify it, but I just don't think it is the best way to handle this.

Companies would get sued and pay out major damages, which would get passed on to us, the comsumers. I doubt people would get damages from the gov't...sovereign immunity.

I may change my mind on this issue, but at this point I am more mad that they allowed this and Patriot Act to be passed in the first place.

Mr Furious said...

it just doesn't seem fair if they did it under the premise that it was legal.

That's the problem. These are major international corporations with massive and expensive legal departments. There was no doubt about the illegality.

President Fascism winking at you and telling you "trust me" is NOT an excuse.

Mr Furious said...

Besides NONE of this is really about the immunity anyway. As always, it's not the crime it's the cover-up. There have been several proposals from Democrats that would have substituted the gov't for the corporations as the defendant, but they were rejected.

If there actually was a fraud by the Administration to dupe these companies, they would NOT be held liable.

This is all about making sure there is no court case at all—regardless of outcome or guilty party.

This immunity means it can all be swept under the rug. We'll never know anything that happened—not who was tapped, who ordered it, whether it led to anything, whether or not is was legal...nothing.

The retroactive immunity effectively erases the past.

Red State Blues said...

Ah, following up on the thread at Shakesville, I see we are in complete agreement.

I'm hoping he will change his mind, grow some stones, I don't care what you want to call it, before the vote goes down.