• commentary
  • MONDAY AUGUST 6 2007 9:00 AM

It’s Official: Democrats Do Not Have Spinal Columns



It is a sad truth. After years of scientific study, Democrats proved beyond reasonable doubt this weekend that they are invertebrates. The good news for Democrats is that they are not alone, because 97% of all animal species live without spines. The Democrats have now joined the likes of flatworms, sea cucumbers, jellyfish, snails, insects, leeches and squid. They achieved their new status by amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by a vote of 60 to 28 in the Senate, and by 227 to 183 in the House. They made the exact changes to FISA that Bush wanted, just like the Republican controlled Congress did for 6 years. Congrats, Dems!

Seems like it was just last November when I thought the Democrats taking over Congress would mean that Bush would not be allowed to trample on the Constitution whenever he said, “Terrorists.” I guess I was wrong. The Protect America Act makes President George W. Bush's illegal wiretapping order retroactively legal, gives enormous power to Alberto Gonzalez and allows warrant-less wiretapping on your phone if you are talking to a foreign fella.


“We are deeply disappointed that the president’s tactics of fear mongering have once again forced Congress into submission,” said Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU. “That a Democratically-controlled Senate would be strong-armed by the Bush administration is astonishing. This Congress may prove to be as spineless in standing up to the Bush Administration as the one that enacted the Patriot Act or the Military Commissions Act.”


Over and over, the Democrats make it clear that they have no idea what to do with a majority. They are fucking pathetic. I am not saying every single Democrat is pathetic, just enough to ruin the country. A few, like Russ Feingold, refused to cave in to the Republican scare tactics.


Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, angrily chastised his colleagues for bending to the administration's will.

"The day we start deferring to someone who's not a member of this body ... is a sad day for the U.S. Senate," Feingold said. "We make the policy -- not the executive branch."


Well said, Russ. It’s too bad that so many in your party are sans spines. What did the Democrats fear so much? Bush was demanding that the FISA bill be passed before Congress went on vacation, even at one point threatening to not allow Congress to take August off. (He can't actuallly do that, but he was just trying to show how little he understands the Constitution) Bush and his cronies hammered the point home: If Congress leaves without amending the FISA law and a terrorist attack occurs, it will be the Democrats fault.


"Al Qaeda is not going on vacation this month," said Sen. Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "And we can't either until we know we've done our duty to the American people."


No, al Qaeda is not going to take a vacation. And since al-Qaeda won’t be on vacation, we can all be thankful that we already have a FISA court that handles such situations and we don’t need to give enormous power to one branch of government. I mean, we would have been thankful, if the Democrats were not invertebrates.

These are the names of the Democratic cowards in the Senate who undermined the Constitution because they didn’t want to spend the month of August being called “weak on terrorism:”


Evan Bayh (Indiana); Tom Carper (Delaware); Bob Casey (Pennsylvania); Kent Conrad (North Dakota); Dianne Feinstein (California); Daniel Inouye (Hawaii); Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota); Mary Landrieu (Louisiana); Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Barbara Mikulski (Maryland); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Mark Pryor (Arkansas); Ken Salazar (Colorado); Jim Webb (Virginia).


Forty Democratic members of the House voted with the Republicans. Those who did not, were very unhappy.



Because many Democrats went along with Bush’s desires, this is where we now stand: Alberto Gonzalez, the man Democrats believe has subverted the Constitution for Bush, lied to Congress, obstructed justice, and defended torture, has now been given the power to declare who is going to be a target of warrant-less surveillance. Fucking amazing. Democrats rail against the man, hold hearing after hearing, constantly call him unfit to be Attorney General and then give him enormous power. Wonderful consistency.

At what point do the Democrats stop caving in to the Republican threats to call them names and grow some balls? How many times will they roll over and basically shit on their base? The Democrats in Congress are still living in the year 2002 and a lot has happened since then. The main change being that Bush is wildly unpopular and Americans seem to want him to be stopped from doing ANYTHING. Yet, the Democrats roll over like he is a 900 lb. gorilla. Amazing.

Our Constitution was created to keep in check any tyrannical attempt to take over our government. The Founding Fathers foresaw exactly this sort of scenario and created a framework to stop it. It is inevitable that a president would attempt this kind of power grab. In 2006, the Democrats were handed Congress – just as the Founding Fathers envisioned would occur in such a circumstance. But what they did not envision was that the Democrats would be complete cowards and fail to defend the Constitution. I now believe Democrats are now a bigger problem than Bush.

There will always be criminals, police and the courts. Crimes will always be committed and we expect the law to do its part to keep us safe. If suddenly the police and courts stopped prosecuting criminals, who would you be most upset with? It is the job of law enforcement and the courts to stop crime, just as it is the job of Congress to keep the executive branch from breaking the law. Unfortunately, the Democratic Congress is now helping Bush to break the law.

The Democrats are saying it’s not that bad because the FISA law has a 180-day sunset provision, which means in six-months it has to be approved by Congress again to continue. Wow, that’s great. But who is going to be in control of Congress in six-months? Oh, the same chickenshits. Bush will use the same argument and they will cave all over again.

The Democrats have never given us a reason to believe anything different will occur. They only do one thing: They capitulate to the president in order avoid having a vote used against them and being called weak on terrorism. But they are called weak anyway, because they don’t vote as one unified block. Just a few cross over, enough to pass the bill, leaving behind many Democrats who are then called “weak on terrorism.” It is a fantastic lose-lose situation that has been going on since 9/11. Why change it?

I have no doubt that when the Democrats return to their constituents during this break, they will be shocked at the anger over their votes on the FISA law. Then they will start talking tough. “This is the last time,” they will say. How do I know this will happen? The same scenario happened just three months ago with the Iraq war. Democrats caved in to Bush, then were surprised at the anger when they returned home on their spring vacation. When they returned to Congress, they were all piss and vinegar and ready for a fight. It resulted in the Democrats forcing the Republicans to filibuster. Oh, you tough bastards! It was meaningless gesture because the Democrats know they can stop the war tomorrow, by simply telling Bush there will be no more funding for the war. The money runs out in March, end of story. Such an action requires no vote. Republicans would be helpless. The Democrats will not take this action, however, because they are pussies.

The argument is that if the Democrats stop funding the war, then they will lose the presidential election. So, how does that go? Majority of Americans want war stopped. Democrats use their power to stop war. Americans don’t vote for Democrats. Can’t beat that logic. By not stopping the war, Democrats are making one point very clear: Their hold on power is far more important than saving American lives in a futile war, just as their hold on power is more important than protecting the Constitution.

The Republicans have no problem standing up for what they believe in. Last month, the Republicans filibustered a Democratic vote on the Iraq war. That is exactly what the Democrats did not do to stop Samuel Alito from landing his ass on the Supreme Court when they were in the minority. Why did they not do it? Because they were afraid of being labeled obstructionists. If they had courage, they would have stood up and said, “Yes, we are being obstructionists because we are fighting for what we believe in. That is why we were elected.” But they don’t. And they won’t. Because the Democrats have no spinal columns, much like earthworms.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 9

Next

Comments
_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:17 PM

chainlink said:
*yawn*

Well that was fun.

Where DO they keep crawling out from ?



I think it's a conspiracy by the SG staffers to increase traffic to the CE forums.

Chainlink

Chainlink

Key West, FL
August 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:21 PM

Tigerwong said:

chainlink said:

Krass_of_nod said:

falseness....do I have to get out the beat down stick of references to show that i am not telling a "crock of shit"
nothing I said is lies or false, not any of it, it is all researchable fact. Ithe only thing that is even debatable about what I put here is my own opinion....



Krass_of_nodin 2000 bush won the election, but why? Al gore had 300k more votes.



Oh! Also btw,
Gore had 453,895 more votes than Bush. What you said is incorrect.

I mean false.

I mean not a fact.

I mean crock of shit. wink



Damn, i was going to say something semi-witty, but KUNGFOO already laid out the fact smackdown.



Totally true.
I just felt that in light of his adamant insistence that every word he uttered was indisputable fact that a little hair splitting might be in order.
smile
He seemed to be begging for it.
Crying out, if you will.

Edit: Damn ! I think that changed while I was responding. Now it looks like I'm totally rambling. Thanks. tongue

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:23 PM

KUNGFOO said:

Krass_of_nod said:

chainlink said:

Krass_of_nod said:

falseness....do I have to get out the beat down stick of references to show that i am not telling a "crock of shit"
nothing I said is lies or false, not any of it, it is all researchable fact. Ithe only thing that is even debatable about what I put here is my own opinion....



Krass_of_nodI mean think about it Clinton gets kicked out for lieing about smoking pot,




kicked out of where for lying ?

somebody should research that.



kicked out of office as in he was impeached...

are you new? that happened like a few years ago...



I think you're the one that's new. Clinton was impeached but never convicted or removed from office. Also, he was impeached because he lied under oath about having sex with Monica Lewinsky, not smoking pot.

You've just proved your (lack of) creditability and knowledge.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

yep i was just looking this up, I was wrong about that....

but it doesn't mean everything I said was wrong...OH SNAP!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

articles of impeachmenthttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:24 PM

Tigerwong said:

chainlink said:

Krass_of_nod said:

falseness....do I have to get out the beat down stick of references to show that i am not telling a "crock of shit"
nothing I said is lies or false, not any of it, it is all researchable fact. Ithe only thing that is even debatable about what I put here is my own opinion....



Krass_of_nodin 2000 bush won the election, but why? Al gore had 300k more votes.



Oh! Also btw,
Gore had 453,895 more votes than Bush. What you said is incorrect.

I mean false.

I mean not a fact.

I mean crock of shit. wink



Damn, i was going to say something semi-witty, but KUNGFOO already laid out the fact smackdown.



OMG I WAS WRONG ABOUT THE NUMBER WOW

thats even MORE than I had thought and the point is bush lost and is still our pres....

soi therefore the point is still valid, had you said bush had more then I would have been wrong on my point, so what if my number was off OH SNAP!

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:28 PM

chainlink said:
*yawn*

Well that was fun.

Where do they keep crawling out from ?



was there any refutation of anything that changed the matter of the point i was making.....no.

I admit I was wrong on my facts, but the point is as I stated above still very valid

the question now is why does a pres get impeached for lying, about something that was sexual and where no one died.

However, a president that rightfully should not be president
( what was that number NOT 300k, but 400+ thousand) did NOT get kicked out of office for lying about things that got his own people killed it still well beyond me...

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:31 PM

thank you for clarifying my lack of proper facts but if you would like to reference anything else I said go ahead you will find its all accurate...

And thank you for helping me establish a point about who really is controlling you. biggrin biggrin biggrin

and i have to admit.... iwas baiting you and yes thats very trollish of me.....

~fin

<3

_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:33 PM

Krass_of_nod said:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

yep i was just looking this up, I was wrong about that....

but it doesn't mean everything I said was wrong...OH SNAP!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

articles of impeachmenthttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm



No, not completely (I don't think anybody was EVER questioning your politics, simply your apathetic and a somewhat hostile attitude towards those who might attempt to do something about the current state of affairs). And anybody can make mistakes. Still, for somebody that is so quick to label people as "asshat[s]" or implying somebody is "special", that's a pretty big thing to miss.

I still call into question your ability to have a mature debate here.

Krass_of_nod said:
And thank you for helping me establish a point about who really is controlling you.

and i have to admit.... iwas baiting you and yes thats very trollish of me.....



Out of pure curiosity, is there anybody else out there who reads the CE forums who thinks he's a made [any] point?

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:40 PM

KUNGFOO said:

Krass_of_nod said:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

yep i was just looking this up, I was wrong about that....

but it doesn't mean everything I said was wrong...OH SNAP!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

articles of impeachmenthttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm



No, not completely (I don't think anybody was EVER questioning your politics, simply your apathetic attitude and your hostility towards those who might attempt to do something about the current state of affair). And anybody can make mistakes. Still, for somebody that is so quick to label people as "asshat[s]" or implying somebody is "special", that's a pretty big thing to miss.

I still call into question your ability to have a mature debate here. You're more of a troll. That's okay though, we're a bit experienced in dealing those.

Krass_of_nod said:
And thank you for helping me establish a point about who really is controlling you.



Out of pure curiosity, is there anybody else out there who reads the CE forums who thinks he's a made [any] point?



well, I was just having some fun and trying to rile some people so I could get straight answers out of them, I have to say its been enjoyable being your antagonist for my own curiosities sake.

I really want to know what people out there think of our situation and what they propose to do about it, without that whole love peace and pot thing getting in the way. it helps to get straight answers out of people by giving them enough to rile em up....

I am not really apathetic ot the situation, I want a viable solution everyone deserves the right to live freely and choose their own path, as well as have basic needs taken care of smile

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:41 PM

sorry for the hostility....will you ever forgive me ooo aaa

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:45 PM

KUNGFOO said:

Krass_of_nod said:
And thank you for helping me establish a point about who really is controlling you.

and i have to admit.... iwas baiting you and yes thats very trollish of me.....



Out of pure curiosity, is there anybody else out there who reads the CE forums who thinks he's a made [any] point?



oh sorry I didn't mean to muddle the point i was making with those specifically faulty facts.

the point is this

why did Bill get booted and not George? Certainly George has a much worse deal on his hands than BIll ever did.

attn_ho

attn_ho

Brooklyn, NY
February 2004

AUG 06, 2007 10:54 PM

alpha22 said:



.KUNGFOO SAID:

BTW, I'm a 8 year OIF/OEF military veteran and a IVAW member, and I have a close family member in Baghdad, Iraq right now, so don't go waving that shit in my face




I should have figured out your one of those JOHN KERRY types. Most of you guys are FAKES and Pussies that served with little distiction.


zoom image


FLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGG!

_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 10:59 PM

Krass_of_nod said:
sorry for the hostility....will you ever forgive me ooo aaa



Of course. I accept apologies in the form of beers. smile

Krass_of_nod said:
...why did Bill get booted and not George? Certainly George has a much worse deal on his hands than BIll ever did.



It fucking boggles the mind to no end. It seems to have a lot to do with the opposing party being a bunch of pussies.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

AUG 06, 2007 11:05 PM

attn_ho said:

alpha22 said:



.KUNGFOO SAID:

BTW, I'm a 8 year OIF/OEF military veteran and a IVAW member, and I have a close family member in Baghdad, Iraq right now, so don't go waving that shit in my face



I should have figured out your one of those JOHN KERRY types. Most of you guys are FAKES and Pussies that served with little distiction.


zoom image


FLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGG!



It is amusing. Alpha seems to me to have a bit of a drinking problem. Posts like this one seem to occur late at night, after he's had a few. He hath been flagged.

PatrickY

PatrickY

Vancouver, WA
December 2003

AUG 06, 2007 11:05 PM

alpha22 said:



.KUNGFOO SAID:

BTW, I'm a 8 year OIF/OEF military veteran and a IVAW member, and I have a close family member in Baghdad, Iraq right now, so don't go waving that shit in my face




I should have figured out your one of those JOHN KERRY types. Most of you guys are FAKES and Pussies that served with little distiction.



This is pathetic, even for you.

Flagged here, as well.

Krass_of_nod

Krass_of_nod

Bend, OR
April 2005

AUG 06, 2007 11:05 PM

KUNGFOO said:

Krass_of_nod said:
sorry for the hostility....will you ever forgive me ooo aaa



Of course. I accept apologies in the form of beers. smile

Krass_of_nod said:
...why did Bill get booted and not George? Certainly George has a much worse deal on his hands than BIll ever did.



It fucking boggles the mind to no end. It seems to have a lot to do with the opposing party being a bunch of pussies.



RE: Beers! yer on! smile

RE: opposite party HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 9

Next