BLOG VIEW  |  HEADLINE VIEW
SUBMIT NEWS  |  RSS FEED  |  SEARCH

Democrats: Worst Party Ever

TUESDAY JUNE 24 2008 6:00 AM

Submitted by FearTheReaper. Edited By FearTheReaper.

TAGS: Democrats, FISA, Republicans

The current Democrats are the weakest, most spineless fucks ever to grace the halls of Congress. After months of attempting destroy the 4th amendment, it seems they have finally succeeded – and their reasoning is more disgusting than the Republicans. Democrats are destroying the Constitution to gain a few votes in swing states. At least the Republicans stand for something, as vile and sickening as it may be.

In case you hadn’t heard, the House passed a FISA bill last week. Headlines could have easily read, “George Bush Wet Dream Turns Out To Be True.” The bill gives immunity to telecom companies who broke the law and expands warrantless wiretapping. That’s exactly why Americans gave Congress back to the Dems in 2006 – so they could help Bush use the Constitution as toilet paper.

Think I’m exaggerating? Here’s what Republicans said about the bill:


“The lawsuits will be dismissed,” Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 2 Republican in the House, predicted with confidence.


“I think the White House got a better deal than they even they had hoped to get,” said Senator Christopher Bond, the Missouri Republican who led the negotiations.


Holy fucking shit. “Better deal than they even had hoped to get.” Why not just say,


They raped themselves! All we had to do was look at ‘em funny!


Even I am shocked at how the Democrats appear to be totally spineless, completely fearful and entirely lacking principles. They embody everything the Founding Fathers were opposed to. A party like the Republicans was expected, which is why the framers created a system that would put a stop to their insane power grab. What was not expected was that the opposing party would go along to gain a few votes and to pad the bank accounts of corporations.

So, what did the Dems give up? Well, the President broke the law – apparently committing these things called “felonies.” Bush spied on our phone calls and emails without warrants because he believes he is above the law. The House voted to protect the President from prosecution, permanently block lawsuits that would have revealed what he did and at the same time, legalized the illegal spying in the past and in the future. House Democrats called it a “compromise.”

This is the kind of compromise where you don’t want to have sex with someone, so you let them fuck you in the ass. The Democratic version of “compromise” always means the Republicans get what they want. In this case, only one Republican voted against the bill. One the other hand, 105 Democrats “compromised.” They were totally bipartisan! Yeah, Washington!

Senator Russ Feingold said it best…


The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation.

I do think this is a total farce with regard to the immunity. It basically guarantees the immunity. It doesn’t simply have the impact of potentially allowing telephone companies to break the law. It may prevent us from ever getting to the core issue … which is the president ran an illegal program that could’ve been an impeachable offense.


Well, don’t worry about that, because the Dems got their buddy telecom companies a "get out of jail free" card.



Hey, no worries. I’m sure the Founding Fathers would have been totally cool with the President opening and copying every piece of mail they received from overseas. Why would they have a problem with that? When has that kind of power ever been abused?

Here’s how this is going to work from now on: Our courts can no longer determine if the government was actually after a terrorist or innocent Americans - or opposing political parties. (You fucking retards.) Judges will actually be barred from examining the actual reasons for the spying. Judges will only be allowed to dismiss lawsuits based on spying – the Attorney General will have all the power to say whether or not the spying was "designed to prevent or detect a terrorist attack." This would be the same Attorney General who can’t figure out if waterboarding is torture – or whether or not members of the Bush White House are in contempt for refusing to testify in front of Congress. Yeah, that guy. The Dems just gave that guy all the power.

Once the Attorney General utters the secret words, judges cannot look into the issue any further. It’s pure lawlessness – like the Wild West, without those oppressive Sheriffs. Judges don’t get to actually decide whether or not the Attorney General is making a valid claim. Once he says the secret words, it’s over.

And bestest of all, the Dems did it to pick up a few seats. Right now they have a 35 seat majority in the House and they want to build that shit up to 50. So, fuck the Constitution, let’s get some Dems up in that bitch!


"For any Republican-leaning district this would have been a huge issue," says a top Pelosi aide, who estimates that as many as 10 competitive races could have been affected by it.


Phew! Thank God you made those districts competitive!

This is a fantastically moronic view of where the country is at this time. Dems made massive, nearly unparalleled pick ups in 2006 – because Americans want the Bush White House to be held in check, yet the Democratic answer is to give him everything he wants, so they won’t lose seats in the next election. They are so cowardly and stupid it is shocking. Karl Roves entire election strategy in 2006 was built upon FISA and national security, attempting to brand the Dems as weak on terrorism. And yet, the Democrats cleaned the GOPs clock. Republicans were obliterated. And apparently the Democrats learned nothing. Zip. Zero. Nada.

Democrats believe the way to show how awesome they are, is to trample on the Constitution. Trampling isn’t even the right word. This is obliteration.

And just to add a little icing on the coward cake, they took a page out of the Patriot Act handbook. House members were only given 24 hours to read the bill and decide on whether or not they should shit all over our rights. Just seems like a few years ago Democrats were complaining loudly they were only given 24 hours to read the Patriot Act before voting on it. And now they are doing it to themselves on a bill that also destroys our civil rights. Well done.

Our neo-con morons will say this bill was necessary, because we need to prevent another 9/11 before it occurs. They argue that if the telecoms aren’t given immunity, they won’t want to help us catch terrorists. Everyone seems to forget that the warrantless wiretapping program started BEFORE 9/11. I’m going to write that again, for the idiots. The warrantless wiretapping program started before 9/11. Got it, you fucking dipshit? (Not you, the idiot who believes the Bush bullshit. The coward who is willing to throw out everything this country stands for, so they can feel save in a place that will never be attacked, like Alaska.)

By the sounds of it, Dems have enough votes to overcome a Dodd/Feingold filibuster. Obama is coming in soft on this one. Previously he vowed to do all he could to stop the bill, now he is basically saying we need the bill, although he has said he will try to get the amnesty removed. Either way, if the bill passes and Obama votes for it, I will not vote for him for President. Sorry, can’t support someone who tosses away the 4th Amendment. Hello Jesse Johnson!

In the future, you will turn on the news and hear a court dismissed all the lawsuits against telecoms. You won’t know why. You won’t know what the government said to have the cases tossed. The plaintiff’s lawyers won’t know either. The judge won’t be able to say a word. No one will know. Just Bush and his boys. Ah, sweet democracy – given to you by the Democrats.

Feel free to take a look at this video of George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley (far from a liberal) as he describes what this bill does to our Constitution.



“It’s what any criminal would love to do.”


“Evisceration of the 4th Amendment.”


Way to go Democrats. Don’t forget to donate to the Dems this elections cycle. They know you will, because they know you fear the other side more. Too bad there really isn’t much of a difference. Oh, wait, there is. One party is full of complete and total cowards who have no principles. The other stands for what they believe in.

You can still call or email your Senator to put a stop to this bill. If you don't know what to say or write, check this shit out.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Senator ******,

I am writing to urge you to vote against the warrantless wiretapping law that just passed the House. (H.R. 6304, THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008).

This law is not necessary for protecting our country. As you are well aware, FISA already allows the government to tap any person's calls for 72 hours so long as it can retroactively prove to the highly permissive FISA court that there was probable cause. Amending FISA will not make us safer. It will only send a message to the Bush Administration that ignoring Congress, violating criminal law, and violating our rights as American citizens are acceptable. It will also reinforce the idea that voting for Democrats is useless because, even with majorities in both houses, they continue to get steamrolled by the Republican minority.

I am also against giving immunity to lawbreakers, regardless of the who told them to do what. If the president told me to break the law, I wouldn't. Would you?

I urge you to vote against this law in any form, and to use the power of the filibuster to prevent it from coming to a vote if necessary.

Thanks.
********

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 13

Next

ChrisSick

ChrisSick

Philadelphia, PA
March 2008

JUN 24, 2008 11:45 AM

Not to be a complete ass or anything, but weren't many of the same faces now expressing total shock and outrage at this story just recently over here all of five minutes ago deriding famous troll Stockula for bringing this up as a negative for Obama?

I mean, look, if I'm wrong, please explain the fine details to me, because the last place I want to be is defending Stockula in any way shape or form, but for god's sake hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Blasting him for pointing it out on the part of a candidate and then ripping into that candidate's party for the same exact thing is sort of a little, hypocritical, yes?

Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

West Vancouver, BC
May 2005

JUN 24, 2008 11:49 AM

Dear Senator Obama,

I am writing to urge you to vote against the warrantless wiretapping law that just passed the House. (H.R. 6304, THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008).



This law is not necessary for protecting your country. As I am sure you are well aware, FISA already allows the government to tap any person's calls for 72 hours so long as it can retroactively prove to the highly permissive FISA court that there was probable cause. Amending FISA will not make anyone safer. It will only send a message to the Bush Administration that ignoring Congress, violating criminal law, and violating your rights as American citizens are acceptable. It will also reinforce the idea that voting for Democrats is useless because, even with majorities in both houses, they continue to get steamrolled by the Republican minority. Furthermore it will send a message to the rest of the world that the inspiring change that we've witnessed, as outsiders has been only a charade, and that America is not yet ready finally, after 7 years living in the darkness of the Bush Administration, to return to the enlightenment of freedom that your forefathers dreamed of. Observing your campaign for the presidency so far has given not only your own nation hope for America, it has given other nations faith in your strength and commitment to doing what is right, rather than caving in to the pressures of those who would choose to rule through fear.



I believe I also stand with your constituents in being against giving immunity to lawbreakers, regardless of who told them to break it. Since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 the rulers of sovereign nations have been held subject to the same laws as all other citizens. Giving immunity to telecommunications companies who knowingly broke the law under the directive of the President would not only be setting your country back 800 years, it would set a terrible precedent for all future leaders to mistreat and subjugate the citizens of your nation, in whatever way they see fit, with impunity.



I urge you to vote against this law in any form, and to use the power of the filibuster to prevent it from coming to a vote if necessary.

I know you will do what is right. Future generations of not only America, but of the world are depending on it.



Yours sincerely,
**************
Canadian Citizen
Friend of America

Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

West Vancouver, BC
May 2005

JUN 24, 2008 11:52 AM

ChrisSick said:
Not to be a complete ass or anything, but weren't many of the same faces now expressing total shock and outrage at this story just recently over here all of five minutes ago deriding famous troll Stockula for bringing this up as a negative for Obama?

I mean, look, if I'm wrong, please explain the fine details to me, because the last place I want to be is defending Stockula in any way shape or form, but for god's sake hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Blasting him for pointing it out on the part of a candidate and then ripping into that candidate's party for the same exact thing is sort of a little, hypocritical, yes?



Not entirely. Obama hasn't voted yet, but congress has.

ChrisSick

ChrisSick

Philadelphia, PA
March 2008

JUN 24, 2008 12:02 PM

Bill_the_Cat said:

ChrisSick said:
Not to be a complete ass or anything, but weren't many of the same faces now expressing total shock and outrage at this story just recently over here all of five minutes ago deriding famous troll Stockula for bringing this up as a negative for Obama?

I mean, look, if I'm wrong, please explain the fine details to me, because the last place I want to be is defending Stockula in any way shape or form, but for god's sake hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Blasting him for pointing it out on the part of a candidate and then ripping into that candidate's party for the same exact thing is sort of a little, hypocritical, yes?



Not entirely. Obama hasn't voted yet, but congress has.



Fair enough, but Stockula headed his article with an attack on Obama and everyone couldn't wait to rip him apart and tell him he was wrong. As I recall very few people made the point that Obama hadn't voted yet. Most of them made the point that his position had changed based on changing facts and political compromise, which is all fine and good. No one can look too closely at how laws get made and expect to walk away feeling good about it. But no one is making those same points in this thread. I love bashing Congress as much as the next guy, but the facts currently seem to be that Obama has decided to support it and that sort of bothers me about him, I can send him an email as a donor to his campaign, just like I can email my representatives to inform them of my feelings regarding their votes, either upcoming or already recorded. None of that changes the fact that we're all sitting around on this thread bashing the Democrats at large, but when someone from the other side uses the same issue against Obama the crowd wants to rally to his defense. The guy's running for president, expecting him to do everything right and please everyone all the time isn't just silly, it's downright dangerous if it leads him to support weak-sister shit like this law.

hk85

hk85

Guerneville, CA
October 2007

JUN 24, 2008 12:04 PM

This is what my congresswoman had to say:


Woolsey Calls FISA Vote a 'Sellout of Our Constitution'
June 20, 2008


Washington, DC %u2013 Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, the Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, today issued the following statement following passage of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Woolsey opposed the measure.

"This proposal is a wholesale sellout of our Constitution. Today's vote provides de facto immunity for telecommunications companies that broke the law and ensures that an Administration that knowingly broke the law will never be held accountable. By weakening judicial oversight, this proposal allows the President to conduct widespread surveillance of innocent Americans, turning our legal system into little more than a rubber stamp for the White House. Elected officials have a solemn responsibility to defend our country, and, like my colleagues, I support a modernization of our intelligence laws. However, I cannot support actions that, under the guise of strengthening our national security, sacrifice individual civil liberties."



Source

It's too bad that more Democrats didn't step up to the plate like she did.

CherryCoke

CherryCoke

Derry, NH
May 2007

JUN 24, 2008 12:19 PM

I was happy to see that my representative voted against it. It makes me happy that I voted her in.
I'll be sending my senator a letter, though I have a feeling he'll still vote for this bill, being a republican and all. Maybe he'll surprise me.

RudieCantFail

RudieCantFail

Intercourse, PA
January 2006

JUN 24, 2008 12:32 PM

I wrote to both my Senators (one's a Democrat, one's a Republican) and I also wrote to Obama.

CodyW

CodyW

Lufkin, TX
December 2004

JUN 24, 2008 12:46 PM

Obama votes for this, he's not getting my vote.

Lavardac

Lavardac

I'm lost
August 2007

JUN 24, 2008 12:51 PM

I'm surprised nobody has jumped all over FTR for mistyping 'vial' instead of vile... I'm sure there's a terrible joke in there somewhere.....

As far as the content of the post is concerned... I can't agree more. The dems are just useless.

AntiSCO

AntiSCO

Ireland
December 2005

JUN 24, 2008 01:21 PM

This is a very good article FTR! I normally steer clear of these, simply because of how apolitical I am, but this one actually made me want to keep reading it. It makes me think of the portion of that old Richard Pryor film "Brewster's Millions" where, out of complete disgust for the two-party norm in politics, he started his own campaign slogan: "None of the above". Fuck, at this point, he'd have my bloody vote! Anyways, it is a VERY well done post. Thank you.

ARRR!!!

SilverJimmy

SilverJimmy

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

JUN 24, 2008 01:30 PM

Here is a sweet opportunity for anyone who lives in SFV in Los Angeles (District 27). Your Congressman, Brad Sherman -- a Democrat who voted FOR this bill and is thereby a douchebag -- is having a conference call TONIGHT.


Dear Friends,

[Today], Tuesday, June 24th, I will be holding a "Telephone Town Hall" meeting from 7:00-8:30 p.m. A Telephone Town Hall operates like a large-scale conference call, where you will have a chance to ask me questions about major issues facing our country. I invite you to participate in the discussion and hear what other Valley residents have to say. Just call the toll-free number, 1-866-447-5149 (Pin# 13402), tomorrow between 7:00 and 8:30 p.m.

If you have any questions, please feel free to visit my website, http://BradSherman.house.gov, or call my office at 818-501-9200.

Sincerely,

Congressman Brad Sherman



If you live in the SFV, take advantage of this opportunity, call his ass out!

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

JUN 24, 2008 01:31 PM

ChrisSick said:
Not to be a complete ass or anything, but weren't many of the same faces now expressing total shock and outrage at this story just recently over here all of five minutes ago deriding famous troll Stockula for bringing this up as a negative for Obama?


that thread really didn't remain on-topic long enough for most people to weigh in with what they thought about it. personally, i view this as a big black mark on Obama--a failure on his part to stand for something that i feel is very important.

but, y'know, what am i gonna do? vote for McCain?

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

JUN 24, 2008 01:36 PM



Just as Nancy Pelosi ran to Time to justify her support for the FISA bill, Steny Hoyer yesterday spouted his justifications to The Politico and said this:

In an interview with Politico on Monday, Hoyer called the FISA legislation a "significant victory" for the Democratic Party -- one that neutralized an issue Republicans might have been able to use against Democrats in November while still, in his view, protecting the civil liberties of American citizens.

In other words, Democrats achieved a "significant victory" because -- by giving Republicans everything they demanded -- Republicans are no longer able to criticize Democrats on this issue. What a shrewd strategy: "if we comply with all their demands, then they can't criticize us for anything." That's the Democratic Party's plan for winning, according to Hoyer.

But that tactic isn't as innovative as Hoyer tries to suggest. That was exactly the mentality that led huge numbers of Democrats in 2002 to vote to authorize Bush's attack on Iraq: "Let's give the Republicans everything they want on national security and then they can't criticize us any more. That'll show them." Aside from being the very definition of cravenness -- "let's comply with all the GOP's orders and then they won't be mad and that will be good for us!" -- ask Max Cleland, who voted for the AUMF and then had commercials run against him with video of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, how well that strategy works.



Glenn Greenwald.

AceT

AceT

Portland, OR
April 2004

JUN 24, 2008 01:38 PM

The democrats have been rolling over since the midterms, it's pretty fucking appalling to watch.

One of my senators, Ron Wyden, has been leading the resistance against FISA along with Chris Dodd and was one of the first to help filibuster the bill last session. The other senator in my state is a Republican and of course voted for it wholeheartedly and I'll be voting against him this year.

I think the main issue here is piss poor leadership. I've been going off for years on how ridiculous it is that a conservative red state Mormon is leading the Democrats in the senate, and I've been severely disappointed by Nancy Pelosi in the House.

bean

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

JUN 24, 2008 01:47 PM

A lesson on election-year politics: All House seats are up for reelection this year. Not one Democrat involved in a close race for reelection voted against the bill. Those representatives in close races represent very conservative districts, and this was clearly a case of representatives voting as they perceived their constituents expected them to vote. Pelosi and Hoyer gave a lot of excuses about why the bill was good, but they gave representatives in safe districts freedom to vote however they felt like voting. That move belies their real intention: ensuring an overwhelming Democratic majority for 2009 and beyond.

Now, some might say that they should protect the American people and our rights at all costs, and that pandering to their constituents smacks of a cold political calculation. That's one way to look at it, but in the end, I'd rather politicians err on the side of representing their constituents. If they're going to pander to someone, let it be to their constituents. Ideally, representatives should be free to protect the rights of citizens without risking their seat.

If you have a problem with the House passing that Act, talk to the people of Pennsylvania's 10th district, of Mississippi's 1st district, of Louisiana's 6th district. Talk to the people who are worried that their Democratic representative is "too liberal;" People in Kansas' 2nd district, or Florida's 16th district. Until we can impress upon the people in these districts and districts like them that "liberal" isn't a bad word, Democrats in these districts will continue to disappoint us on high-profile election-year votes.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 13

Next

Now Hear This

Last Comment 4 HR by orbro

Now Hear This

Last Comment 4 HR

There's like a half-hour of video here. You should do a vlog. More ...

Asshole Fuckface Roundup #74

Last Comment 5 HR

Parents who are accustomed to carrying guns around may not think anything of going into child-related... More ...

An Encounter With Jonathan Shaw's Narcisa

Last Comment 6 HR

thanx gurlz... u rrrrrule!! xx jonathan shaw and narcisa More ...

SuicideGirl: Bob

Bob

Terrible Woman's MySpace Alias Leads to Teen's Suicide.

Last Comment 21 HR

But, it's delivered poorly...really poorly. Unless, it's not a joke, in which case, it's a good place... More ...

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08 by Shalome

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08

Oh my fucking god. More ...

Filtering the Truth: Religion - Friend or Foe?

Last Comment 11/30/08

I'm just going to skip over the mass orgy that's going on and say my piece: I don't think religion is... More ...

SuicideGirls Interview: Aesop Rock
SuicideGirls Interview: Bootsy Collins
SuicideGirls Interview: Travis Barker