"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safet

[unusualmusic_lj_archive]

This is the ad that will run against Dem. Steny Hoyer in next week Thursday's Washington Post. Via:Digby




This is Glenn Greenwald giving rather objective proof thatthe word bipartisanship, in Washington, seems to mean that the Dems. give the Republicans whatever the hell they want. (The post is from January, but you get the point)

Kyl-Lieberman Resolution on Iran: GOP - 46-2

Dems - 30-20

To condemn MoveOn.org:

GOP - 49-0

Dems - 23-25

The Protect America Act:

GOP - 44-0

Dems - 20-28

Declaring English to be the Government's official language:

GOP - 48-1

Dems - 16-33

The Military Commissions Act:

GOP - 53-0

Dems - 12-34

To renew the Patriot Act:

GOP - 54-0

Dems - 34-10

Cloture Vote on Sam Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court:

GOP - 54-0

Dems - 18-25

Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq:

GOP - 48-1

Dems - 29-22

On virtually every major controversial issue -- particularly, though not only, ones involving national security and terrorism -- the Republicans (including their vaunted mythical moderates and mavericks) vote in almost complete lockstep in favor of the President, the Democratic caucus splits, and the Republicans then get their way on every issue thanks to "bipartisan" support. That's what "bipartisanship" in Washington means.

This is Glenn Greenwald slamming Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Fred Hiatt, and the rest of teh Democratic Congress who capitulated to the Pres. Unconstitutional demands:

It's bad enough watching the likes of Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel and a disturbingly disoriented Nancy Pelosi eviscerate the Fourth Amendment, exempt their largest corporate contributors from the rule of law, and endorse the most radical aspects of the Bush lawbreaking regime. But it's downright pathetic to see them try to depict their behavior as some sort of bipartisan "compromise" whereby they won meaningful concessions:

"When they saw that we were unified in sending that bill rather than falling for their scare tactics, I think it sent them a message," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). "So our leverage was increased because of our Democratic unity in both cases."

Not even the media establishment and the GOP can refrain from mocking this pretense they're trying to peddle. What's amazing is that they're actually as devoid of dignity as they are integrity.

As I noted yesterday, the GOP couldn't even wait for the ink to dry on this "compromise" before publicly -- and accurately -- boasting that they not only got everything they want, but got even more than they dreamed they would get. To The New York Times' Eric Lichtblau, GOP House Whip Roy Blunt derided the telecom amnesty provision as nothing more than a "formality" which would inevitably lead to the immediate and automatic dismissal of all lawsuits against the telecoms, while Sen. Kit Bond taunted the Democrats for giving away even more than they had to in order to get a deal: "I think the White House got a better deal than they even had hoped to get."

Lichtblau himself noted that "the White House immediately endorsed the proposal" and wrote that the bill "represents a major victory for the White House after months of dispute." Reporters Dan Eggen and Paul Kane were even more blunt and derisive in The Washington Post, noting that the Democrats "hand[ed] President Bush one of the last major legislative victories he is likely to achieve"; that "the deal appears to give Bush and his aides, including Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, much of what they sought in a new surveillance law"; and that "the negotiations underscored the political calculation made by many Democrats who were fearful that Republicans would cast them as soft on terrorism during an election year."
...

But this absurd praise underscores what the Washington power structure means when they speak of "bipartisanship" -- it means having the Republican Party demand something, and then having enough Democrats agree to it to ensure it passes in essentially undiluted form.

...

UPDATE II: Sen. Kit Bond was on NPR this morning explaining why telecom amnesty was justified and uttered what is the most revealing quote of the last year at least (h/t Soprano2):

When the Government tells you to do something, I think you all recognize, uh, that that is something that you need to do.

(This is me wondering if he has lost his fucking mind!)

He forgot to say that we should click our heels and salute before obeying, but that omission notwithstanding, Bond has brilliantly put his finger perfectly on the bipartisan ethos of our ruling class. Pardon me, but I just need to write that again: "When the Government tells you to do something, I think you all recognize, uh, that that is something that you need to do." Clearly, Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi and we-will-see-today- how-many-other-Democrats concur.

This is Benjamin Franklin:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Comments

[cobecat.livejournal.com]

Son of a fucking--! AdjkasknbfiuirelhrghhhhKILL!

Gods, I hate this. I hate it so much.

[unusualmusic.livejournal.com]

(866) 675-2008 His campaign number.

[fengi.livejournal.com]

I encourage you to call Barack Obama's office and tell him to change his mind on supporting this. He's clearly doing it for misguided election year reason's and we don't need a candidate who has given up even before he gets into office.