Senate to stay in Pro Forma session over the winter break

The Senate will stay in Pro Forma session during the winter break to deny the little idiot the opportunity to use recess appointments to put mendacious thugs like Sam Fox in positions that they wouldn't have a prayer of being confirmed to.

The Fox appointment might have been the proverbial straw that broke the donkeys back. Sam "Swift Boat" Fox was nominated for an ambassadorship, and withdrawn because the votes weren't there to confirm him. When Congress recessed for the Easter break, Bush made an end run around decency and installed Sammy-the-Swiftboat-liar via a recess appointment.

I have to give the devil his due here - I have been one of those Democrats screaming the loudest for real leadership. I would prefer that the feckless Republican bastards be treated exactly the way they insisted on treating the Democrats for the entire Bush administration. I want my pound of flesh, and I don't even pretend to deny it. I want the fuckers to bleed and sputter and whine like the little bitches they are.

So when I see a scintilla of spine, a modicum of moxie or even a dram of determination - I am happy for it. It fortifies me for the upcoming fight, and since I want more, and better - with the emphasis on better - Democrats, I will take all the fortification I can get.

There's more: "Senate to stay in Pro Forma session over the winter break" >>

Call Senator Reid Right Now!

He is on the verge of sticking a thumb in your eye on a Friday afternoon! Flood his office with phone calls and emails! Fill his voicemail! Run his staff ragged!

He is threatening to ask for a 'motion to Proceed" on FISA - the bill that Senator Dodd placed a hold on! Reid wants to let the Telecom's off the hook for breaking the law and spying on you!

The phone number to his office is 202-224-3542.

If you can't get through to his office, acll the Capitol switchboard. That number is 202-224-3121

Here is the link to his senate email forum:

reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm


Call right now and tell him just exactly how pissed off his fecklessness makes you!

(Can you say Majority Leader Feingold?)

There's more: "Call Senator Reid Right Now!" >>

Once in a while, Bloggers bitch and Congress eventually listens...

Last month, before Mukasey was confirmed, there was talk about just giving him the gig in a recess appointment. Of course, we - meaning the left side of the blogosphere - went nuts.

My exact words were:

Probably so. Wouldn't put it past the sonofabitch for a hot second, but there is an easy way to thwart that possibility, and they damn well know it!

Don't officially call a recess.

A couple of Dems need to stay behind in Washington. Call the Senate to order every day of the scheduled recess, even without a quorum. I realize that this is the same party that was in a big toot to get their vacations started in August, so they caved on FISA, but damnit! Read the freakin' Jefferson's Manual! Mikulski and Webb live in close enough proximity to the Hill to employ the tactic and not even be greatly inconvenienced.

For every parliamentary maneuver, there is a parliamentary check. And if we don't have Democrats who know how this god-damned game is played, then we need some new god-damned Democrats.

Today, Roll Call is reporting that Reid pulled the trigger, and the Senate will stay in Pro Forma session over the Thanksgiving break, so the Resident can't use recess appointments to put his Loyal-Bushie cronies in positions of power (especially in the Department of Justice) without Senate approval.

About god-damned time that bastard Reid grew a pair. It's his responsibility to keep the fucking Senate in session until the end of the error in January 2009. Screw Bush. Give that bastard nothing, unless it's a stroke.

[thats all]

There's more: "Once in a while, Bloggers bitch and Congress eventually listens..." >>

Reid offers an olive branch to anti-war Republicans

Accepting the contentious nature of the debate ahead over the approaching weeks, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has acquiesced on the “date certain” provision of upcoming legislation in an effort to build an alliance with a small-but-growing contingent of anti-war Republican lawmakers in an effort to find ways to draw down the occupation of Iraq. .

He acknowledged that his previous insistence on a withdrawal deadline had presented an insurmountable obstacle for many Republicans who have said they oppose continued involvement but who were unwilling to commit to timetables.

"I don't think we have to think that our way is the only way," Reid said of specific dates during an interview in his office here. "I'm not saying, 'Republicans, do what we want to do.' Just give me something that you think you would like to do, that accomplishes some or all of what I want to do."

Reid's unwavering stance this summer earned him critics who said he was playing politics by refusing to bargain with antiwar Republicans. In the interview, he said that his goal remains an immediate return of U.S. troops but that now is the time to work with the GOP. He cited bringing up legislation after Labor Day that would require troops to have more home leave, forcing military leaders to reduce troop levels, a measure that has drawn some Republican support.

On September 4, Congress returns from the August recess, facing an angry electorate and a desperate executive. The coming week will see the congress take the initiative on the assessment of the situation in Iraq by opening hearings into a GAO report that will be released Tuesday, and by taking up the issues raised by the report of another Blue Ribbon panel. The following week, Petraeus will bring his particularly insidious brand of spin to the Hill, where he will appeal for more time, blood and treasure to pour into the sand of Iraq.

After the Parade of the Viziers is done, and the Resident makes his own report, the debate will begin anew.

That debate screeched to a halt after the fake filibuster in July. All that stunt managed to do was piss everyone off, Republican and Democrat alike. The Republicans successfully blocked the withdrawal measure, because the advocates for withdrawal were unable to reach cloture and pass the legislation with only four Republican votes.

Reid wisely dropped the war debate after that, and attempted to shift the focus to the obstructionism of the Republicans.

This tactic gave the White House a toehold, and they set about building the case that the ridiculously-named “Surge™” strategy is working, in spite of all evidence to the contrary.

"I don't think we had any choice," Reid said, shrugging off past skirmishes. "I have no regrets about the way that I have tried to marshal the troops. It's been hard to keep all the Democrats together, but we've done that."

But looking forward, Reid said he will encourage new coalitions to develop, with a more bipartisan hue. "There is no reason that this be Democrat versus Republican," he said. But his GOP colleagues, he added, must be willing to stand up to Bush, as few have so far. "All these people saying September is here, September is the time -- they're going to have belly up to the bar and decide how to vote," Reid said.

Sen. Jack Reed, a close senate ally of Harry Reid on Iraq policy was circumspect. He noted that with every shift in the Iraq debate, "we've picked up more votes." But he quickly added that meeting the Democrats' ultimate goal of ending the war, well, "There's only so many things you can do."

One of the pieces of failed legislation that Reid will dust off will be the proposal by Sen. James Webb that would mandate that troops deployed to a combat zone get an equal or greater amount of dwell time after their rotation before being redeployed back to combat. This would not set withdrawal dates, but it would effectively curtail troop levels. When the issue came up for a vote earlier in the summer, it received 56 yes votes, but, again, obstructionist Republicans had invoked cloture, which requires 60 votes. Worth noting: Seven Republicans voted yes on the proposal last time, and Senator Johnson is returning to the Senate in September.

The month of September appears to be shaping up to be everything it was billed and more. It seems like every one of 535 congresscritters went to Iraq this month. It wasn’t all of 'em, of course, but it was eight sold out shows a week all month long in every house. Some fell victim to the Green Zone Fog.

Also worth considering is legislation offered by Senators Ken Salazar and Lamar Alexander that would make the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group into official U.S. policy. The ISG, which was mostly ignored by the Bush administration, included defining specific roles for combat forces and far greater diplomatic initiatives, especially diplomatic initiatives involving the neighboring states. Under the Salazar/ISG legislation, if progress failed to occur, withdrawal would begin early next year. The Salazar-Alexander Bill has attracted 12 additional co-sponsors, at least half of them Republicans. "I respect that some Democrats want us out tomorrow, and some Republicans want a victory like Germany and Japan, but that's not going to happen," Alexander said. But he warned that, given the onset of the 2008 presidential campaign season, "September may be our last best chance" to force a legislative solution.

Re-election season is indeed upon us. All 435 house seats and 34 Senate seats are up this election cycle, and every last one of them will have to answer tough questions about Iraq, posed by an angry electorate. Brian Baird found out just how popular war support is at home. The bloodletting for 2008 is going to commence early. We only thought 2006 was contentious - 2008 is going to be absolutely brutal. It certainly isn't going to be politics for the faint of heart. I hope they are rested up, because the days on the other side of the weekend are going to be grueling (I myself have been on a training regimen for weeks in preparation).

There's more: "Reid offers an olive branch to anti-war Republicans" >>

So who is going to blink first?

.

As they seek to reconcile two versions of the spending resolution to fund Bush’s not-so-excellent adventure, Senate Democrats are looking at making timelines and benchmarks “advisory” rather than binding.

They are also considering giving Bush the authority to waive troop readiness standards.

Sounds to me like they are folding like a bunch of cheap suits. Their compromise will cost them dearly with the staunchly anti-war members of the party, but will likely pick up some Republican support.

Bush claims he will veto any legislation that isn’t 100% to his liking, and insists he will never compromise. Timelines, to his way of – ahem – thinking – ahem – are a “date to surrender” you see. (Never mind that American forces are viewed as occupiers, and are caught in the crossfire.)

The haggling between congressional Democrats came as their leaders met at the White House with Bush to try to hash out their dispute. Both sides termed it a polite, productive meeting in which they restated their positions but emerged without an agreement. Democrats promised to send Bush their bill next week.

"We believe he must search his soul, his conscience, and decide what is best for the American people," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters on the White House driveway. "I believe signing the bill is that."

White House spokeswoman Dana M. Perino said later that Bush has not changed his mind. But she expressed optimism that after a veto, Democrats would pass legislation without conditions to provide $100 billion to continue operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. "It was clear that ultimately there will be a bill that can fund the troops, that the troops will get the funds they need," Perino said.

It is, of course, brinksmanship, pure and simple. This is all positioning for the post veto phase of the process. One Democrat was reported to have said that Congress might pass a 60-day spending bill, without conditions and continue the debate on the supplemental. . Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) said Democrats are treating June 1 as the final deadline for passage of a war-funding bill that would not be vetoed.

Bush offered platitudes, assuring the congressional leaders that he believes in benchmarks and has been pressing Iraqi leaders to meet them, he just doesn’t want them to be binding or anything he has to live up to. Democrats want to make the benchmarks binding.

Democrats were quick to cite Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who told reporters traveling with him in the Middle East yesterday that demands for withdrawal have been constructive. "The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable probably has had a positive impact . . . in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment," Gates said.

When the House convenes tomorrow, Speaker Pelosi will have quite a task on her hands keeping the Democratic caucus together.

[Cross posted to Blue Girl, Red State].

There's more: "So who is going to blink first?" >>

OK, call me a Green State blogger in a red state

That includes you, Harry Reid

When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid goes around demonizing freely elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as did Kent Conrad and others, it’s a reflection on why I’m skeptical about today’s Democratic Party in foreign as well as domestic affairs.

Considering our own government likely tried to get him overthrown, isn’t this rather just a case of Chavez taking care of No. 1? And, is only the United States allowed to form alliances, bloc and groups?

And, yes, I am floating this post in part as a deliberate test to see how a non-Democratic left-liberal gets accepted.

(Note to readers and fellow bloggers: I am listing my tags for people the same way as on my blogs -- last name first, for alphabetizing, then first name in parentheses, because you can't, of course, separate the last and first names by commas.)

There's more: "OK, call me a Green State blogger in a red state" >>