Good morning Jane!

If Cathy Castor doesn’t vote NO on this bill she’s gonna pay a price next year.

Tap, tap. Is this thing on?

Mornin’, Jane

Off to swim in the great capitalist cesspool.

Be good to yourselves, and all other living things.

Namaste

interesting lists…

Another trait I so admire. Threatening members of Congress who don’t agree with you on single issues. Of course this hardly ever happens because it’s just talk. But, if it did it would probably make a Republican’s chances of winning much greater. But who cares about that right?

And sorry Jane – you do not speak for all “progressives” nor do you define them. So to say as you do, “progressives have been seriously emboldened.” and “progressives being forced to betray their anti-war principles” is intellectually dishonest. This passionate progressive does not agree with releasing the photos, I do agree with Obama keeping his word on the IMF loan which would benefit 3rd world countries and I do support our troops in Afghanistan . . . which is not Iraq.

The contention as is alluded to every day here, that to be a “progressive” you must toe the party line on every single issue (as defined by a handful of activists) is insulting and wrong-headed. You are telling me that someone is not a progressive who is for single payer health care, unions, against offshore drilling, gay marriage, a green world, was against the Iraq war and decries the irreparable harm that the Bush-Cheney neo con cabal did to this country? BS.

Of course Obama should never have stuck IMF into a war funding bill. But that is politics.

Redfish:

Unless you are a member of Congress I don’t believe that Jane was referring to you when she wrote, ”Progressives have been seriously emboldened to oppose the supplemental in the past 48 hours as a result of activist support”. She, judging by your post, was also not referring to you when she wrote, ”activist support” since you have stated that you haven’t been lending your support on this issue, activist or otherwise.

I was speaking parenthetically and the point is clear. Whether you are a private citizen or a member of Congress, whoever you are, there is no definition for progressive to fall neatly in to. My comment was also in the context, as I said, of comments made here daily which seek to demonize and trash those who don’t agree with every issue that web activists feel progressives should support. But good for you rallying to the defense of your leader.

I called my Congressional Rep., John Yarmuth and got the run around. I first called the D.C. office and they said that they couldn’t tell me how he was going to vote. I told them that I wanted to know if he supported the change to FOIA that the Graham/Lieberman amendment amends and they couldn’t tell me. I told them that I wasn’t very happy with the secrecy surrounding my own Reps. views on this issue and that I wanted to lodge a complaint. They told me I’d have to call the local Yarmuth office. I called them and went through the same process. The woman I spoke with said she would call the D.C. office and see what she could find out and would call me back. I told her that when I called Yarmuth on FISA that I got the same run around from Yarmuth’s office and that in that vote he voted for the FISA bill giving retroactive immunity to the telcoms. I also made clear that I was very unhappy with the secrecy in his office when a constituent calls to find out his views. She tried to tell me that bills change and he may have to vote against a bill that he might otherwise support if something is added or taken away. I told her that I understand the process but that he should be able to tell me his views on whether he supports what the Graham/Lieberman amendment does and whether he would vote for the bill if an amendment similar to the Graham/Lieberman amendment is included.

When she calls me back I’ll let everyone know what she says.

But good for you rallying to the defense of your leader.

Right. Only you express an opinion which is truly yours, where as I have no opinion of my own, I only have a leader. That must be what’s going on here. It’s you against Jane Hamsher and her followers. It’s a hard knock life when you’re Redfish.

That was quick.

I got a call back from Judy Look (sp?) in Yarmuth’s office and she told me that he does not sit on the Conference Committee but that he is against the Graham/Lieberman amendment and hopes that it’s not in the bill when it comes to the floor. But, that he may have to vote for it if there are other things in the bill more important. In other words, if the amendment is in the bill he will vote for it anyways and just tell constituents like me (who he already knows are against this amendment) that while he was against the amendment the other “important” things in the bill required him to vote for it anyway. SAME OLD BS. He will do just like he did on FISA. When he voted for FISA Nancy Pelosi and Yarmuth showed up in my town and they both talked about all the money that Yarmuth was receiving for local projects.

That was a little humor. I think Jane does a great job, that’s why I read her. I respect everyone’s opinion, especially those of liberals here who I agree with on 95% of the issues.

Remember the nonsensical Dr. Suess book – One fish, two fish, redfish, bluefish? I think our Redfish chose the correct name.

Good one! That was intelligent. Any more sophomoric childish taunts or would you like to comment on the issue? Of course you don’t.

Nah, I think the sophomoric, childish taunts are a much more appropriate response to the comments that I’ve seen you post over the last two days.

I’m afraid you’ve jumped the shark in that comment.

Of course you do – because when it becomes obvious that you have been soundly thrashed intellectually on the playing field of ideas, that’s all you have left.

Sorry I didn’t drink your kool-aid, and, I am not going anywhere. Perhaps they can censor me or bar me from the site? I’m sure they will – honest debate is not the goal here is it?

We have a wide range of opinions at the Lake on specifics, not lockstep. Why are you so sarcastic when something varies from your perfect ideal? Are you just cranky all the time?

Sharks are my specialty. Have at me I couldn’t be less intimidated.

I feel it’s critically important that Obama’s efforts are not derailed by extremists. There is too much at stake; health care, gay rights, the environment, etc. So have at me. Progressives for pragmatism.

Yes, a bit cranky after two days of ad hominem personal attacks. You’ve come to the game late. I hope what you say is true – I have read this blog for a year now — I do not see the diversity of ideas you allude to — so far.

As to the issue. There are many good, progressive Democrats that “honestly” feel it would be wrong to release those photos. I have given lucid, sound, logical reasons for this perspective. I am far from alone.

I’m not late – have read all you comments and you came in with a chip on your shoulder and were very aggressive in your approach. You made it personal and attacked others positions but didn’t want anyone to object. We like to talk and debate but you only criticize.

I can’t believe Zoe Lofgren is in favor of the supplemental, or Mike Honda for that matter.

What the hell happened to those two?

Yes, you drift in ready to pick a fight. It has been non-stop. But the attack noted above was beyond the pale of any boundaries you pretend to observe.

Soundly trashed intellectually? LOL Now that’s what I call humor. LOL

What’s the matter Redfish are you the only one who can post a “little humor” like you claimed @11? Do we also have to agree with you on what constitutes humor? I thought the Dr. Suess reference was much more humorous than what you claimed @11 was your brand of humor. By the way, you and I never engaged in any kind of debate, honest or otherwise, before you responded to my comment to someone else. LOL

I hope you don’t go anywhere I think you provide excellent entertainment in the thread. LOL

Thanks for your analysis, it’s completely erroneous. I came in to this particular conversation, not others, because I feel strongly about this issue. Now why don’t you stop talking about me and start talking about the issue as I have done. Or not.

Glenn has a piece up about Slaughter and the FOIA amendment.

If Congressional Democrats are willing to vest the President with the unilateral, unreviewable power to override FOIA — which, as Chairwoman Slaughter says, is one of the crown legislative jewels for the Democratic Party, “as sacred as Social Security and Medicare” — what aren’t they willing to do for him?

I agree that “ideally” FOIA should not be abridged; it would bad precedent to give the executive branch that much power. I would hope that a compromise could be arrived at – keep FOIA intact and in exchange give up on the attempt to release the photos for a pre-determined period of time. This would be a compromise – not ideal for some, but it would allow moving on to more important issues like health care and avoid a blood bath in Congress over this issue. That is what the American people want from congress, compromise, work together and get things done. There will be no patience in mainstream America for this if it rises to critical mass which it hasn’t yet. This will ultimately hurt Obama and the Democrats as the majority of voters do not support releasing the photos.

Boy, you sure are transparent. Your aggression and demanding insults directed
at the owner of this blog are childish, misinformed and inappropriate. If you can’t stop judging us and her based on your limited vision/information, you should just STFU. Go away. Or take a course in reading comprehension.

Of course Obama should never have stuck IMF into a war funding bill. But that is politics.

LOL! Obama didn’t do it.
If you think the IMF is going to help 3rd world countries, you really need to do some research.

There’s another way to move on. Allow a judge to rule on the release of the photos and then follow his order. It’s Graham/Lieberman and Republicans that are making this an issue, not progressives. Oh, and Obama, by reversing himself. Release the pictures and it’s over.