Brad:

I agree with you. Things MAY be beginning to shift. I'm cautiously optimistic. Somebody is letting a few things pass thru the MSM filter. David Ray Griffin's presentation. Today we have British MP Galloway's testimony. "In Plane Sight" was shown in my local viewing area. Twice. Anyway, W. has a LONG 4 years ahead of him, and he's starting it out at 43% approval rating. When I look back at the Presidents of my lifetime, all the 2 term winners basically got eviscerated in the second term. And W. deserves it more than any other.

The neocons have worked long and hard to do away with the filibuster in the Senate.

The value of the filibuster is noted by the fact that the minority democrats and one independent represent states with more population than the majority does.

With the '06 election coming up, and one that will be watched closer than any in history perhaps, some of the moderates are beginning to realize there is going to be political fallout.

And not in the favor of those assisting the neocons in their fascist pursuits.

More support for the theory ... the Senate just defied the president by passing a bill he said he would veto (link here).

I mean even they can see the madness in going to Iraq and decimating the place so billions can be sent there ... but not at home?

Yes Folks, the shift is happening, and indeed, it is happening because Congressmen and media are being hammered by the New Democracy - we the people. Mass Emails and these wonderful Brad Blog forums are bringing the actual American citizenry, we the people, into play in ways that were never imagined before. The GOP has been thrown for a loop by this newly discovered 4th branch of government, the New Democracy, coming to life and fighting back. We have to keep it moving and get it organized for full force though.

I can't begin to even frame my applause for Newsweek's valiant efforts on the Quran story. I know there's a lot we don't like about Newsweek reporters, but in truth they need our help to really stand up to the White House and right wing pressure.
I hated to see them retract the story. It smacked of towing the Right wing extremist party line. In reading their retractions and editorials and the play by Raw Story, it of course doesn't sound completely like a retraction and of course the White House
is still going to pound them about it. One more time, we must urge them to STAND THEIR GROUND!

As the Raw Story story puts it, the Newsweek editor types are standing behind their reporters,
reinforcing the same "hard driving news writing" that has been horribly lacking in Main Stream Media. This is the place where it really starts coming alive. If we want to see MSM actually take it full circle in their expose' of GW's scams, we must unite in pressing them to Stand their Ground!! They cannot let the White House dictate the line that they will print. We know that it's really time for them to step back and ask the White House the hard questions...., "How many have died because the White House erroneously reported that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction?"

Put it to the Newsweek editors straight, and if they can press a White House explaination about how they outright bought bad info and foisted it onto the World body as gospel, then Newsweek folks will be more than happy, delighted even to explain what went awry in their article.

No, we are staggering through an amazing age of censorship by the State. That has to be the really, really big story about censorship and the process whereby the White House connives to eliminate any media that is critical of their campaign against humanity.

Censorship - Cry it out loud and Clear - CENSORSHIP OF THE HIGHEST ORDER! And let's all call them on it!
So, let's thank Newsweek for standing firm even as they retracted for a distance, and offer them our support. I know, there are Isakoff reporters that we are not happy with, but this episode is showing that Newsweek really does have some cajones.
gh

No doubt, the foundation is shaking, the fortress will fall. I've been feeling subtle shifts and tremblings since January, when the debate on the legitimacy of the Ohio electors was forced upon a reluctant congress. It's only in the past couple of months that the quakes are getting strong enough to make people say "What the hell was that?"

It's only a matter of time now.

(Okay, tangent thought - is it just me, or did anyone else think of this administration while watching the crumbling of the Dark Lord's tower in "Lord of the Rings - Return of the King"?)

Good job Brad. To see this plus Raw Story advising that Newsweek backing its reporters is a breath of fresh air.

Perhaps the MSM actually has a small, almost imperceptible pulse?

Let the tide turn and let those in power feel what we've had to endure for the past 5 years or more!

It's typical that the MSM is hysterical about Newsweek's "blunder" and paying little to no attention to the demise of the filibuster to keep out incompetent judges. It appears that the Powers That Be don't like Newsweek and would like it (or at least certain reporters there) to go the way of Dan Rather. Therefore I subscribed to Newsweek today (even if they are MSM). Anyone care to join me?

Remember all.

When these people fall from power, they will not go out without a fight. A massive fight in this case because they are so entrenched. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. So watch out!

What we are doing here is simply putting them on defense for the first time since 2000.

The only way to win now is to go for the kill. Because when they are wounded, they will attack ferociously.

I agree with you, MrBlueSky. The toughest fights are yet to come. They won't fall easily.

But the fact that it looks like there *will* be a fight at all...for truth, justice and the American Way...is an encouraging thought over where I know that many were several months ago.

Keep. Making. Noise. It's the very least you can do for your country.

Yes, Brad! And you do it so well we would be ashamed to fail to do what we can also!

I think the fall will start right here at home.

http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/002805.html

snip

"I'm here as House Democratic Leader today to talk about a new ethical standard for the House of Representatives, which will remove all doubt in the public's mind as to who we are here to serve. The public is our boss. We are here in the public interest, not to be the handmaidens of the special interests.

"Democrats are setting forth the new ethical standard containing these six principles:

* Ban Members from accepting any gifts from lobbyists.

* Ban Members from secretly working with corporate lobbyists to write legislation.

* Ban lobbying by Members of Congress and high level staff for two years after leaving Congress.

* Enforce the ban on Members and staff soliciting privately-funded travel.

* Ban lobbyists from arranging and financing travel.

* End the 'K Street Project' - ban Members and staff from threatening lobbyists with official actions.

"Some of these provisions are already in the excellent Meehan-Emmanuel Bill, which is being introduced today. All of them will uphold a high ethical standard in the House of Representatives.

"It is no longer acceptable to just talk about ethics reform and restoring integrity to the legislative process. We must do something about it, and we must do it now."

http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/002805.html

Every law has been broken and you can't get away with that when its obvious the people will not allow it! These thugs are being put in their place.

But then again, there are all these media personalities like www.mysterypollster.com threatening people, there are hackers deleting websites, and people clogging everything up with BS manufactured by Dick Cheney's force-felt army.

Obviously to out Rove Karl Rove, you have to do more than hit from all sides you have to undress the super secret central core!

Matt

In floor speeches today, Sens. Reid and Boxer brought up (very strongly) that it was the Repubs who came up with "Nuclear Option".

Boxer made a long speech on the subject, and also took a long time to go over why the Senate previously rejected Janice Rogers Brown. And she did it very well, as usual, damning Brown with her own quotes and bad decisions on the CA Supreme Court. I had to laugh when Sen. Boxer kept asking "What planet is she on?"

For myself I called my R Senator (who is a moderate - at least *these* *days* he's a moderate!), asking him to vote against Rogers Brown and Owen, and to save the filibuster. Didn't have to call my Dem Senator; he's one of the most liberal there. Tomorrow should be interesting!!!

yea, you don't want to say "nuclear option" because, in relation to the administration, it has 2 meanings. people might get confused.

"nuclear option" for global strike mission:

"Surprisingly, however, global strike also includes a nuclear option, which runs counter to traditional U.S. notions about the defensive role of nuclear weapons
...

The global strike plan holds the nuclear option in reserve if intelligence suggests an "imminent" launch of an enemy nuclear strike on the United States or if there is a need to destroy hard-to-reach targets."

The problem with the Republicans is that they are not in the business of LEADING the people, for the benefit of the people. Instead, they have opted for he business of MISLEADING the people, for their own benefit. It is dishonest, it is dangerous, there is no place for it in society, in government, or in the world.

Voinovich got the memo, read it, and unfortunately committed it to memory. "Senator Voinovich is in favor of the Constitutional Option" was the reponse I got when I called his office yesterday to find out where he stood on the issue. Not that it will do any good, but I bothered to explain the foolishness of the idea and how disappointed I was in my Senator. Who knows, maybe others have done the same and he may yet be swayed back to reality. As for DeWine, it's anyone's guess. His office said he was refraining from announcing his views as a member of the Judicial committee. They indicated he might make some statement about it prior to an actual vote. I encouraged him to think very carefully about this most fateful decision. The staffer I spoke with didn't seem to like my assertion that he'd have to live with the consequences when his party is no longer in power.

Nelson of florida is for the filibuster but Martinez is going with the Repubs,one for each.Nelson in Fl really needs to go in 2006,he votes against the people all the time,so does Boyd.

You guys are getting it all wrong. I love filibusters. They are brilliant. They are needed.

However, constitutionally, filibusters are for legislation, not judges. It is clear that a president picks who he wants and if they are not criminals or unfit, etc., they get an up or down vote. Being pro-life does not make them unfit.

I have no problems with the talking points because many Americans, thanks to government schools, are ignorant about the constitution.

I cannot believe you guys believe that the Koran story by Newsweek is true. It is impossible to flush the Koran down a toilet. It never happened. The government is not strong-arming Newsweek.

I agree with Rush and Newt. The anti-war crowd, the anti-Bush crowd, the liberal MSM, will do anything to hurt this country because they hate Bush, the military, and hate our power. They want these falsehoods to be true. The Dan Rather story was bogus but it did not inflame the Muslim world like Newsweek did. When the whole world thought Saddam had WMD, that does not make Bush a liar.

The Republicans are not crashing and burning.

I'd like to see the minorty party actually do a real filibust. They will look like fools! Bring it on!!!!!!

Paul poked his head out from under the bridge to say:

"However, constitutionally, filibusters are for legislation, not judges.

Really, Paul? Show it to me in the constitution please. I await your reply.

"It is clear that a president picks who he wants and if they are not criminals or unfit, etc., they get an up or down vote."

Then why did the Republicans disallow up-or-down votes on 65 judges of Clinton's? (Versus just 10 of Bush's). I await your reply.

"I have no problems with the talking points because many Americans, thanks to government schools, are ignorant about the constitution."

See my first question. I await your reply.

I want to know what happens if the Dems hold a filibuster and nobody covers it.

The filibuster should (in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" fashion) draw attention to the failings, inconsistencies, deceit and craven things the current administration has done---not only about judicial appointments, but about the big picture. But whatever it is about, the press has to cover it to get the points across. I am depressed that the blogs and the pundits seem to think of this entire thing as Kabuki performance about Senate traditions or a horse-race in the making with Frist running for president. It is nothing unless the press is there to report it fully. C-Span will do its job. Will anybody else? Public involvement in the debate over the big picture is needed and it won't happen if the press wants to talk about Neweek, Michael Jackson, or Star Wars.

Link to "Nuclear Option" as Lott Republican word-ology:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200504260001

I am neither Republican nor Democrat; I am centrist and independent. I even voted for a Republican candidate (not Bush, of course) in the November '04 election.

Being independent, I have a "nuclear option" of my own: If the Senate rules are changed regarding the filibuster, I pledge to never again vote for a Republican candidate for as long as I live.

If you have ever voted for a Republican, you may join in my pledge as well.

Spread the word.