Skip to main content



Folks, this message just in from Progressive Democrats For America (PDA).
_____________________

The Fillibuster is within our grasp!
Call now and let them know we mean business!

Fillibuster here we come...
No Retreat, No Surrender!

Senate Democrats refuse to signal whether or not they will filibuster Alito. They appear to have 41 votes, since Ben Nelson (D-NE) is the only one of 44 Democrats who supports Alito. Jim Jeffords (I-VT) should oppose Alito, and 5 Republicans - Lamar Alexander (TN), Lincoln Chafee (RI) Susan Collins (ME), Olympia Snowe (ME), and Ted Stevens (AK) - are undecided.

We've called and called, but we need to call our Senators again and DEMAND A FILIBUSTER: TOLL FREE - 888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641

For extra credit, use the same numbers to call all the 2008 Presidential candidates who are sitting Senators - Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, and John Kerry - and tell them to either LEAD THE FILIBUSTER or FORGET ABOUT YOUR SUPPORT. You can also send that message to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (202-224-2447) and the Democratic National Committee (202-863-8000).


Originally posted to DerekLarsson on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:41 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Don't ask them to signal (4.00)
    they shouldn't.  Let them keep cards close to the vest.  The best thing the could happen would be for the cloture vote to come on Friday and fail with no on expecting it.  Big news, high drama, suddenly the repubs have to decide if they want to pull the nuclear otion trigger right before SOTU or delay.

    -4.63,-3.54 If the people will lead the leaders will follow

    by calebfaux on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:42:41 PM PST

    •  PS (4.00)
      the instant they signal, that "signal" becomes the target of attack.  They're better off saying nothing.

      -4.63,-3.54 If the people will lead the leaders will follow

      by calebfaux on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:44:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  and assuming (none)
        they don't read this site.  LoL
        •  Makes perfect sense to me... (none)
          It's too bad that the conservative media keeps spinning this as a win for Alito.

          Hah... conservative media.  How the worm turns.

          Sit at the feet of the master long enough and they start to smell. - John Sauget
          -8.00, -6.05

          by Jensequitur on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:45:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  that the media has been saying he's a sure thing (none)
            would only heighten the drama (that may, in fact, be the reason they're doing that), and make our victory all the more sweet.

            It is too hard to believe the media really believes he's unfilibusterable, given his opposition to abortion.

            •  Dick Cheney (none)
              Also, by making it seem like a foregone conclusion, Dick Cheney stays in his undisclosed location and is unavailable to break the rules.

              That's right the UNCONSTITUTIONAL option BREAKS THE RULES...

              Bastards.

              ---
              God wants spiritual fruit, not religious nuts.

              by huppster on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:38:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  IF YOUR SENATORS' LINES ARE BUSY, OTHER CONTACT #S (2.00)
                CALL YOUR SENATORS!

                If Repug, tell them "No" to Alito; if Democrat: FILIBUSTER!
                If the Washington lines are busy you can also call your Senators' home offices (for info, click here:) CALL YOUR SENATORS (Click here)

                Get the word out about why Alito needs to be filibustered:

                Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper. (Click here)

                People for the American Way has collected nearly 65,000 signatures to send to the Senate, please add yours: Save the Court Petition

                John Kerry has endorsed this anti-Alito petition, signers' names will be read into the Congressional Record:

                http://www.johnkerry.com/...

                And as thanks, some Alito jokes:

                "Supreme Court confirmation hearings are under way for Judge Samuel Alito. It's pretty interesting. Democrats want to know his position on privacy, while Republicans want to know his position on prison terms for bribery." --Jay Leno

                "The American Bar Association gave Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito their highest rating. President Bush gave Alito his highest rating, too, because he called him 'Super' and 'Duper.'" --Conan O'Brien

                "President Bush was asked how he came up with a conservative like Alito, and he said he got the idea over the weekend while turning the clocks back." --Jay Leno

                "Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito says he's embarrassed by some of the things he wrote in the 1980's. Yeah, apparently Alito wrote the song 'Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go.'" --Conan O'Brien

            •  heh heh heh (none)
              And the increased drama would be sure to draw tons more attention to Alito by our fellow countrymen. And the ONE THING the pukes don't want is for the average American to actually pay attention to what is going on in DC. That's the last thing they want. I saw, bring it on!

              LetsFight. re handle: Fight the radical right is the sentiment!

              by letsfight on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:33:47 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  It's not conservative (none)
            It's corporate. One thing that happened under BushCo is a loosening of the media rules on numbers of outlets owned, under Colin Powell's son Michael. It's showing now. In the things that are not covered more than anything. How much time did the Alito hearings get on the network news shows tonight? How much on the Sunday talk shows a few days ago?

            "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

            by bewert on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:40:40 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  THANK YOU! (4.00)
      I've been so frustrated with people terminating their democracy bonds and throwing all sorts of fits because "the Dems won't say they're going to filibuster." Sheesh. It's been another case of feeling like I'm the only person in this country with any sense!

      By playing it close to the vest, they're keeping the Repubs off balance.

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

      by WV Democrat on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:54:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Or mmmaaaybe.... (4.00)
        I've been so frustrated with people terminating their democracy bonds and throwing all sorts of fits because "the Dems won't say they're going to filibuster."

        Maybe, just maybe, those very people are just feigning fits to convince Repubs there will be no filibuster, thereby keeping them off balance.

        C'mon! It's possible!

      •  Nothing terminated .... yet (4.00)
        If the Democrats don't lead a filibuster against Alito, then they have forfeited the right to lead. One may have to hold one's nose and vote for them in 06, but the fight must go on for a new party if the Dems fold here. That goes double if the Bush offensive on NSA beats out any opposition response.

        Which, btw, I am wondering, why hasn't the legislative branch, i.e., Congress, passed a resolution saying that their previous grant of war powers to the President specifically does NOT include warrantless non-FISA wiretapping. Why hasn't a Democratic Representative or Senator introduced such a bill or amendment? (Maybe one has? I'd like to know.)

        "...in this abject posture have ye sworn / To adore the Conquerour?..../ Awake, arise, or be for ever fall'n."

        by Valtin on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:17:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  They don't need to... (none)
          They don't need to pass a law.  They already did.  It says wiretapping requires an FISA warrent.  Simple as that.  We need to nail them on that.

          If they write a new law, then there is the claim that the President did have the power, because the new law wasn't in place.  We would be saying that the existing law wasn't enough.

          I repeat, it was enough.  It is illegal.  Let's nail them with it!

          "No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown

          by AUBoy2007 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:16:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  not quite (none)
            It is the Constitution that says a warrant is required.  FISA just sets up a mechanism for granting those warrants while restricting the flow of classified information.

            Not only does Bush not have the power to wiretap Americans without warrants, Congress cannot grant him that power.

            Furthermore, since amendments trump any contrary language in the main text, assertions that Bush's commander-in-chief power means jack are just big lies.

            •  Not to mention (none)
              The Fourth Ammendment is also the more specific of the 2 laws (Article 2 & the 4th Ammendment) and, in matters of Constitutional Law, the more specific law always takes precedence.

              "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Von Goethe

              by green917 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:04:15 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  A law is only as good... (none)
            ...as the government's willingness to enforce it. So far, the very people who are charged with enforcing the law are themselves beholden to the lawbreakers. This means that our government is hopelessly saturated with corruption. It means the the Rule of Law is obsolete. This means that we have a government completely dependent on forces that have nothing to do with the act of voting. How convenient it now appears that the voting process can be so easily manipulated by the zeros and ones of software code, because all we have left is the ILLUSION of democracy, and that's all we're going to get from now on.

            So all you lawyers, pack your bags. You're heading for the police academy.

            This is not a government of incompetency; rather, it is a cabal that is intentional and focused. It frantically attempts to gain as much wealth and power it could gobble up while a half-step ahead of bankruptcy and collapse.

            And on the sidelines, we helplessly watch it all unfold before us, as our energy bills skyrocket, our real income flattens and weakens, our health care costs balloon, our right to privacy is shattered, and our earth heats up. We watch as our leaders capitulate to the corruption that eats upon itself.

            Our last irony: reality television shows in a faith-based society. Gallows symmetry.

        •  I can answer your question. (4.00)
          Tonight, I've been watching C-Span 2's re-play of today's debate in the U.S. Senate. Patrick Leahy, Democratic Senator from Vermont, stated in part as follows:

          This past week, I introduced a resolution to clarify what we all know, that congressional authorization for the use of military force against Osama bin Laden did not authorize warrantless spying on Americans, as the Bush Administration is now claiming.  I thought -- we all thought -- that when we joined in the bipartisan authorization of military action against Osama bin Laden more than four years ago, that action would have been more effective and have succeeded by now in ridding the world of that terrorist leader.  That is not the case.  Instead, the Administration is using this resolution as legal justification for a covert spying program on Americans that recently came to light.

          Sen. Leahy addressed "illegal" wiretapping at length, as did Sen. Kerry and probably numerous other Democratic Senators.

          Somehow, I doubt Sen. Leahy's resolution will have a lot of bipartian support.

        •  Not holding my nose this time (none)
          If there's no filibuster of scAlito, fuck the Democrats; I will stay home on election Day.  Let 'em sink if they won't stand up for the Constitution.

          "I want a world where the Democrats will put somebody up there worth voting for." --- Lt. Frank Drebin, Police Squad.

          by asskicking annie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:46:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Cast a ballot anyway (4.00)
            Go to the polls and cast your ballot anyway. Even if that means taking it from the election worker and stuffing it straight in the box.

            If things don't go well leading upto this election, undervotes are the way to send a strong message that you don't like the current party direction but support our democratic process.

          •  Never Stay Home on Election Day (4.00)
            If there's no filibuster of scAlito, fuck the Democrats; I will stay home on election Day. Let 'em sink if they won't stand up for the Constitution.

            Never stay home on Election Day. That sends the message to elected officials of all parties that you don't care, and they can do what they want.  Lately, what they want often appears to be raking in bribes from lobbyists. Staying home is a vote for more power to lobbyists, and that just sucks.

            No matter how angry you are, go to the polls, and vote for who you truly support. Perhaps there's a third party candidate who interests you.  If not, write someone in (some places you have to ask the elections official for a write-in-ballot, so ask).  Or just cast a blank ballot.

            This sends a message that you care enough to drag your butt into the polls, but you just don't like them.  This seems to be the message you are seeking.

      •  Wrong... (4.00)

        My Democracy Bond doesn't get terminated IF, come Friday and a vote to end debate, the Dems actually do the one thing they MUST do:  filibuster Alito.  They do not need to signal their intent.  They can keep it under the vest until the moment of the vote to close debate and vote.  Come that moment, they WILL then filibuster, one way or another.  If they do not, then the Bond is shredded and the party loses me and my money henceforth.  Hopefully they lose many other people the same way, including many losing NARAL support, NOW support, Sierra Club support, labor union support, etc.


        I DESPISE cowardice.  I can't state that any more forcefully or deeply.  Cowardice makes me very angry, be it moral cowardice or physical cowardice.  I will not tolerate it.  I will not tolerate surrender and cowardice for expedience.  SOME things go way beyond any possible expedient.  The Constitution, Bill of Rights, the fucking oath every one of those PUBLIC SERVANTS took to sit in their seats...they trump ANY other consideration.  They WILL uphold each of them to the fullest extent or they deserve the gulag.  Literally.

        The Dem party WILL filibuster Alito.  Failure to do so shows yet again that they are, as a party (vs some INDIVIDUAL Dem reps), craven, cowardly, and unwilling to stand for anything.  They will do their fucking jobs to the fullest and subjugate their personal desires or wishes to the greater good of the country, the Constitution, and Bill of Rights.  No other option.

        Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

        by praedor on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:34:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't know why your comment . . . (4.00)
           . . . made me think of this scene from Manhattan, but it did:

          Woody Allan "Isaac Davis": Has anybody read that Nazis are gonna march in New Jersey?  Y'know, I read this in the newspaper.  We should go down there, get some guys together, y'know, get some bricks and baseball bats and really explain things to them.

          Party Guest:  There is this devastating satirical piece on that on the Op Ed page of the Times, it is devastating.

          Woody:  Well, a satirical piece in the Times is one thing, but bricks and baseball bats really gets right to the point.

          BenGoshi
          __________________

          We're working on many levels here. Ken Kesey

          by BenGoshi on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:09:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, I saw it recently and it reminded me (4.00)
            of the present climate, and how all these diaries and comments are probably not convinving a single right-winger to abandon ship.

            Not that they don't serve other, very important and necessary purposes, of course.

            Still, sometimes you just want to get out that old bat and put it to "alternate" use--which is fine so long as this stays in one's fantasies. (Boy would Bush, Cheney & Gonzales absolutely LOVE such an excuse to ramp up their police state agenda.)

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:38:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I've had this scene come to mind... (4.00)
            more than once recently, too.

            Posting here makes me feel both stronger and weaker. Stronger because I feel that each post is a claim on the world, that we are doing something, trying to convince others, mobilize them, etc. Weaker because I am too aware that political battles are not won by the scribes. Even the greatest, e.g., Voltaire, couldn't win most of his battles. His rehabilitated victims of unjust terror were rehabiliated and vindicated usually...after they were dead.

            (Look up fate of Jean Calas.)

            "...in this abject posture have ye sworn / To adore the Conquerour?..../ Awake, arise, or be for ever fall'n."

            by Valtin on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:29:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  nice thread! (none)
              love it.. keep it up!
            •  You're correct. (4.00)

               It will only get nastier.  And soon.

               The Radical Right, which has highjacked the GOP, is not in its "last throes", but it is certainly on the defensive:  the curtain has been about 2/3 pulled back on this Organized Crime Ring that's almost as feckless in its ability to effectively manage government, as it is mendacious in its looting of the treasury and screwing of the American People.

               That said, it is only going to get nastier:  it is a cornered animal, scared and likely rabies positive.

               Bush's High Crime of brazenly violating Federal Law in the FISA Scandal is a prelude:  instead of running when caught red-handed in an impeachable offense, in a classically Rovic Way, it's now championing this High Crime as a virtue and calling those who still cling to their belief in that (to Bush) merely quaint, document, The Constitution, traitors and enablers of terrorists (Note:  a twofer for Bush -- diverts attention from the fact that he and his war in Iraq has created and energized and trained untold thousands of terrorists).  We're all through the looking glass now.

               While part of me knows that there's "nothing new under the sun," my eyes and my head and my heart tell me that, at least in living memory, we are in utterly uncharted territory.  It's spooky.  But, let it not be forgotten, this is part of Rovism:  ramp-up fear, then tell the fearful that they need to "Trust Dear Leader" to assuage that fear and protect the fearful from those who would threaten or hurt them.  It's twisted.  It's diabolical.  But, friends, it's where we are.  And, again, know that it's only going to get weirder.  

               Hang on and keep the faith:  we're in for a bumpy ride.

               BenGoshi
              __________________

               

              We're working on many levels here. Ken Kesey

              by BenGoshi on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 03:42:17 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Agree 100% (none)
          I agree that the Dems need not and should not publicize their battle strategy, assuming they have one.  However, if the Dems allow scAlito to be confirmed without a fight, they MUST be held accountable.

          I've already sent messages to the Democratic Party by leaving the party to register as an independent and by withholding donations to Democratic incumbents who have failed to oppose Bush and the Republicans.  I will withhold VOTES for Democrats if the Dems let this monster onto the SCOTUS by failing to filibuster.

          Do we have to destroy the Democratic Party in order to save it?

          "I want a world where the Democrats will put somebody up there worth voting for." --- Lt. Frank Drebin, Police Squad.

          by asskicking annie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:01:47 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Absolutely (none)

            Do we have to destroy the Democratic Party in order to save it?


            They seem willing to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights in order to "save" it, just like the GOP, only by a slightly different means...cowardice and abject surrender.

            Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

            by praedor on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:13:09 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Friday? (none)
      Are they staying on friday? Don't they usually stop Thursday night so they have a travel day?
      •  Yes the cloture vote cannot (none)
        happen before Friday and Frist is hoping to get this done before SOTU on Tuesday.

        So Friday could be interesting.  If culture fails, then suddenly they're faced with the choice of either delaying or having blown up the Senate rules lees the three days before Bush shows up to speak.  Imagine the tension and dram that would create.  I'm not at all convinced that the Republicans have the guts to go through with it.  They may blink when faced with those choices.

        -4.63,-3.54 If the people will lead the leaders will follow

        by calebfaux on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 05:05:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (4.00)
      The President really doesn't want to be put in the position of going to the State of the Union to announce that half the Congress has Declared its Independence from his unitary executive.

      For him to have to say that in a huge vote of no confidence the Congress, representing the voters of half the nation, have done and will continue to do everything in their power to resist his tyranny just does not look good.

      Its just another nail in the coffin at this point, but spin it as he will nobody is buying Alitos unitary executive. Nobody is buying that the President is above the Law.

      I listened to Gonzales best muster of Georgetown University Federalist Society Law profs try to spin this and people in the audience stood up and said the last time anybody had heard people express beliefs like that it was the logic cited  to allow the third reich come to power.

      Live Free or Die (-8.88 -9.49) IMPEACH

      by rktect on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:00:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Filibuster, or Bust! Tips on Calling and Writing (4.00)
      • The #s given by Derek seem to be for Capitol Hill switch board. Ask to be forwarded to your senators, one at a time.

      • Needless to say, there won't be anyone in the senatorial offices to take your calls tonight. So set aside an hour tomorrow 8am-4pm (ET) for calling.

      • Before that, tonight, and early tomorrow am, write emails, send faxes, and submit webforms (links below).

      • You need good talking points (esp. when you call, your arguments should be defensible). I posted a diary. Here is a 4-point "talking point list" (check the diary for links etc):
      4-Point Case for a Filibuster of Alito's Nomination
      1. Alito supports the notion of a Unitary Executive.
      2. Alito opposes the fundamental precept of democracy, namely one person, one vote.
      3. There is a good chance that he may overturn Roe V. Wade.
      4. He has essentially admitted to lying in his 1985 memo when he was trying to become deputy assistant attorney general.

      • Another good source for talking points are statements by the senators themeselves. You can find links to press releases by the senators either on their senate pages, or in this compilation by CA Yankee.

      • An especially good statement is given by Jack Reed.

      • In December, I put together a set of links (with redundancy), that should give you a full range of options (phone, fax, email, webforms) for communicating with your senators:

      Links for Contacting Members of Congress

      1. congress.org directory listing
      2. Senate's own member listing
      3. visi.com search tool
      4. ACLU's search page
      5. Congressional leadership listing


      • Once you find the info you need (for the two senators, and while at it, for your congressman), bookmark, jot down, and save the infor for handy use the next time.

      • That next time is closer than one would like. Note that Patriot act reauthorization debate will be coming shortly as the temporary extension expires on Feb. 3rd.

      • Therefore, when you call/write, you may want to use Al Gore's statement on both Alito and the PATRIOT Act in his landmark DAR speech. No, this isn't a "plug" for Gore :) His distillations of facts are very powerful and well written, indeed. For more inspiration, here is the video for that speech:
      Al Gore on Alito:
      As we have all learned, Judge Alito is a longtime supporter of a powerful executive - a supporter of the so-called unitary executive, which is more properly called the unilateral executive.  Whether you support his confirmation or not - and I do not - we must all agree that he will not vote as an effective check on the expansion of executive power.

      Al Gore on PATRIOT Act reauthorization:
      the extensive new powers requested by the Executive Branch in its proposal to extend and enlarge the Patriot Act should, under no circumstances be granted, unless and until there are adequate and enforceable safeguards to protect the Constitution and the rights of the American people against the kinds of abuses that have so recently been revealed.  

      Please call your senators regardless of their party affiliation, and regardless of their stated position, and record your opinion.

      Also, get organized with your congressional communication. Set aside a notebook (or folder on PC), and take reusable notes (the aide you speak to etc). And post useful information here and at other blogs (caution: don't identify the Aide on a public forum unless absolutely necessary; remember that it's you members of congress that are accountable to you, and not their staff per se).

      Yes, it's very much possible to filibuster the Alito nomination! Just say Filibuster, or bust!

      Keep up your spirits and keep chugging away at reclaiming our Democracy.

      Thanks.

      Dean inspires me, Katrina stirred me, Gore leads me. Draft Al Gore for President!

      by NeuvoLiberal on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:47:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Contact Sen. Lamar Alexander of TN (4.00)
        Before he was a TN Senator, Alexander was a TN Governor. He took the oath of office 3 days early in a bi-partisan move to push then- Governor Ray Blanton out the door.

        Ray Blanton was handing out prison pardons as fast as he could sign them & was an absolute corrupt piece of human excrement. And sadly enough, he was a Democrat.

        You can read the Blanton story here if you're so inclined.

        The point of this little story is to point out that at one time, Lamar Alexander was a moderate. He was against corruption & absolute power.

        Somtime over the last 10-15 years he drank the neo-con kool-aid, but there used to be a human in there somewhere.

        Maybe, just maybe he can be reached. It won't hurt to try.

        Senator Lamar Alexander Phone Numbers:

        Washington, DC
        Phone: (202) 224-4944

        Knoxville, TN
        Phone: (865) 545-4253

        Tri-Cities, TN
        Phone: (423) 325-6240

        Jackson, TN
        Phone: (731) 423-9344

        Chattanooga, TN
        Phone: (423) 752-5337

        Memphis, TN
        Phone: (901) 544-4224

        Nashville, TN
        Phone: (615) 736-5129

        Call one office or call all offices, but please call...Ask Senator Alexander to vote NO.

    •  (pssst....pssst) (none)
      (i think that might already be the plan but let's keep it under wraps, ok?)
    •  Yessss! (none)
      POUNCE, UNANNOUNCED!!!!

      LetsFight. re handle: Fight the radical right is the sentiment!

      by letsfight on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:31:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  NY Times editorial Jan. 26 (none)

      OUR SPINELESS SENATORS
      ...A filibuster is a radical tool. It's easy to see why Democrats are frightened of it. But from our perspective, there are some things far more frightening. One of them is Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.

      We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. -Albert Einstein

      by Plan9 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:36:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ted Stevens? Undecided? (none)
    Ya, right.

    Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

    by bumblebums on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:44:13 PM PST

  •  Undecided (none)
    The fact that these senators are undecided on Alito doesn't mean they are undecided about the filibuster. If Lamar Alexander or Ted Stevens vote "no" (yeah, right!) on Alito, they would probably not support a filibuster. I already called my senators--Sarbanes and Mikulski--and I hope there's a filibuster. But as someone else said a couple of posts above, I hope they don't announce it if they're filibustering until it's actually time to do it.
    •  looking forward to that (none)
      The fact that these senators are undecided on Alito doesn't mean they are undecided about the filibuster.

      Can't wait to see them vote against Alito before they vote for him.  We'll see how that plays.

    •  Mary Landrieu says (none)
      She won't support a filibuster.  But what if they decide to have one anyway?

      Sit at the feet of the master long enough and they start to smell. - John Sauget
      -8.00, -6.05

      by Jensequitur on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:47:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here's to the State of Mississippi (4.00)
        Reminds me of that old Phil Ochs song:

        Here's to the the land
        they've torn out the heart of
        Mississippi find yourself
        another country to be part of

        Look, I don't know if the filibuster is the issue, but sometime in the next year or two an issue (impeachment, perhaps?) will come along that will be decisive. Either you vote with the Democrats on it, or you decide you can no longer be a Democrat.

        When that issue happens, Mary will be faced with a choice -- just as Lincoln Chaffee is facing a similar choice on the other side right now. I hope she chooses to stay with us. If she doesn't, well, the tide is turning. The new Democratic era is nearly upon us, and Louisiana will be a part of it.

      •  yes - make her vote to close debate (none)
        push it, and make people put their cards on the table.

        maybe she will waver. politicians do not always do what they say they will.

        an ambulance can only go so fast - neil young

        by mightymouse on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:06:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Armando say she's vote for cloture (4.00)
        That as definitive as you can get. I.e. she will not only NOT support a filibuster by taking her part in keeping up the endless floor speeches and debate, but when cloture is called for, she will vote for it. Not sure if she's also said if she'll vote for the nuclear option.

        If she does that too, she's no longer a part of the Democratic party and might as well move in with Zell Miller or get her own talk show on Fox.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:07:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I could just slap her (4.00)
          GOD SAVE US FROM DINOS!

          I hope she gets eaten by a gator.

        •  she is beholden to (none)
          commitments she needs from other senators regarding new orleans - tit for tat, that simple
          •  AS IF (4.00)
            they're going to follow through with these committments once they get their man on the court! She's an idiot for turning to the other side for help when she should be sticking with her own. And if the "help" she's looking for is contrary to Dem policies (e.g. oil industry tax writeoffs or deregulation), then she's doubly a traitor.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:36:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  unfortunately you (none)
              are being rational - dem senators are not rational, they act like naive school children.
              •  Actually, they are being rational, if shamefully (none)
                Maybe it is in Landrieu's case--she really does strike me as a dope. But most of them are just making calculations that in some ways do make sense, even though in many ways they don't.

                It's a variation on the old "prisoner's dilemma" problem. When it's your ass on the line vs. your buddy's, you tend to look out for number one. And given Dems tendency to look out for themselves in recent years, it's no wonder.

                The pressure and/or motivation to unite is going to have to come from outside the party leadership. I.e. from people like US. As long as they think they can get away with this crap and not be held accountable for it, they're going to keep on selling out.

                Shameful, but perfectly rational.

                "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

                by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:57:44 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  2008 (none)
                  She'll be up for election in 2008.  Hold her accountable.  Smile and wave while she sinks.

                  "I want a world where the Democrats will put somebody up there worth voting for." --- Lt. Frank Drebin, Police Squad.

                  by asskicking annie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:13:29 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And I'll throw her a copy of the constitution (none)
                    as a life preserver to boot.

                    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

                    by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:44:50 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  They've already said (none)
            they're shooting down the Baker bill (the NOLA buyback recovery plan) - how many times does she need to get kicked in the teeth before she realizes that playing nice with Repugs gets you nothing?

            -8.25,-8.36 The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

            by sidnora on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:56:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Then she should pack her bags (4.00)
        and move back to LA...permanently.
        •  You may get your wish as I have a feeling... (none)
          ...that Moon Landrieu's little girl Mary is not going to be greeted with much enthusiasm down here the next time she runs for office.

          [Nevertheless, you can count on politics always being a part of the Landrieu family; it's rumored that Mary's brother Mitch (current Lt. Governor) has considered following in his Daddy's footsteps by running for Mayor of NOLA.]

          God she pisses me off.

    •  Alito must be derailed. (none)
      Fine with me if the Dems (and Republicans of conscience) aren't beating their breasts right now, but a curse on both their houses if they don't follow through in opposition.
       This feels like the vote that allowed Bush to invade Iraq. Most of us knew it would be used by the administration to grab more power and undermine our system of government.  
       Alito on the SC will be just as dangerous.
       Dammit.  We have to stand on principle or we are responsible for the damage.
  •  YUP (none)
    It can't hurt, and as I said (shameless I know...) it seems that they're just not hearing from folks on this issue. With one aid saying the issue "...has kind of sputtered out."
  •  Every blog (3.91)
    Should post at its top "Filibuster Alito" and engage in some blog equivalent of a telethon to demand a filibuster - everything else stops while we demand the Democrats do their jobs, lay down on the tracks, and stop Alito.

    I'm not part of a redneck agenda - Green Day

    by eugene on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:48:19 PM PST

  •  Remember, Don't Call It A Filibuster. . . (4.00)
    Just extend the debate until Alito gives straight answers to the critical questions that will face the Court.  Put the burden on Alito and the Administration to give answers before an "up-or-down" vote can go forward.

    Dems should state "We look forward to a full debate and an up or down vote, once we have all the answers and the American People and their representatives know what we are voting on."

  •  Dialing directions (none)
    I dialed the number and they saaid "Helloe".

    Took a while to figure out that I had dialed "the U S Capitol"

    a little more instruction, please :))

    •  cue the judibrownibot (4.00)

      Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

      by bumblebums on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:55:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dan Quayle on DKos?! n/t (4.00)

      You didn't do it.

      by Earl on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:08:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh God... I cannot resist..... (4.00)
      Mujibar was  trying to get into the USA  legally through Immigration.
      The officer said, "Mujibar,  you have passed all the tests, except there
        is one more test. Unless you pass  it, you cannot enter the United States
      of America."

        Mujibar said,  "I am ready."

        The officer said, "Make a sentence using the words  Yellow, Pink and
      Green."

        Mujibar thought  for a few minutes and said, "Mister Officer, I am ready."

        The Officer said, "Go ahead."

        Mujibar said,  "The telephone goes green, green, green, and I pink it up,
        and say, "Yellow, this is Mujibar."

         Mujibar now lives  in a neighborhood near you and works at a Verizon.

      LOL, we roar with laughter when we make a call or get a call anymore!

      I am not your beast of burden: I will not be forced to carry your baggage.....Humanistic Property Manifesto (-5.13, -4.77)

      by panicbean on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:08:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Who did you think you were calling? (none)
      Miss Cleo?
    •  You are reaching the switchboard operator (4.00)
      and you will need to tell her the Senator's name.  I always ask to speak with Senator HARRY Reid's office.  Or ask for Senator Feingold's office, etc...  The operator will patch you through to the right place and you listen to the menu. Either push 1 to speak with a staff member or 2 to leave a message. (Not sure if there are more options.)

      <div style="color: #a00000;"> Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshal

      by bronte17 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:44:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Stevens and Alexander?? (none)
    Those are laughable...the others we may be able to persuade...but I'm betting they're getting bribed by the Republican Leadership as we speak...
  •  The mailbox belonging to (none)
    the Chairman of the DNC is full.  Well done everyone.  Keep calling every number you can think of!  There are plenty of other mailboxes to choose from at the DNC too.
  •  Call it what it is (4.00)
    if and when we do filibuster, just tie it in to Bush. They should praise Alito. Insist that he is indeed qualified, even if his views (In the Dems opinion) are out of the mainstream.

    Be sure to explain that he's being filibustered and will continue to be because he wasn't what was promised.

    It's not for what Alito IS, it's for what he ISN'T: a carbon copy of Sandra Day O'Connor, a justice that was praised by Bush himself and admired by the majority of Americans.

    Don't make it a reproductive right issue, or a right to privacy issue, or a worker's right issue. Not because those aren't relevant, but because we don't have to.

    Make it a Bush issue. Don't get drawn into a wedged, divisive debate when we can just throw this in tweedle-dumb's lap.

    •  Disagree (none)
      Unfortuately, they're going to have to let Bush put someone on the court, so dumping on Bush instead of Alito isn't the solution. What Alito specifically means to the Bush regime is a better place to start. And Alito needs to be hammered on all the issues that you say he doesn't.
      •  It's Politically Smart (none)
        Appreciate the reply.

        Kennedy and others have done the hammering enough in their own way. But this is not the time to raise our flag on the moral high ground, it's a time to be politically advantageous.

        Bush has the frying pan 6 inches from his azz right now, why not make it even hotter for him?

        Bush lavished praise on O'Connor...then gave us Alito. It's almost like he's wanting the benefit of the doubt....AGAIN!!!

        We gave it to him on:

        9/11
        Patriot Act
        WMDs
        Iraq as a whole
        High Court nominees
        No Child...
        etc.

        He gives us a judge that is nothing like O'Connor.

        Now the Democrats message should be what every single soundbyte they give should be:

        "He's out of 2nd chances."

        It's the best move politically and enables Dems to wash their hands of this.

        •  No disagreement (none)
          with your points on GWB. I think that message is important too. But they need to continue to point out Alito's downsides. I don't think enough people understand - no matter how hard they've been hitting him - just what the court with Alito would be capable of. Not so much attacks on Alito, but warnings of what the SCOTUS might be inclined to do with him confirmed.
          •  Two birds (none)
            exactly. and you can do both.

            you filibuster on grounds that all point to bush, but it also opens up more debate on Alito.

            if you can rip Alito to shreds while also making W's political life hell, than why not do both?

    •  In my mind (4.00)
      it's not about reproductive rights, or the right to privacy.

      It's about the right to live in a country where the President is required to follow the laws passed by the Congress, as intrepreted by impartial judges.

      Alito seems to think that our democracy is a good idea, but needs just a bit of tweaking. Let's just rename the office of President, and call it Emperor, or King instead.

      BTW, next time I file my taxes, I'm going to include a "signing statement" describing my personal interpretation of the tax code. I'm sure the IRS will appreciate the clarification.

      congratulations on your foreskin -- osteriser

      by bartman on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:32:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Keep America safe -- from Bush (4.00)
    Bush is not worthy of nominating anybody anywhere. Bush is an illegimate president who is a lying, cheating, homicidally negligent, warmongering criminal. He is worthy of none of the honors of the office of president. He should only be met with obstruction, fillibuster, and scorn. Every political trick in the book should be used to prevent him from FUCKING UP THE COUNTRY ANYMORE THAN HE ALREADY HAS. That, by the way, should be a non-partisan and glaringly obvious viewpoint. Keep America safe from Bush.

    "There is more stupidity around than hydrogen and it has a longer shelf life." Frank Zappa.

    by Nordic on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:32:08 PM PST

    •  I like it. (none)
      The "use every political trick in the book" school of "non-partisan" politics.

      I think that's what the Republicans have been doing for years, in the name of bipartisanship. Are you sure you're not a reformed Republican?

      :P

      congratulations on your foreskin -- osteriser

      by bartman on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:35:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  it's called reality (4.00)
        If someone declares war on you, you have to go to war with them. Something the Democrats can't seem to fathom. It ain't pretty but it's necessary, and if you have to go to war, you go to war to win. Seems like common sense to me, but our elected Democrats? I think they're all like Alam Colmes, in that they're the "official opposition party of the Republican party". Most of our elected Democrats seem to be there strictly for show.

        "There is more stupidity around than hydrogen and it has a longer shelf life." Frank Zappa.

        by Nordic on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:54:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree, but found your comment ironic (none)
          The way you intertwined your opinion that this should be a non-partisan idea with the call to use "every political trick in the book" just struck me as humorous. It also reminded me of the Republicans who will tell us that we are too uncivil, as they compare us to Osama and claim we should be executed for treason.

          I think we need less civility from those officials with the power to stand up to the evil which has infested the Republican Party, but more civility among those of us who are better positioned to try to mend the broken bonds which have been shattered during Bush's historic plunge from record high approval ratings and unprecedented national unity, to this current era of near-record low approval and terrible divisiveness.

          congratulations on your foreskin -- osteriser

          by bartman on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 12:34:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  well, my point was (none)
            actually that it SHOULD be a non-partisan reality that those in the executive branch are a bunch of criminals who have hijacked not only our country, but the conservative movement and the Republican party as well. However that's not the reality, as most republicans seem quite happy to have their party hijacked and their constitution destroyed, as long as the hijackers put an (r) after their names. Which is yet another reason why I really don't like republicans. They have absolutely no scruples about anything. At the same time, those who DO recognize the truth should use every dirty political trick in the book to get our country back.

            "There is more stupidity around than hydrogen and it has a longer shelf life." Frank Zappa.

            by Nordic on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 08:55:36 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Nordic (none)
      This is absolutely correct, and everything Bush has done since January 20, 2001 has been unconstitutional as well. Alito MUST NOT be confirmed. He MUST be filibustered. Bush was appointed by the very court he is now nominating justices for. That is NOT Democracy, that is aristocracy! But you see how taboo even mentioning 2000 is in this Congress, because they are all complicit in allowing that crime to get swept under the rug. It is time for them to redeem themselves. Alito wouldn't even answer regarding Bush vs Gore because he KNOWS the USSC overstepped their bounds, and because he does not agree with one man one vote. These people are Fascists, and it is about time the word was said and they were challenged on it to their damn faces.
    •  Yes (none)
      Yes and yes and yes again. Or just repeat Molly Bloom's monologue. The part about yes.
  •  E-mail lists? Fax numbers? (none)
    I want to send a letter to all Democratic senators.  Does anyone know where to find an e-mail or fax list. I don't want to go through their webmail forms one by one.

    Hope someone can help!

    •  look up Judy (none)
      JudyBrowni..She has been posting everything under the sun to filibuster...

      *"It is the difficulties that show what men are" ..Epictetus*

      by Chamonix on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:40:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, why no robo-comment from her? (none)
        I thought this diary had the right tags.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:09:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Judy is doing a great job (4.00)
          On one of the petitions they are keeping track of how many peopl eyou are responsible for bringing to the site to sign the petition. Judy has several thousand credited to her and her next closest competitor only several hundred. That's just one of the petitions where they are keeping track. I imagine if they were all keeping track, Judy would be right at the top of all the lists. Bless her, she has taken a lot of shit on this site for her efforts.
          •  It's not a competition (none)
            The real competition is between us and the right, not amongst ourselves. Not unlike the competition to get the most recommendations for diaries. Anyway, in this particular diary it was obviously inappopriate and off-topic, which is what happens with bots--assuming the diarist was not joking, which I think he deserved the benefit of the doubt on.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:34:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oops, I was referring to another diary (none)
              The one where the diarist threatened to kill himself if the filibuster failed.

              Still annoying to see these even if they are, I admit, helpful and effective.

              "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

              by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:44:21 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  here you go (4.00)

      weather forecast

      The palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. - Paine

      by Cedwyn on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:44:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A commenter on of my diaries (none)
      posted that s/he had one available - here's a link to the comment.

      ...with liberty and justice for all.

      by Cory Bantic on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:45:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Senator List (none)
      www.senate.gov for email.  I also have taken info from there and built a table that includes fax numbers (when available - a few do not publish their fax numbers).  It makes it easy to do a mail merge but you still have to dial the fax numbers.  Email me at vze3cskcatverizon.net if you want me to send it to you.  I sent all the Dems plus Chafee, Snow and Collins a fax last night - took about 45 minutes and I have an older model fax.
  •  Seriously think about this . . . (4.00)
    All the Republicans you mention will vote for cloture, even if they don't vote for Alito.

    Landrieu has said she'll vote no on Alito, but yes on cloture.  

    that give us 42 votes against cloture, 43 if you think Jeffords would vote against cloture which I'm not convinced of.

    Then you have these Dems from the Gang of Fourteen (Nelson excluded because of his professed yes vote, Landrieu excluded because she says she'd vote for cloture), three or four (depending on Jeffords) of whom would have to vote against Cloture.
    # Joseph I. Lieberman, Connecticut
    # Robert C. Byrd, West Virginia
    # Daniel Inouye, Hawaii
    # Mark Pryor, Arkansas
    # Ken Salazar, Colorado

    Byrd I think we could count in our corner, but I wouldn't bet money on any of the others.  You can bet Harry Reid is talking to them, but if you actually want a filibuster, these are the men to persuade.

    Then you have to keep the rest of the caucus unified.

    Possible yes, but don't hold your breath.

    The most terrifying verse I know: merrily, merrily, merrily, merrilly, life is but a dream. Joan Didion

    by dbratl on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:42:54 PM PST

  •  what if they just don't vote (none)
    are you allowed to not vote?

    they have to get 60... so just sit on your hands!

    SoapBlox Colorado - The Daily Kos of Colorado
    (-5.38/-4.36)

    by pacified on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:46:48 PM PST

  •  Please spell it "filibuster", not (none)
          "fillibuster". Thanks!
  •  Of course not!!! (4.00)
    "Senate Democrats refuse to signal whether or not they will filibuster Alito."

    There have been way too many posts, and even diaries, today wondering why we haven't started the filibuster yet; or in deep gloom because we missed the filibuster. Enough to indicate substantial lack of knowledge about how or why a filibuster might occur (or not).

    The nomination is out there for debate - and the nominee is Bush's pick (since Bush is the President, he gets to pick - that's the way it is). Everybody gets to weigh in on why this nominee is good/bad. At some point the leadership (GOP, as it happens) says "OK, enough talk - time for an upperdown vote".

    If that announcement occurs before everybody has had adequate opportunity to say their piece; or if the opposition over the nominee is so "exceptional" that we can't possibly let it go to a vote without one last desperate and strenuous try to change the probable outcome of the vote, then filibuster may be an option. In theory, (let's just pretend) that during the next few days of debate enough Republican Senators may have, or develop, reservations about the fitness of this nominee that he will be rejected without a filibuster.

    However, if enough members believe they have not had adequate opportunity to be heard, or that the desperate strenuous last stand is required a filibuster becomes an option.
    You can't decide at the beginning of the debate that you are going to filibuster, and if you did decide it was likely to become necessary you wouldn't "signal" it. And don't forget the requirement for enough members to agree with you.

    By all means, call your 'critters'. Tell them you are violently opposed to this nominee, and all the good rational reasons why. Call them all - each and every one - including the GOP's. If you are blessed with one or more Dem Senators, tell them that if it comes down to the wire you want them to take that desperate last stand and you will stand behind them for doing so.

    Practice absurdus interruptus - Support ePluribus Media.

    by Catte Nappe on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:51:56 PM PST

  •  Keep in mind: (none)
    Landrieu is against a filibuster, so we have 43 Democrats either in favor of a filibuster or undecided. See Armando's front page thread.
  •  Can't get through and the voice mailbox (none)
    is full. Are staff working this evening to answer the phone lines?

    <div style="color: #a00000;"> Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshal

    by bronte17 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:02:07 PM PST

    •  in my area (none)
      both 888 numbers are turfed to Feinstein's office, where a recorded message suggests caling local offices. The voicemail to (my) local office is full. I resorted to the email.

      "You'd like that shit...it's all political and morose."

      by Miss Devore on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:16:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I just called my current Senator's phone (none)
        that was godhimself Russ Feingold and I said I wanted him to oppose Alito to the last with a filibuster.

        If Russ leads it and is successful, look for him to get traction.

        An untypical Negro...since 1954.

        by blksista on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:17:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  well (none)
          you got FeinGOLD so you're luckier than me. Although I realize Dianne is opposing Alito, I don't think she is using her power enough. And she could. but I think she is behind the ball on this one.

          "You'd like that shit...it's all political and morose."

          by Miss Devore on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:09:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Why is this diary BREAKING? (none)
    What in any way justifies its BREAKING status? I thought that there was both a specified and understood rule that you don't do this unless the story actually IS breaking?

    Sure, I know, the filibuster is still within reach, as far as we know at least. But it's been within reach for some time now, given that the numbers have not been there to either support OR defeat it. But what exactly has happened in the past few hours to make a filibuster MORE likely than it's been for the past few weeks? Nothing in your diary indicated this.

    And by the way, as my many comments and a few diaries clearly indicate, I'm completely in favor of the filibuster and also think it can succeed, and is worth doing even if it fails. I've been emailing my own and other senators and today phoned them as well, and emailed them again, urging them to filibuster.

    I'm just questioning the urgent tone of the diary title as it's not fair to other diaries that are just as worthy of our attention.

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:03:37 PM PST

    •  Amen. This is a Call to Action Not Breaking (none)
      •  And I thought BREAKING was something kids did (none)
        on cardboard boxes in the 80's.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:38:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's not BREAKING, or up-to-date, or even true (none)
      Nelson
      Salazar
      Landrieu
      DiFi leaning against

      That puts us right on the bubble.

      Don't assume Byrd will filibuster. He favors conservative judges, give great deference to presidential appointments. But if he gets up and starts lecturing about the Romans, look out!

      Dem's are pushing all the wrong buttons so far. Hitting the polarizing hot buttons, not the small-r republican arguments that would loosen up the Gang of 14.

      None Dare Call It Stupid!

      by RonK Seattle on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:53:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  My spoof "BREAKING", or this diary's? (none)
        I don't get it, but then I don't think like a centrist Democrat.

        Jeffords would surely filibuster, as he's got nothing to lose at this point and would love one last chance to stick it to his former fellow Repugs. Not sure about Feinstein either. I've read that she's rich and well-connected in the business community and wants to stay that way.

        As for Byrd, he's gotten quite entertaining in his "old age" (at his rate he'll live another 40 years). I think I read recently that although he would vote against the nuclear option, he wouldn't support a filibuster. But Alito would threaten the very constitution that he professes to love, so I'm not sure. As you said, let's wait for the speeches about Cato and Pericles to find out what he'll do.

        Oh, and greetings from the Emerald City! Did you call Cantwell and Murray? Murray I'm sure will support it. Cantwell I'm not so sure about (unless she's the reason Stevens has not said how he'll vote yet--now THAT would be weird).

        Not looking good at all. We'll soon see.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:22:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The diary, for the reasons given (none)

          None Dare Call It Stupid!

          by RonK Seattle on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:44:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I thought so (none)
            But some can get pretty snarky here, so I wasn't sure. Doesn't really matter, really, as it doesn't look like it's going to happen--the filibuster, that is, diary title notwithstanding. Dems either lacked the balls or the leadership. Probably both.

            I realize that politics is a dirty biz but when members of your own party won't go to bat to support a cause that goes to the very heart of what the party supposedly stands for, in order to protect their asses, then what's the point of pretending to be a party? What WOULD they go to bat and put everything on the line for? I'm guessing absolutely nothing.

            I'm not giving up on the cause or party, but I am giving up on these faux Democrats (both big and little "D"). They might still be useful for some things, but the party (or we) needs to find replacements for them asap. They don't really belong to my party.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:03:42 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Ted Stevens (AK) (none)
    What's that about? Did Stevens make good on his promise and drop out of the Senate?!?!?

    It's not easy being a Floridian.

    by lawstudent922 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:06:27 PM PST

  •  Bill Nelson (none)
    I tried to call my senator, but I got the message that his mailbox was full. I called his office number same story. I then tried his West Palm Beach, Fl, office number and I was able to leave a message that I wanted him to vote to filibuster Alito. His West Palm number is 1-561-541-0189. We might as well fill that mailbox too. I feel that he may be a key vote.
  •  To repeat what I said yesterday: (4.00)
     can't believe that some folks are worried about whether there's 51 votes to kill the nuclear option or not.

    It's irrelevant.

    Really.

    Even if a whole slew of fascist judges get confirmed.

    Why?

    Because Americans want to see strength. Even in defeat.

    Remember Terri Schiavo?

    Anyone who's anyone with a brain knew that whole shebang was doomed. The Repubs certainly did.

    But you know what?

    They played to their base, and it got the base further mobilized.

    It got contributions flowing.

    Yes, we're like that too.

    If we don't make a stand for what we believe in, why should middle America  expect us to act bravely with the courage of our convictions?

    We must filibuster.

    Period. Even if we lose.

    Especially if we lose.

    "It's better to realize you're a swan than to live life as a disgruntled duck."

    by Mumon on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:12:18 PM PST

    •  Amen! Have a four (4.00)
      The Repugs have spent the last fifteen years playing to their base and it put them on top.  The Dems have spent the last twenty-five years running from the core of their support and we all know what it has done for them.

      Filibuster the son of a bitch.

    •  Hear, Hear (none)
      I received my DNC renewal form and membership card in the mail a week or so ago.  I've been saving it to see if the Dems filibuster or not.  If not, I'm not renewing.  I'll send my money to particular candidates and support local candidates even more.
  •  I must disagree (none)
    For extra credit, use the same numbers to call all the 2008 Presidential candidates who are sitting Senators - Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, and John Kerry - and tell them to either LEAD THE FILIBUSTER or FORGET ABOUT YOUR SUPPORT.

    I'm sorry, for me this is not a life or death issue. Feingold is going to get my support in 2008 regardless of this one issue. You can't expect your senator to vote the way you want him/her to every single time.

    "He's not a leader, he's a Texas Leaguer" - Eddie Vedder

    by griswald11 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:30:05 PM PST

    •  This is not a vote on an omnibus bill... (4.00)
      This is a vote on the future of our Republic. They MUST KNOW WE MEAN BUSINESS. They are our employees. You may like your employees, but if they betray you to the competition, you'll still fire them.
    •  NO. This is the line in the sand. (4.00)
      You can't expect your senator to vote the way you want him/her to every single time.

      I can bloody well expect them to fight THIS fight, and to fight for what's right, when the Constitution is at stake.

      You can march merrily along with Russ into the special hell reserved for cowards. And thanks for telling him he's got your vote anyway, no matter what he sells out between now and then.

      If Feingold is worthy of the office he holds, much less the office he aspires to, he fights TONIGHT. He can fight for us, and our future, tonight, or I won't be fighting for him, ever.

      •  Sort of an old argument... (none)
        But elections have consequences. Apparantly the majority of Americans (voting Americans, that is) trust Bush to make the right calls when it comes to the Supreme Court. It's not like we didn't know this was coming. He even said during the campaign that, should any Scotus openings arise, he would appoint someone in the mold of Scalia or Thomas. Surprise, surprise, it's someone in the mold of Scalia and Thomas.

        I'm not advocating laying down and dying, but the American people had their shot in November of 2004, and they blew it.

        "He's not a leader, he's a Texas Leaguer" - Eddie Vedder

        by griswald11 on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:53:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Did you read the GAO report? (none)
          WE didn't blow it. WE didn't create faulty machines and fail to ensure that there was an adequate number of machines available. Until you can tell me that the election was fair, I'm not buying the "Americans blew it" defense.
          •  The GAO report (none)
            Did not claim that Kerry actually got more votes than Bush, did it?

            No matter how much you want to pretend it didn't happen, bush got millions upon millions votes, and all indications are that, in raw numbers, Bush improved in virtually every district in the country.  By all measures he got more votes than Kerry.

            I have no doubt that voting problems, irregulatiries, fraud, deception and lies led the final tally to not reflect the will of the voters.

            But there is no evidence in the GAO report that suggests that Bush actually had fewer votes than Kerry.

            •  what the report suggests (none)
              The report suggests .....no, it clearly says that the election was a friggin cluster. There were machines that counted more votes than there were voters in certain districts. There were machines that lost votes when it rolled over. We aren't talking one or two votes either. We're talking hundreds and thousands. In short, the results of the election were not conclusive at all. Bush may have won. He also could have lost. We'll never know because the equipment did not function properly. Read the report, then tell me you can say without equivocation that Bush won the election. He won by default.
              •  read it, studied it (none)
                The report suggests .....no, it clearly says that the election was a friggin cluster
                Absolutely.  Totally, totally shameful.  Top to bottom, just a shame.  A national shame.

                In short, the results of the election were not conclusive at all. Bush may have won. He also could have lost.
                Sorry, but it does not say that.  It talks about voting irregulaties.  And you are right - hundres here, thousands here.  And, yes, it could have changed an electoralcollege vote and the election.

                But, it is not suggested that the popular vote gap - ~3M votes between Bush and Kerry, would have been substantially affected.

                Voting problems come in flavors: fraud, accident, random occurance, negligent occurance, rigging, etc.  Now, I think most of the fraud and rigging and underhanded shit is done by the GOP.  The other stuff leans in favor of the GOP, but not exactly.

                Read the report, then tell me you can say without equivocation that Bush won the election. He won by default.
                I have read the report.  I agree that the electoral results are possibly ambigious - we can never vote.

                But none of the problems detailed nor any of the conclusions made are on the scale to affect the ~3M vote margin in the popular vote.

                I think this hard for many to accept, but the simple fact is that Bush was more popular than Kerry on voting day.  The election was a festering sore of failure, but the voting public voted a plurality for Bush.  And the GAO report does not question this conclusion at all.

                •  And why do we care about the popular vote? (none)
                  Did the loss of the popular vote prevent Bush from being President in 2000?

                  I tell you there is a fire. They have this day set a blazing torch to the temple of constitutional liberty and, please God, we shall have no more peace forever.

                  by Anderson Republican on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:04:03 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No (none)
                    I am not arguing that Bush was rightly elected, just that, clearly, the will of the majority was that Bush be President.

                    Just like in 2000 the will was that Gore be president.

                    Again, you are misreading what I wrote.  

                    People's views have consequences; the American public in 2004 held by a ~3M vote margin that Bush should be president.  Vote counting, inconclusive electoral college results, etc aside, democratically speaking, the people got what they wanted.

                •  We don't elect by popular vote. (none)
                  We use the electoral process. If we did this wouldn't even be a debate because GW wouldn't have been up for re election. He didn't win the popular vote in 2000(and I'd question whether or not he won the popular vote in 2004 since it is clear that the machinery tabulating was faulty), he won the electoral vote. The GAO report clearly says there is absolutely no way they could be certain that GW won the votes that were certified. None. Nada. Zip. They noted that the software the machines used could have been easily manipulated. Indeed, they noted there were so many discrepencies in Ohio alone that suggest that GW may not have won Ohio at all. With that in mind, calling GW the LEGITIMATELY elected President is wrong. Folks can hem and folks can haw but the truth is the election of 2004 was not legitimate. We're stuck with GW but it isn't because he was fairly elected. The evidence says contrary.
                  •  Look (none)
                    I am not saying that Bush was "rightly" elected in a perfectly or largely fair election.

                    I am saying that the will of the people was expressed and it was clearly that Bush should be president - by some 3M votes.  That's what the original post was about.

                    I think there is good evidence to suggest that Bush would have lost an electoral college vote in 2004 had the votes been perfectly counted.  But I dont see any evidence to suggest that these thousands of votes that would have gone 3-to-1 or 4-to-1 Kerry would have uspet the overall vote count.

                    The original post was to the effect that "American blew it", and yes, that's accurate. A majority of Americans wanted Bush to be President.

                    You can "question" whether he won the popular vote in 2004, but if he didn't, it would be a stunning rigging job since he improved in 90%+ percent of the precints in the country.  Literally, it would require dozens of thousands of fraudsters to pull of that type of improvement.  

                    So, legitimate or not based on the college or the machine fraud or the voting manipulation there is no report I know of by the GAO or anyone else that concludes fraud or mistakes would have tipped the popular vote to Kerry.  That 3M vote gap is just to large to explain away.  

                    •  If......... (none)
                      If the election results weren't conclusive (and the GAO report makes it clear they couldn't be) and the election was not fair how was the "will of the people" expressed?

                      You cite a 90% improvement rate. Where are you getting these numbers from? Are you basing them on the data pulled from the very machines that the GAO said were not reliable. If the machines weren't reliable then neither would the data that resulted from them.

                      Feel free to call him legit if you like. Legit or illegit, the American people are stuck with him. I wouldn't and couldn't conclusively say though it was because of the "will of the people" instead of faulty, easily manipulated machinery. Not after reading the non partisan GAO report.

        •  Clearly, you have not read the report (none)
          on the 2004 election.  Not nearly as many Americans trust Bush as the number of votes they manipulated.  Nobody who has looked into it believes that Bush was legally elected.
        •  That cuts the other way too. (none)
          And about half the American voting public rejected Bush.  Their views, needs and issues didn't vanish on 11/4/04.

          Our job is to be their voice, their spine, their hammer.

          And even if Kerry had lost 90% of the votes, the Constitution is tossed away like an old Kleenex. We have to preserve our fundamental rights, regardless of the electoral popularity of the task.

          Some of us are not up to that job, wevidently.

  •  to be frank (4.00)
    i would die to see a fight over the nuclear option.  its all talk now.  no WAY frist and his boys would dare go through with the nuclear option.  but boy oh boy, would i love to see them taken for their word!
    •  yep. (none)
      I really really want to see what Senator Byrd's still got in him... for such an old bag of bones, he can sure put up a fight.
    •  What is the nuclear option? I have heard it (none)
      threatened but haven't heard it explained.
      •  Change to Senate rules (none)
        Currently, they need 60 votes to break a filibuster, that's the Senate rules.

        So, if they can't get 60 to break the filibuster, what they'll do is offer to change a Senate rule. That only takes 51 votes. They'll change the rules to require only a simple majority to break a filibuster. That's the nuclear option.

        Personally, I don't see them being able to trigger it. They are weaker now then they were back in the earlier flap that the Gang of 14 rescued them from. Several members are looking at getting tossed out on their ears come November, and if anything will motivate the Democratic base to do that, it will be the promise of a Democratic Senate with the ability to pass bills with a simple majority. There's a lot of Republicans privately scared shitless at the thought.

        I tell you there is a fire. They have this day set a blazing torch to the temple of constitutional liberty and, please God, we shall have no more peace forever.

        by Anderson Republican on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:08:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thank you. I certainly hope that the Dems (none)
          will test them on this.  I believe that the Republicans should have learned when they shut down the government during the Clinton Administration and it helped Clinton and hurt them that these strong-arm tactics can backfire.  I hope the Dems recall that they generally win when they stand together and stand strong.
  •  done (none)
    I left a message for Sen. Jeff Bingamen (NM) to vote no and to fillibuster. I'll call his office tomorrow again and see what his staff says about how he'll vote.

    He who is the author of war lets loose the whole contagion of hell and opens a vein that bleeds a nation to death. - Thomas Paine 1783

    by lanshark on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:48:34 PM PST

  •  RE: BREAKING!! (3.00)
    BREAKING!!!

    DEMS FAIL FOR 10TH STRAIGHT DAY TO SIGNAL USE OF FILIBUSTER!!!

    BREAKING!!!!!!

    RETHUGS MIGHT USE NUCLEAR OPTION IN RESPONSE TO THREATENED FILIBUSTER!!!

    BREAKING!!!!!!!!!!

    I'M BREAKING THE CAPS LOCK ON MY KEYBOARD!!!!

    BREAKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    KOSSACK CAN'T STOP MAKING SNARKY COMMENTS!!!!!

    BREAKING!!!!!

    SOMEONE IS BREAKING MY NOSE FOR BEING A JACK---!!!!

    (-7.25, -5.85) "Talk amongst yourselves. The Christian Right: neither Christian nor right. Discuss." --Linda Richman

    by Slartibartfast on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:55:56 PM PST

    •  See that (none)
      I wasn't the only person to be honored with a 1 from chicagochristianleft

      'Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it'. - GBS

      by stevej on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:30:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  And what exactly is breaking (none)
    and why is this non-diary top of the reco list?

    'Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it'. - GBS

    by stevej on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:56:27 PM PST

  •  Can't communicate. (none)
    Harry Reid's voicemail box is full.

    Can't get John Kerry's fax machine to pick up.

    I composed a note to Kerry saying what Elrond said to Aragorn: "Be the man you were born to be. Live up to your oaths and the votes you won. Fight for the right."

    It was a nice piece of writing. Alas, rather than having it go through on fax, I was reduced to emailing it.

    Anyone know a backdoor way into a voicemail box, or a person, or a fax?

  •  List of Senate phone numbers (none)
    I thought I had bookmarked it last night and apparently I did not. Anyone have it?  I am prepared to start dialing.

    "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious" - 1984 - George Orwell

    by elveta on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:02:18 PM PST

  •  Hit them where it hurts (4.00)
    Anyone who has donated to any dem senators should call and ask if they can get their donations back if the senator votes for cloture.  Also ask them to take you off their mailing list if the senator votes for cloture.
  •  Call- Fillibuster (4.00)
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster
    Call- Filibuster

    Alito is Bush's Get Out Of Jail Free Card
  •  I called Levin earlier, (none)
    but had to leave a message (for whatever that may have been worth).

    -6.13, -5.90 The New York Times: All the news that's fixed to print

    by GOTV on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:09:51 PM PST

  •  My letter to Barbara Boxer (4.00)
    Dear Senator Boxer:

    I am writing to urge you to filibuster the nomination of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court.  I know you intend to vote against his nomination, and I appreciate that very much. However, it is not enough.  You and I both know that the Democrats don't have the votes to defeat Alito on a straight up-or-down vote. The only way we can keep this extremist off the court is to put together a filibuster.  

    During the six years I have lived in California, you have never failed to represent me well.  You have been one of the few politicians in Washington that I don't have to worry about. I've always been able to count on you to do the right thing.  Without my asking.  This time, however, the stakes are too high. So I am asking you, as a Democrat, as a Californian, and as an American, to step forward once again and lead a filibuster against Samuel Alito.  

    Thank you,

    In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

    by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:14:46 PM PST

  •  The DLC already said "no" (none)
    to a filibuster:

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    So I suspect we won't get 41 votes against cloture.

    When liberals saw 9-11, we wondered how we could make the country safe. When conservatives saw 9-11, they saw an investment opportunity.

    by onanyes on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:15:49 PM PST

  •  IMAGINE (political wet dream) (4.00)
    Bush smirks up to the microphone before the State of the Union.  Looking pretty much like he did during the debate in Flordia, because the Demo-saurs become Spinosauruses and flibustered Alito's nomination.

    He loses his long lusted-after victory of standing before Congress and rubbing Alito in the face of the Dems.  "Screw you, you'll never touch me now!"

    But now, in defeat, Bush has to face the Dems in Congress and I hope they're all sitting there, staring at him, smiling - smilin smuggest smiles they know how to make.  "Screw you, el Presidente. What happened to all that political capital you were claiming this time last year.  Spent that shit, didn't you?  It's all gone, and the 2006 elections are bearing down on you faster than Laura when she learned you fell off the wagon - again.  And now you have to face the American people in defeat. Your spoiled blue-blooded instincts tell you to lash out at nasty, nasty Dems, and Turd Blossum' given you all the leash you need.  But it's not going to change a thing.  Fitzgerald's stilll pumpin Scooter, Abramhoff's squealing on you, Iraq is every bit the quagmire you said it wasn't back in 04 & 05.  What do you have to waive in the face of your opponents?  Not a damn thing. Yo're screwed...hard.

    I love the smell of impeachment in the morning!

    by gabbardd on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:26:49 PM PST

  •  Doing my share - or trying to (none)
    Have left a message with Senator Obama (yay! I got to vote for him). Unfortunately, Durbin's system, which was set up differently, would take no messages. Will try again during business hours.
  •  Ah, you have to love the Intarwebs. (none)
    PDF with phone numbers of all Senate:

    http://senate.gov/...

  •  Rude Pundit NAILS it (none)
    Give it up for the Rude Boy when he says

    So here's the question that the Rude Pundit has for Senators Daniel Akaka, Max Baucus, Joe Biden, Robert Byrd, Kent Conrad, Tom Harkin, Jim Jeffords, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Frank Lautenberg, Patrick Leahy, Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Barbara Mikulski, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, and Paul Sarbanes, who were there then and are there now: Do you wish you had filibustered Clarence Thomas now? Do you wish you had done everything you could even against the slim majority that supported Thomas?

    In 2004, Harry Reid said this about Clarence Thomas on Meet the Press: "I think that he has been an embarrassment to the Supreme Court...I think that his opinions are poorly written. I just don't think that he's done a good job as a Supreme Court justice." Is there something you could have done back, say, in 1991 that might have prevented an unqualified ideologue from being on the Supreme Court? Looking back, would you have done something differently?

    'Cause, see, we know now to be true what a whole fuckin' lot of us were sayin' back in 1991: Clarence Thomas supports rolling back rights and expanding the power of the Presidency, as well as in a detrimental, extreme Federalism (except, you know, in Bush v. Gore) and a pro-corporate, fuck-the-citizens approach to jurisprudence, easily the most conservative member of the Court, the only man who could make Antonin Scalia look like a wild-eyed Bohemian.

    See, the debate on Samuel Alito is one of those "If I had known then what I know now" moments. It's one of those "If you went back in time and had a chance to shoot Hitler, would you do it?" moments. (No, the Rude Pundit's not comparing Alito to Hitler - that'd be Bush. And, no, he's not advocating shooting Alito - instead, use a tranq gun on Karl Rove.)

    There's many, many reasons to filibuster Alito, ideologically and politically. At the end of the day, sweet Senators, look at Clarence Thomas - look at his decisions, his dissents, his deep desire to eviscerate individual rights and freedoms like they're pig carcasses in the slaughterhouse. Ask yourself if, at the end of another decade and a half, you wanna look back and wonder if you did everything you could, even if you failed, to prevent another extremist from getting on the court. Ask yourself what kind of America would you be looking from. Act like that's what's at stake.

    I love the smell of impeachment in the morning!

    by gabbardd on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:53:08 PM PST

    •  And again... (none)
      there's way to filibuster this while putting it all on Bush, regardless of what the Dickless Lacky Club has to say.

      You can make up for Clarence Thomas without having to really say anything.

      blame it on Bush. Say that Alito isn't O'Connor, just another long road of broken promises, etc.

      and then ask the Republicans, point blank: Are you not insulted, whether you approve of Alito or not, that your President spoke everything of a justice like Sandra Day O'Connor and then failed to deliver?

      sometimes a good defense is a good offense.

  •  BREAKING! Raw Story Say Filibuster Unlikely! (none)

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:54:36 PM PST

    •  Surprise, surprise (none)
      "Filibuster unlikely, Frustration high"

      Understatement much?

      this whole thing was fought wrong from the beginning.

      instead of grilling Alito (which we could have done anyway) why weren't we on Bush's azz for nominating him instead of someone in the mold of O'Connor?

      We could have controlled the debate and put Bush and co. on the defensive, and probably had public support before Alito even answered a question.

      Instead you let it slide and then every  news report begins with "Alito headed for smooth confirmation."

      You know, I read a review of War of the Worlds where the reviewer said "only Stephen Spielberg can ruin a Stephen Spielberg film."

      Well, only Democrats can defeat Democrats.

      •  No disagreement here (4.00)
        We're our own worst enemy, not the right. Like the disease that they are, they just exploited this weakness. Of course, it depends on what you mean by "Democrat". Does the DLC even count these days? What about sellouts like Landrieu, Nelson and Lieberman? This isn't really about how we deal with this or that issue, be it Alito or ANWR, but about how we deal with all issues and set and enforce policy. Do we even have a policy these days? I'm not even sure that being pro-choice or for minority rights are supported by the party anymore.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:17:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed (none)
          and I'm not really sure how we are supposed to formulate any type of message when half of our party reads from another playbook.

          The only hope I have is that by finding new, local candidates and by heavily backing some dark horses we can eventually purge our party of what ails it.

          the problem with that is you would need some members to have a long, hard look in the mirror and not at their warchest fillers.

          •  We're unfortunately stuck with them for now (none)
            unless we want to be a minority party for another decade or longer, while we develop our "farm system" and "purify" ourselves of these Democratic poseurs. And we might not be able to afford that much time as the right consolidates its illegitimate hold on power. We might not have a viable democracy by then within which we could fairly comptete, no matter how deep we were in talent.

            I'm torn about this, but my gut feeling is that we're better off supporting them for now while keeping them on a short leash, while we try to regain the majority, and when and if we do that, start reeling in the leash until they either become true team players or else leave the fold entirely. Party discipline is important, but not at the expense of regaining the majority. Let them be our occasionally "useful idiots" for now.

            Politically, at least, I think that the Reaganites should be our model for this. When they set out to capture the presidency, their movement was still a minority within the GOP. Even when he won, they were still but the most important of several factions within the party. Only after years in control were they able to purge the party of moderates and liberals and turn it into its currenty hard-right version.

            I think we need to keep cooperating with those in the Democratic party whom we neither agree with nor respect, so long as it helps the party retake congress and the white house, while continuing to strengthen our movement within the party (progressive, for lack of a better word). When we retake these, we can start "purifying" the party. Unfortunately, this seems to be the most successful model for political success.

            I'd love to hear about other ones that also work, though. The only other one I can think of is a viable third party, but I don't believe we have the right conditions for that to happen right now. Perhaps we will, though, if Bush stays in power and further consolidates his tyrannical rule. That would be sure to drive out libertarians and whatever moderates remain in it from the GOP, who could perhaps unite with progressive Democrats similarly disgusted with their party's fecklessness and relentless drive towards the center, to form a new party. I hope it doesn't come to that, though.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:42:46 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Have doubts about Raw Story's sources... (none)
      I am still feeling burned by all their "Fitzmas" reports about Karl Rove's "imminent" indictment.

      I don't doubt their sincerity - but get the feeling that in their eagerness to break stories they are easily 'played' by their sources.

      •  True, not the real news yet (none)
        But they put out the Rove indictment story before Fitzgerald had his meeting with Luskin that supposedly made him decide to not indict Rove, which he was prepared to do before it.

        Given this, perhaps there's still hope that one or more of these Dems will change their minds, or be "pursuaded" to change it. Nothing's official yet, as no vote has been held and the debate continues on the floor, and anything can technically still happen.

        And as someone else here just pointed out, Byrd hasn't lectured about the Romans yet...

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:27:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  psssst (none)
    When your recommended diary hits number one, it's a good idea to correct the misspelling of the word "F-i-l-i-b-u-s-t-e-r" in its title.

    : )

  •  shit (none)
    i should email alexander if he is undecided
  •  BREAKING: Filibuster Even Less Likely Now! (none)
    I just got this from Raw Story:

    Salazar won't filibuster Alito

    That makes 3 who won't filibuster: Ben Nelson, Landrieu and now Salazar. There may already be others that I haven't heard about yet. We can afford 1 more non-filibuster, but 2 would make it totally impossible. And with only 23 out of 45 Dems having declared how they'll vote after the first day of debate ((all No votes, as of 11pm EST), it's not looking very good.

    We're basically down to a Hail Mary at this point and the clock is rapidly running out.

    This is so pathetic. I'm not proud to be a Democrat tonight. Not proud at all.

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    by kovie on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:28:21 PM PST

  •  Do these spineless Democrats (none)
    understand that this is about Rove and Bush and their hideous power grab, and not about whether Alito isn't unpopular enough?  Do these fuckers remember that oath they took?
    •  Ohh come now (none)
      Alito is not right for the court, but you are vastly exaggerating the effect we are talking about here.

      He's a reliable conservative vote for the next 25-30 years.

      The ideological problems that Democrats disagree with are not new.  

      So yes, he's going to shift to the right.  This was expected.  Bush isn't going to nominate a leftist, or a centrist, or anyone of that sort to the court.

      But the mans' opinions are within the scope of the Constitution.  They are wrong, generally, in my view, but they aren't extra-constitutional.  They aren't anthethical to the concep of constitutional government.

      Being a looney on the topic - look up for "the republic is at stake" type of posts - isn't going to help win the Senators over.

      •  The Republic IS at stake (none)
        you fucking troll.
        •  No (none)
          It's not.

          Alito isn't going to dissolve the republic.

          Call me a troll atll day long.  

          This is politics.  Alito is bad ffor the court.  He regressive and frequently wrong.

          He is not, however, going to install Bush as dictator.

          If you really believe that the Republic is at stake are prepare to engage in the violent overthrow of the Supreme Court if Alito is confirmed?

          If that's what's really at stake doesn't patriotism suggest, or rather demand, that you take up arms with your fellow citizens to put down the usurper?

          I have this sneaking suspicion the answer is no.

          Because "The republic is at stake" theme is just that: a theme.  

          Dislike Alito, want him to be confirmed, but make no mistake.  Having Alito on the court is a rightward shift for 25 years.  Abortion rights, civil rights, and the balance of power between the branches is at stake.

          But get off the lies.  The Republic has survived much worst without breaking.

  •  Deal breaker (none)
    Any Democrat that votes for cloture instead of filibustering will not get a single red cent from me. This one is a dealbreaker just like the bankruptcy bill in my eyes. Either you believe in taking a principled stand and fighting or you lose my support. That simple. My money is going to the brave and those strong enough to fight, not the wussies. For the record, I've already notified Salazar and Landreiu that I'm not a constituent, but I was a potential donor and my disappointment will be a loss for their coffers come election time.
    •  precisely (none)
      as I've said a bunch of times today (click signature, forgive the blogwhore, for one example), a "No" on Alito but "Yes" on cloture amounts to the same thing as a "Yes" on Alito.

      (Just as it was when Lieberman did the same damn thing with the bankruptcy bill.)

      Ken Salazar doesn't get that.  Feinstein, from what she said, may not get that.  Landreiu, well, she hasn't even said she's voting "No" yet.  But she has shown herself to be an idiot.

      -- Stu

      •  This is the message that needs to be sent (none)
        It puts it in terms they understand. Money.

        Money talks, bullshit walks.

        For those of you that are constituents of the Senators on the thin line, this a great message to send them right now.

        "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

        by bewert on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:46:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The problem is... (none)
      I remember that for a lot of us, the Bankruptcy Bill WAS the deal breaker, and then the Dems started to win us back by pushing back on the privatisation of Social Security, the Senate closed session about the Bush administration's mishandling of the war, etc.

      We have to let them know that this is OUR line in the stand, and if they do not show any backbone here, we will stiffen ours and work to change the ENTIRE Congress - Dems and Repubs alike.

      A few thousand calls and e-mails to the Democratic National Committee saying that we will cut off funding ANY sitting Congressperson unless they show spine now will be very effective - besides, if Alito gets confirmed, it won't really matter if we have Dems in Congress.  They have proven themselves to be unworthy to be in OUR party, and even if we get an entirely Repub President, House, and Senate in 2008, at least we will know who our enemies are.

      "A CONSERVATIVE is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run." --Elbert Hubbard

      by Rico on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:51:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nope (none)
        Let's just say that the largest probability - that Alito passes - happens.

        Who here is really going to vote against their Democrat the next time around?

        Who here is going to pull the green candidate or write in slot in a close senate race between Santorum and whoever is running against?

        Seriously.

        It's a nice idea, but this isn't a line in the sand.  I've added you to my "people to watch" mental list.

        My guess is that 3 months from now you are  back on board the Democrat train; supporting, rallying, and going all out to get them back in power.

        Care to put a wager on it?

        •  well (none)
          If Alito is confirmed then it doesn't matter. For me it will mean the end of the Democratic party. if they couldn't be bothered to filibuster this nomination then stuff it. I won't vote against the Dems but I won't vote for this level of incompetence. The only thing that will get me to the polls would be if I knew Al Gore was going to ruin. otherwise forget it. There's no there left for me if we lose this. Screw them. I been giving & giving & giving. Why? To protect every woman's right to choose. If they can't be bothered to filibuster this nomination the I can;t be bothered to volunteer for them anymore. That was the contract I have with the Dems. They were supposed to stand up for the things I believed in & in turn I volunteered for them, I gave money, I did what I was supposed to do. This is it.

          I don't think I am the only one to feel this way. I am hard core liberal, but I am near the end of the rope. If they really think being Rethug lite is what Americans want then fine, let them have at it - only don;t come crying to me later - I'll be in Canada!

          Sign me disheartened.

        •  Roe v. Wade isn't the line in the sand? (none)
          I've added you to my DINO list.  I'm a whole-hearted Democrat - My dad was a foreman in his union.

          I'm just more aware of my party being hijacked by the rich than you are.

          And if you don't realize that there might be close Congressional races in the future, but the Republicans will NEVER allow themselves to be the minority party again, you are just a oblivious victim of a mugging.

          "A CONSERVATIVE is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run." --Elbert Hubbard

          by Rico on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 06:04:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Assumptions (none)
            You call me a Dino.  But here is the thing:

            I'm not a Democrat.

            Second, I'll wager money with on the Republicans are going to hijack the government meme.  They are going to lose, and that's that.  

    •  RE; (none)
      I agree, but you should also think twice about giving money to Democratic party organs such as the DNC because they will in turn give money and support to the candidates tha you have decided not to support.

      Shaming them hasn't worked so the only thing left to do is shut the spigots, no matter how meagre they are in the grand ocean of political money.

      ... now watch this drive.

      by jg on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:41:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Kiss My Ass, Arlen Specter (4.00)
    Yes, pucker up and give it a big wet kiss.  I'm really tired of seeing you at a microphone, deploring the partisan divide on the Alito nomination. I'm really tired of seeing you urging people to cross that partisan divide, when what you really mean is you want DEMOCRATS to cross the divide. You want DEMOCRATS to vote for Alito.  Well, listen up, you fucking scrapple-eating asshole...if you really think someone ought to cross the partisan divide on this nomination, how about you lead the way? After all, you claim to be pro-choice, and we all know Alito was chosen because he thinks the government should be in the business of telling women what to do with their lives. So, I'll stand over here on MY SIDE, and tap my foot while I look for a shred of courage from you.  You want someone to transcent partisan politics, to cross that divide?  OK, you Amish-country possum-fucker...YOU GO FIRST.

    I'm waiting, dipshit.

    In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

    by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:37:55 PM PST

  •  Likely holdouts (none)
    According to an email I just got from Democrats.com, Reid says there are 8 holdouts who won't filibuster.  Won't name names, but the likely ones (according to D.com) are

    The most likely suspects are the "Red State" Democrats:
    Tom Carper (DE)
    Kent Conrad (ND)
    Byron Dorgan (ND)
    Tim Johnson (SD)
    Mary Landrieu (LA)
    Blanche Lincoln (AR)
    Mark Pryor (AR)

    Tantalizingly close, but

    •  voting for cloture (none)
      So far I think we have had 3 public no filibuster statements. Feinstein(D-Ca), Salazar (D-Co) and Landreiu (D-La). I've contacted all but Feinstein. I'll let her no my extreme disappointment tomorrow. Maybe if we apply pressure we can get them to change their minds. I guess we should go ahead and hit the rest of the rest of the undecideds. Anyone have an updated list of who hasn't declared?
      •  DiFi really? (none)
        I know she said so a while ago, but still?  Must I call her again?
        •  She hasn't said anything (none)
          I haven't heard anything recently to indicate a change of heart. I think we need to continue applying pressure. No need to call again if you already let her know how you feel. Hopefully, the rest of us can pick up the slack. The Democrats in the Senate need to realize how serious we are in our opposition to Alito. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
  •  voting for cloture (none)
    and against Alito when you know to do so is to confirm him, is the most disgraceful vote combination possible for democrats, akin to trying to disguise a pile of dogshit with plastic flowers.  Don't let it happen. Choose hero, not coward for all time.

    What would you attempt to do if you knew you could not fail? unknown

    by moon in the house of moe on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:58:51 PM PST

  •  I've been trying to e-mail (none)
    Landrieu - it is jammed - I can't parse the letter.  
  •  1933 And Now! (2.66)
    Neither the writer, I am confident, nor I, are giving up. Understand:

    Clearly, even most leading Senate Democrats have failed to grasp the essential issue of Alito. They have obviously failed to relive the experience of those, during January and February of 1933, who failed to recognize what should have been the obviously, already looming, danger of an Adolf Hitler dictatorship. Their cowardice then created the conditions under which Hitler was made a dictator in the immediate aftermath of Herman Goering's "9/11," the setting of fire to the Reichstag.

    Many of those who refused to recognize the Hitler danger before the Reichstag incident, were soon rewarded by being shuffled into prisons, shot peremptorily, or shovelled into what became the concentration-camp system. What made that possible was Germany's toleration of Carl Schmitt's award to Hitler of the same powers, which the Supreme Court faction of Carl Schmitt's Federalist Society fellow-travellers, such as nominee Alito represents.

    Those of us from my generation, and some others, who lived through the experience of that tragic outcome brought about by those who refused to "exaggerate the Hitler danger" then, look sadly at those in the Senate and elsewhere today who seem inclined to repeat the lesson of history, from January-February 1933 -- weeks when Hitler could still have been stopped.

    They either do not remember, or have chosen to forget, that the prompting of the Hitler coup, which had been promoted by the head of the Bank of England, Montagu Norman, and his Anglo-American-French and other private banker accomplices, was motivated by the events surrounding and following the 1931 founding of the Bank for International Settlements. This all occurred in the context of a great international monetary-financial crisis, like that of today.

    Then, as now, it could happen here!

    It is notable that many relevant members of the Senate and others do not know of that lesson of history; the problem is the influence of sophistries catalogued under the rubric of "go along to get along." Let them look into the millions of despairing faces of those who died so cruelly in Hitler's camps, as a result of the same doctrine which the Federalist Society has adopted from the same Carl Schmitt known as the Crown Jurist of the Nazi system.

    To repeat the mistake of Germany in January-February 1933, is to take on oneself the guilt for those who were tortured and murdered so mercilessly by the forces of the Hitler whom the relevant leading private bankers brought to power then, and would do the like again today.

    by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
    January 25, 2006

    http://larouchepac.org/...

  •  We need every Who down in Whoville. (4.00)
    the tall and the small, to get off their ass and call!
  •  Letter to My Senator (none)
    Dear Senator Feinstein:

    Please vote against cloture on the Alito nomination. Furthermore, lend your support to a filibuster.

    Democrats helped let President Bush lead America into war in Iraq based on false pretenses. In retrospect, it was shameful. Please don't let this supreme court appointment go down the same way.

    Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense. - John Dean

    by easong on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:19:04 PM PST

  •  Cowardice never won anything for anyone (4.00)
    Sometimes you go to the wall for what's right.  Sometimes you even take the bullet.
    In contemplating the current crop of pants-pissing, equivocating vermin who style themselves our "party leaders," I'm reminded of an episode from our another of America's little imperialist adventures from long ago.  Of course, in this case, it was six teenagers from the opposing side that reminded America what it means to believe - really believe, not CNN-believe - in an ideal.
    The cowards who would save our republic by abandoning its core principles could learn a lot by looking into the Battle of Chapultepec, which occured a few miles from Mexico City on 13 September, 1847.  American forces under Winfield Scott were storming a colonial fortress-cum-military academy, and were succeeding in drving the Mexicans from their positions.  The general in command of the defenders ordered a retreat, but the six boys disobeyed the order and continued to fight.  When five had fallen, the last cadet, rather than aquiescing to defeat and submitting to a life on his knees, wrapped himself in the fort's flag - denying it as a prize - and leaped from a precipice shouting "Viva Mexico!"
    Sometimes the right thing to do is the right thing to do, irrespective of political considerations or personal feelings.  Sometimes the right thing to do is to nail your colors to the mast and go down fighting like a bastard.  Sometimes the right thing to do is force a constitutional crisis and bring the light of truth to bear upon those who know it not.
    But that's epic stuff, isn't it?  And we don't live in epic times.  We live in an era of milquetoast Democrats and Unitary Republicans, where the right thing to do is to put off the fight so long that it never even happens.  Better to go out with a wimper later than to set off a bang today.
    Scre this: anybody else wanna form a splinter party?

    dulce et decorum est, pro patria mori

    by Unitary Moonbat on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:41:09 PM PST

  •  Ted Stevens??? (none)
    What, is Alito against bridges?

    Accountability moment, my ass!

    by orthogonal on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:06:44 PM PST

  •  Done! (none)
    Contacted both Ca. Senators. Next up - the Presidential "candidates".

    -4.25, -6.87: Someday, after the forest fire of the Right has died we'll say "Whew, I'm happy that's over."

    by CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:40:01 PM PST

  •  RE (none)
    But I thought Democrat needed my money to help send them back to DC to stop right-wing justices from reaching the SCOTUS?  That is what I thought.

    It sounds like they needed the money for other purposes.

    It really sucks when you discover that you gave money to some Senator that has said they will not support a filibuster.  For me it was Landrieu.

     

    ... now watch this drive.

    by jg on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:45:44 PM PST

  •  Did Landrieu change her mind since (none)
    this afternoon ? She said she would vote yes on cloture if there was a fillibuster.

    Let's get some Democracy for America

    by murphy on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:06:12 PM PST

  •  lines are full (none)
    Both my Senators (Feinstein and Boxer) have full mailboxes
  •  Filibuster or else not one dime of my money!! (none)
  •  hahaha (none)

    weather forecast

    The palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. - Paine

    by Cedwyn on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:04:51 AM PST

David Nir, Leslie in CA, Kimberley, Mary, Tripleg, Thumb, Alumbrados, buffalo soldier, Manix, Terri, coral, MediaFreeze, Phoenix Woman, musing graze, taylormattd, MadRuth, copymark, Trendar, sharronmar, Renee in Ohio, Unstable Isotope, ScientistMom in NY, existenz, RINO, gorlim, lebowski, Stoy, Shockwave, mlkisler, ssteuer, TeresaInPa, jdld, Mnemosyne, Dan Hrkman, cmk, chicagochristianleft, free speech zone, figdish, lemuel, Bexley Lane, ortsed, blksista, Mumon, frisco, storme, MarkInSanFran, exNYinTX, Vitarai, HariSeldon, Plan9, dpc, loudGizmo, Czarvoter, agoldnyc, busternjake, Microangelo, mrsdbrown1, km4, concernedamerican, joel3000, kwinz, Glickman, bronte17, conchita, sponson, landrew, macdust, Wee Mama, daisy democrat, SamSinister, anotherCt Dem, understandinglife, walmas, DaveP, poemless, KBnNC, stevetat, mxwing, Glic, buckhorn okie, vmibran, Transmission, allysonsta, oslo, Molee, cognitive dissonance, bincbom, MonkeyDog102, House, ornerydad, Nate Roberts, ctsteve, diana04, David Boyle, Alna Dem, Chrisfs, Alohaleezy, Mauimom, Oke, mayan, cathy b, chinkoPelinke, tyukc, Barbara Morrill, rcvanoz, danthrax, Subversive, airMaufer, by foot, nj mom, sp0t, TXsharon, crackpot, MGH, astronautagogo, Science and Art, dwahzon, Catte Nappe, horsewithnoname, lcrp, welshvalleymaid, Sheims, Democratic Hawk, towit, TheJohnny, walkshills, zdefender, Man Eegee, CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream, Mosquito Pilot, rebirtha, kd texan, negropontedeathsquads, BigBite, liesl, rolet, boran2, We hold these truths, macmcd, waitingtoderail, Anglico, vcmvo2, Duke1676, Bluesee, sanrand, farleftcoast, Cisco Pike, rstnfld, pammo, LisaZ, Pandemoniac, Parker Lewis Cant Lose, panicbean, Valtin, ChemBob, Kdoug, Ranting Roland, boofdah, NeuvoLiberal, Jules Beaujolais, lennysfo, buckeyedem08, truebeliever, concerned, GreyHawk, annefrank, abbeysbooks, Caleb G, SBandini, Cannabis, tburcham, bartman, Cory Bantic, Brian B, JanL, proudprogressiveCA, JPete, kathny, sfdoug, martini, occams hatchet, LiberalDoc, Ranchita, seoguy, kraant, tarheelblue, Deuc, BlueInARedState, units13, Dvalkure, Empires Crumble, Truza, buhdydharma, Wary, dangangry, b1oody8romance7, trupatriot, TalkieToaster, MJ via Chicago, wmhalpin, lbrasington, Kitten

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site