Blue Dog Torturecrats

After reading an article about Democratic party unity and the Blue Dog Democrats, I decided to look them up and compare to my list of Congressional Torturers.

What I found was interesting.  37 members of the Blue Dog whatever in the 108th congress.  23 of them voted in favor of torture.  This accounted for 23 of the 30 democrats to vote for torture.  Now the Blue Dogs have increased their membership to 43 in the 110th caucus.  

Not much else to say.  What do you have to say?

Will the 7 new members of the Blue Dogs cause an increase in the number of Democrats willing to Torture people and hold them without trial?  What does this mean for the odds of repealing the MCA?  Do you think that members of congress that voted for the MCA should be charged in connection with any war crimes that are committed by soldiers that now think their behaviour is legal?

You can see the bipartisan list of torturers at http://www.dailykos.com/...  And the Blue Dog list is at http://www.house.gov/...

I've annotated the Blue Dogs from the 109th with their votes on the MCA below:

  * Nay  Rep. Joe Baca (CA)
  * Aye  Rep. John Barrow (GA)
  * Aye  Rep. Melissa Bean (IL)
  * Nay  Rep. Marion Berry (AR)
  * Aye  Rep. Sanford Bishop (GA)
  * Aye  Rep. Dan Boren (OK)
  * Aye  Rep. Leonard Boswell (IA)
  * Aye  Rep. Allen Boyd (FL)
  * Nay  Rep. Dennis Cardoza (CA)
  * Aye  Rep. Ben Chandler (KY)
  * Nay  Rep. Jim Cooper (TN)
  * Nay  Rep. Jim Costa (CA)
  * Aye  Rep. Robert E. "Bud" Cramer (AL)
  * Aye  Rep. Lincoln Davis (TN)
  * Aye  Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. (TN)   <- the only torturecrat to lose his job <br>   * Nay  Rep. Jane Harman (CA)
  * Aye  Rep. Stephanie Herseth (SD)
  * Aye  Rep. Tim Holden (PA)
  * Nay  Rep. Steve Israel (NY)
  * Aye  Rep. Jim Marshall (GA)
  * Aye  Rep. Jim Matheson (UT)
  * Aye  Rep. Mike McIntyre (NC)
  * Nay  Rep. Charles Melancon (LA)
  * Nay  Rep. Mike Michaud (ME)
  * Aye  Rep. Dennis Moore (KS)
  * Aye  Rep. Collin Peterson (MN)
  * Aye  Rep. Earl Pomeroy (ND)
  * Aye  Rep. Mike Ross (AR)
  * Aye  Rep. John Salazar (CO)
  * Nay  Rep. Loretta Sanchez (CA)
  * Nay  Rep. Adam Schiff (CA)
  * Aye  Rep. David Scott (GA)
  * Aye  Rep. John Tanner (TN)
  * Nay  Rep. Ellen Tauscher (CA)
  * Aye  Rep. Gene Taylor (MS)
  * Nay  Rep. Mike Thompson (CA)

•  This is where you can give me troll ratings...

  by jello5929 on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:00:13 PM PDT

  •  if you are lime/sourcream jello with linguica

    tacos, you are safe.

    by Compound F on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:24:29 PM PDT

  •  I am pleased as punch that you

    called these people what they are, that is, Torturecrats.  My theory about 'em is use and lose 'em.  (We need their votes for a majority, but Liebermanize the lot of them next primary season.)

    by DCDemocrat on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:42:13 PM PDT

•  how bout if i just call you

  an idiot?

  by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:13:25 PM PDT

  •  please expand, or get trolled.

    I've had enough of the gratuitous insults for one night following Miss Devore's crack-up.

    by Compound F on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:26:45 PM PDT

    •  then go ahead.

      don't threaten me.

      by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:33:07 PM PDT

      •  bad form.

        by Compound F on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:37:05 PM PDT

        •  double bad.

          by Compound F on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:39:19 PM PDT

        •  likewise

          we just won congress. rumsfeld was fired. the person replacing him just conceded that we're losing iraq and validated everything the dems have been saying for years. the ISG comes out and says all of bush's efforts have failed, for the same reasons that dems have been saying for years. Bush's entire management style and rationale has been gutted. we are on the cusp of a new era.

          and this dipshit wants to round up half our team and shoot them in the head?

          idiot. complete and utter idiot. and I'll throw you in that camp for not seeing it without an explanation.

          by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:41:56 PM PDT

          •  So how do you propose...

            we hold members of our team accountable for politically enabling torture?

            Or do you not have a problem with that?

            by Immigrant Punk on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:44:38 PM PDT

            •  why stop there?

              let's round up all of them that voted for iraq and shoot them in the head as well. let's demand goddamned fucking perfection from everyone and if they don't comply, shoot them all in the fucking head.

              Let's do this exactly as we're in a position to make some positive change. real fucking productive. you got me on that one, punk.

              by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:46:46 PM PDT

              •  I didn't say any of that.

                Yeah, torture bugs me a lot. It motivated me to get involved in the work for a Dem majority!

                But if Dems won't stand up to torture, then just how new an era will it be, this one you promise us?

                I ask in all sincerity. There is no need to go off on me. Nor will I be browbeat into silence on the issue.

                by Immigrant Punk on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:49:43 PM PDT

                •  i'm not really that angry

                  i mean, in theory i am. but not emotionally. i look at working with the democratic party, pardon the crass image, like trying to make love to someone with a broken back. It's just a great big frustrating mess.

                  People are weak. politics ruins otherwise good people. I don't know what to do with that. no idea. but when we are finally emerging into a position of power to reverse some of the harms, it seems we should be trying to encourage good behavior, not highlighting how much we suck. and yes, i know we suck a lot. but still....

                  by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:53:19 PM PDT

                  •  Torture is not about us and our needs!

                    It is about our obligatory duties, as a partner in the U.S. Government, to the weak and vulnerable, to all those illegally imprisoned and at the mercy of forces ostensibly under our civilian control-- it is about our duties and obligations to others. It is about our responsibility for the torture conducted in our names, with our tax dollars, with our at least partial knowledge.... and, as the diarist points out above-- surely uncomfortably-- with our at least partial consent.

                    Only we can stop it. Our acceptance of it, passive or otherwise, is our participation in it.

                    This is an entirely appropriate topic to bring up at this site, and just after an election is the very least damaging time in which to do so.

                    I am not willing to trade our moral core for short term political viability "at any cost." We've had too much of that already, seems to me.... and American had ended up very very far to the right for it.

                    by Immigrant Punk on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:08:45 AM PDT

                    •  the principle is clear

                      what i question is the effectiveness. I've already given up on democratic politics as being an exercise in anything approaching idealism. It's an ugly mud wrestling contest and you try to throw the beast in a way that kind of matches your personal values. When you only get 80%, you just keep on going.

                      I think we might right ourselves, eventually, but making lists like this seems very foolish right now.

                      by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:16:26 AM PDT

                      •  If not now, when?

                        If not us, who?

                        by Immigrant Punk on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:19:17 AM PDT

                        •  we've got two years

                          until the current season changes. think in those terms, and use all of that time to its best effect. Let's peak at month 22, not now.

                          by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:25:30 AM PDT

                          •  Does Jose Padilla have another 22 months?

                            What about the (apparently) thousands of others in his predicament, or worse-- because they're not citizens and so therefore don't have any standing in the courts?

                            Mr. Padilla is one of the few we really know anything about at all. Aside from the corpses that occasionally show up on Iraqi roadsides, their kneecaps Black&Deckered...

                            Justice delayed is justice most tragically denied.

                            by Immigrant Punk on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:53:50 AM PDT

                            •  Right!

                              And what about the estimated 3000 others that have apparently disappeared off the face of the Earth? This is nothing more than a bunch of mental sadists enabling a bigger bunch of physical sadists.

                              by Spoc42 on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 07:53:54 AM PDT

                    •  Immigrant Punk

                      Well said.

                      My thoughts here.

                      by Carnacki on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 04:01:20 PM PDT

              •  Are you drunk?

                by Carnacki on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:54:07 PM PDT

                •  why would you troll rate

                  my explanatory comment? that's when I stopped being drunk!

                  by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:59:06 PM PDT

                  •  Sean

                    Trollrated for the "dipshit" and the mischaraterization of what the diarist wrote as wanting to shoot them in the head.

                    The insults in the comments seemed trollworthy. That is not meant to imply you are a troll which I know well you're not. I've agreed often with you in the past and I'm sure I will again in other diaries.

                    by Carnacki on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:05:19 AM PDT

                    •  i would characterize that as

                      ratings abuse. but that's your call. for the record, this kind of diary, at this time especially, is really really grating to me! It's like dumping mud all over a sunday dinner.

                      every now and then, the message discipline of the other side is attractive! =)

                      by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:11:00 AM PDT

                      •  Sean

                        Yes, but that message discipline comes at a steep price. The Republicans marched lock step and almost all voted for the torture bill in order to maintain message discipline.

                        Here's from the troll rating article in dKosopedia:

                        Personal attacks on other site users, including following them from thread to thread.

                        Now where I come from calling some one an "idiot" and "dipshit" are personal attacks although your actual mileage may vary.

                        by Carnacki on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:19:49 AM PDT

                        •  as to this

                          Yes, but that message discipline comes at a steep price.

                          agreed, a bit too steep to be sure. but that doesn't mean we have to commit a similar error that's more comfortable to our side.

                          by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:26:37 AM PDT

              •  you lookin at me?

                by dft on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 04:57:02 AM PDT

          •  Sean

            No, these are the people we need to begin looking at replacing in the primaries in the longterm.

            Instead of your juvenile insults, why not trying to raise real counterpoints to the diary? For instance, the person replacing Rumsfeld also said the U.S. needs to stay there for a long time even though we're losing. So what if Bush's management style has been gutted? He's still president for the next two years. The new defense sec'y is just as likely to be pushing for a war in Iran as the last defense sec'y only Gates will be perceived as having the "credibility" that Rumsfeld lacked.

            Pointing out the bad voting records of Democrats is not the same as "round up half our team and shoot them in the head."

            Enthusiasm about being on the "cusp of a new era" is terrific, but don't let it lead to your hyperbole running away with you.

            by Carnacki on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:50:53 PM PDT

            •  Carnacki

              i appreciate your comment. we achieve these thing through party discipline and leadership. I fail to see how labeling our own as "torturecrats" gets us anything other than disunity and less power.

              by the way, my insults aren't juvenile, they're simply pointed.

              by SeanF on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:56:29 PM PDT

              •  Sean

                That's a better response than your earlier ones. I don't agree with it. I think I made my view on it clear. I was just happy the vast majority of Democrats voted against torture. But I really had to wonder at your responses because I hadn't seen you throwing around insults like that when disagreeing with people in the past.

                by Carnacki on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:00:37 AM PDT

                •  eh, gotta let off steam sometimes

                  let me be rumsfeldian for a moment, if you aren't getting a few troll ratings here and there, you aren't doing your job! (that's a joke)

                  although i don't always agree with you, i think you make your points effectively. you tilt more idealist, i tilt more pragmatic. oh, and you write diaries that make the rec list.

                  by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:12:02 AM PDT

          •  Whether we are on the cusp of a new era

            remains to be seen.

            When I actually see us out of Iraq; when I see the Bush cartel at the very least, investigated for their crimes and brough to justice; when I see that the Congress is acting in the interest of working people instead of doing the bidding of the corporations; when see the Congress repeal the MCA and legislate against rather than for torture; the I will belive that we are entering a new era.

            Debbie Stabenow, my Senator was one of thaose who voted for torture and against habeas corpus. Up to that point I contributed to her campaign. After that vote, I ceased  campaigning for her and did noit vore for her. Nor will I ever vote for anyone who votes aginst the constitution and basic human rights.

            If that makes me an idiot, so be it. I would much rather be labeled an idiot than sell my soul for political expediency.

            by slatsg on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:01:52 AM PDT

            •  i think that's a fine sentiment

              and i'd do the same. what i wouldn't do is make lists and scheme ways to weaken the party when we may have the chance to fix even bigger problems. I kinda think 100,000 dead in Iraq is a big problem. and that's just the beginning. If we have to go through the theatrics of habeas corpus and torture, if that's the path we as a nation have to tread in order to learn these stupid lessons, ok.

              I don't think we disagree. I just wanna get some horrible wounds treated now, before we address the ones that have already scabbed over.

              by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:06:43 AM PDT

              •  I appreciate the reply

                Let me explain the list.

                Before the election, when the Blue doggies voted for MCA, a list of these folks was posted here at DK and there was a suggestion that perhaps there should be a large outpouring of outrage directed toward those who would make this country a rogue nation. Those of us who were rather chagrined by the thought of our country reverting back to pre-Magna Carta times wre instructed to "keep our powder dry" and wait until after the election to raise a huge outcry.

                Well.... the election is over, and in a month the Democrats will take control of Congress. We now need to round up these doggies and let them know that we expect that they will rejoin the free world, the one in which human rights are respected, and repeal the MCA.

                by slatsg on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:25:39 AM PDT

          •  dipshit? idiot?

            Let's not get personal and name calling is not exactly in the diary rules.  He is entitled to his opinion, and his diary.  I agree with his low opinion of Blue Dogs, but I think this is the wrong bill to measure their allegiance to Dems or democracy.  It was claimed that the torture bill was going to pass anyway and so Dems up for re-election ran for cover by voting yes on this bill.  Having said that, they are certainly no one I'd like to have a beer with.

            by dkmich on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 04:51:00 AM PDT

        •  You have bad form.

          If the Diarist can adopt the GOP meme of fill in the slur - o crat  you ought have thick enough skins for the relatively tame  "idiot". No one on our side of the aisle is pro torture. Got it jackass?

          by Robert Davies on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 07:51:42 PM PDT

•  the MCA won't be repealed

  by Congress...it will hopefully be repealed by the courts.

  Democrats simply don't have the votes to overturn the abomination even with the majority...and even if every Democrat voted to repeal, not eneough Republicans would to get a 2/3 majority--same in the Senate.

  Bush would veto any repeal of the Act.

  by michael1104 on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:14:19 PM PDT

  •  the supremes are frozen, refuse cases n/t

    by Compound F on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:28:27 PM PDT

    •  yeah I read the NYT article...

      Somehow I doubt they would pass up on this case if it got to the level, and I am confident it would get stuck down by every judge before it reaches the Supreme Court. It is blatantly unconstitutional...and if this same conservative court ruled againt Bush on Hamdan, I can also see them striking this shit down...

      by michael1104 on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:38:26 PM PDT

      •  michael1104

        What was the vote tally in Hamdan?

        by Carnacki on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:56:17 PM PDT

  •  Let Bush Veto it

    Any patriotic American congress would repeal it anyway.

    by recontext on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 11:53:22 PM PDT

•  why are there 23 comments reported,

  only 7 showing?  Is Ajax buggy?  Send in the spiders!

  by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:04:50 AM PDT

  •  Compound

    The site seems to be behaving very badly tonight. Perhaps ajax is going on a sympathy strike in response to peeder's gbcw comment.

    by Carnacki on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:10:08 AM PDT

    •  I don't even understand that one at all.

      I have no idea what happened in that previous diary.  I viewed Peeder as an asset.  Thanks, Carnacki.

      by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:22:26 AM PDT

      •  Hmm...

        I think you know at least part of the story.

        by ek hornbeck on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:47:27 AM PDT

        •  which part do I know?

          I'm pretty averse to the pissing matches, and tend not to follow too closely or even remember.  I do recall that Armando and Miss Devore had some encounters, minimally.  After that, please explain Peeder's involvement.  Like I said, huh?

          by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:00:38 AM PDT

          •  I think...

            it had very little to do with Miss D's diary and a lot to do with another diary I know you didn't miss because I saw you in it.

            Perhaps peeder spoke hastily, but he has some very strong feelings about whether you use carrots or sticks to enforce community norms.

            As do I.

            I don't think people draw the right lessons from Armando.  He was very particular about content, no dissing Markos or the site, no breaking the articulated community norms.

            I never saw him say someone's writing was bad.

            by ek hornbeck on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 07:07:05 AM PDT

  •  ha ha!

    the magic of the troll button!

    by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:31:37 AM PDT

    •  Your comment was no better than

      Miss Devore's.  Anyone who fails to see that will approximate that level of potential discourse of their own accord.

      by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:56:58 AM PDT

      •  i missed the Miss Devore meltdown

        apparently. but the point being, don't complain about disappearing comments if you dole out the donuts.

        this diary afforded an interesting discussion, whether you see it or not.

        by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:02:25 AM PDT

        •  and your calling the diarist an "idiot"

          was pertinent?  In what universe?

          by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:05:05 AM PDT

          •  that was the extent of your comment, as well.

            tell me: Productive or destructive?

            by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:07:26 AM PDT

            •  you really want to fight this again?

              there were around 15 comments below that, that apparently you missed due to the troll rating.

              by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:14:29 AM PDT

              •  whatever.

                why I'm missing the ability to see comments is beyond me.  I stand by what I did.  Your comment was a pure attack, meaning that you simply called the diarist an idiot, without further comment.  Perhaps Bob Johnson could get away with violating the rules so blatantly, but you cannot.

                by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:20:20 AM PDT

                •  boo hoo

                  if you don't have TU (trusted user status) you can't see a comment when it gets 2 troll ratings. or any of the responses. But being that you can only troll rate someone when you are TU, and you troll rated me, that would imply you had TU so i don't know why you couldn't see them.

                  before you get all high and mighty, you might consider that you don't know the whole story.

                  must go to bed.

                  by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:24:49 AM PDT

                  •  You are the dumbest fuck around.

                    For whatever reason, the software glitches are fucking up my TU status.  

                    You never addressed your fucked up behavior.  That is the issue.  You basically pulled a MIss Devore, by issuing gratuitous insults against the rules of the site.  I have just about completely lost any respect for you at this point.  You fail to acknowledge what you actually did.  And it was in violation of site rules.  I called you on it.  I gave you time to respond.  You responded and said, "fuck off." so I trolled it.

                    by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:32:35 AM PDT

                    •  i don't give a shit if you troll rated me

                      pick up the plot, junior.

                      by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:46:11 AM PDT

                      •  again, failure to address.

                        live with it.

                        by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:53:11 AM PDT

                        •  fundamentally, you refuse to address what was

                          a pretty trivial human failure, then magnified thqt failure.

                          by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:54:41 AM PDT

                    •  sorry dude

                      "You're the dumbest fuck around" is no better than the shit SeanF is posting.

                      by Politburo on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 06:46:13 AM PDT

                •  look again

                  i untroll-rated one of your comments, which might have restored your TU status. see if they're there now. all this is just highschool stuff anyway, so i wish you a good night.

                  by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:29:56 AM PDT

                  •  I appreciate your willingness

                    to reconsider.  That is indeed magnamimous, especially on a blog.  I hope to hold myself to the standard you are now displaying.  Good night to you, as well.

                    For now, I cannnot see anything, due to an Ajax software malfunction, I believe.

                    by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:37:11 AM PDT

                    •  lighten up

                      there's more worthwile drama out there in real life if you look for it. you're quite the judgmental little snip.

                      by SeanF on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:40:37 AM PDT

                      •  Yeah, it's boring as hell.

                        But insofar as you have impugned me, that is not unimportant to me.

                        by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:51:15 AM PDT

                  •  I cannot see much.

                    with this shitty software, which I hope gets fixed.

                    by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:45:36 AM PDT

•  What a stupid question

  Do you think that members of congress that voted for the MCA should be charged in connection with any war crimes that are committed by soldiers that now think their behaviour is legal?

  Never mind that the Constitution explicitly forbids this under the "speech and debate" clause (votes are a protected form of speech), just who do you propose ought to carry this out?

  FYI, if you want to kill any chance to repeal the MCA, this kind of talk is a sure way to do it. Most sane people have moved beyond their outrage and are working on sensible ways to get the repeal done. I suggest you join them. Righteous indignation will get you absolutely squat.

  by dragon695 on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 12:48:11 AM PDT

  •  righteous indignation

    is a core fact of our existence as vertebrates.  Somehow, people need to adjust to that fact, while still maintaining whatever thin veneer of rationality is doled out to vertebrates.

    by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:15:24 AM PDT

  •  righteous indignation

    is a core fact of our existence as vertebrates.  Somehow, people need to adjust to that fact, while still maintaining whatever thin veneer of rationality is doled out to vertebrates.

    by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:16:00 AM PDT

  •  righteous indignation

    is a core fact of our existence as vertebrates.  Somehow, people need to adjust to that fact, while still maintaining whatever thin veneer of rationality is doled out to vertebrates.

    by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:16:41 AM PDT

•  Cali represent

  All the California folks voted Nay.  West side represent...

  by agorabum on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:19:26 AM PDT

•  this software is fucked up.

  I hope it gets fixed soon.  If not, it will lead to further, unnecessary aruments.

  by Compound F on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 01:25:33 AM PDT

•  one huge cheer for my delegation

  as agorabum noted above, it is indeed a relief to look at a list and NOT fund that folks from the california delegation are on it for the WRONG reason(s). phew.

  but i tend to agree with sean f's perspective (although not his invectives).  a little bit of foresight goes a hell of a long way here.  and in the case of listing all the so-called "blue dogs," many of which are quite liberal on social issues (leading me to wonder what in the hell a blue dog really is except  a statement of fiscal philosophy?) -- i absolutely agree that our response to these folks needs to be measured and articulate.

  what we do not need at this point in time is a list of people who some folks agree need to be "shot" especially when the list/folks in agreement is on such a hot-button spot like dKos.  it would be a cyber version of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face...

  i am not suggesting shutting down discussions about how we respond.  but i am suggesting that such hyperbolic talk is not helpful.

  i mean:

  • it is not helpful to US, the side that just finally has seized back a brief window of opportunity to right six year's worth of wrongs...
  • it is helpful to THEM, namely those who just lost power and are desperate to find ways to knee-cap the dems at each and every turn.

  to not even yet be in power and to already be bandying about half-baked and half-measured ideas is clearly not the place we want to or need to be right now.

  yes, the impulse to satisfy our need for revenge is always powerful.

  but, the capacity to see beyond the immediate and destructive gratification of this urge for revenge is what makes us different, i suggest, than those who just lost power.

  their play book reads very simply:  cross us and pay the price.  
  (plamegate anyone?  richard clarke?...)

  ours should not.

  after all, isn't it partly because of this play book that they have been steadily losing our nation's support, our nation's confidence and -- as we saw november 7th -- losing the votes of our nation's electorate. ?  just wondering...

  _______________

  it's their screen name because they couldn't figure out how to spell "moran."

  -9.75 (e), -7.18 (s)

  by dadanation on Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 05:21:38 AM PDT