I’ve just had an inspiration: A literally perfect protest that will—without any doubt whatever—cause a media firestorm. And it won’t cost anything. And it won’t be illegal. Or a LIE.
The moment President Bush in his upcoming State of the Union speech utters a falsehood, or a mischaracterization, like “I did not break the law by ignoring FISA,” or that he will do “anything” to protect the people from the terrists, or claiming that congress was briefed on and agreed to the wiretapping, the moment he utters a single syllable of bullshit, then:
every single Democrat should get up and quietly walk out of the room.
This mass exodus would not be disrespectful to the presidency itself, but rather a principled refusal of congressmen and women to by their silence endorse the bullshit and lies of the man who occupies the office.
Imagine it!
Why don’t we start an email, fax and telephone campaign? Spread the word. Let the word flow through the blogosphere. Let the Fascists know what’s coming.
The beauty of this proposal is that we don’t have to resort to the slime tactics and lies and bullshit that got the Republicans where they are today. PRINCIPLE will be the bedrock of this exercise of free speech.
What do you say?
It sounds good, John, but as you noted in another thread, the Dems can't act as concertedly as the Republicans can. If the tables were turned, the GOP would easily stage such a walkout.
Besides, what good would it do if Joe Lieberman and Joe Biden remained behind?
Posted by pessimist at January 14, 2006 04:09 AMKidnap Joe&Joe Inc., take to plastic surgeon, have balls installed. How about all dems boycotting Fox "news".
Posted by TIKI AL at January 14, 2006 04:44 AMGood God, what Dems actually WATCH Faux News??
Posted by Kris at January 14, 2006 04:51 AMPut you're tinfoil hat on, fire up a copy of the Pet Goat video, and imagine Andy leaning in to whisper: "It's begun, sir" instead of "America is under attack."
Now look at Bush's expression and tell me that deer in the headlights doesn't look more like a man suffering buyer's remorse than a man frozen in fear.
Posted by scott at January 14, 2006 05:00 AMKris: I'm referring to the endless parade of inept dems that GO ON Fox "news", and allow themselves and their party to be demeaned, shouted over and ganged up on to satisfy the T-REX riders that do watch.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 14, 2006 05:18 AMThis speaks to the concept of the "Big Lie" hiding in plain sight. If you read the Neocon's manifesto on their PNAC website they were looking for a catalyzing event to execute their plans. So if Tenet's hair was flambe in the Summer of 2001 it's plausible that Bu$hco and the Neocons let 9/11 happen. That provided the perfect backdrop for their middle-east plans and pillaging of the U.S. government... Some say FDR let Pearl Harbor happen to motivate the isolationists to support European allies and we know Shrub likes to compare himself to FDR... ;)
Posted by Roy Batty at January 14, 2006 05:31 AMI watch Fox sometimes. It's hard, but I feel like I need to hear their spin to understand why Reps say the things they do.
Posted by ann at January 14, 2006 05:31 AMRoy, I said the same thing yesterday. FDR needed Pearl Harbor, Bush needed 9/11. How else do you convince the country that we need to be in a perpetual state of war? How else to you fleece the treasury to line the pockets of armamanets companies? (I guess Bush doesn't have any friends in the body armor business, though, they're probably kicking themselves over that one.)
I've always believed that they knew something was coming on 9/11, Bush was not in the WH that day after all, and was Rummy at the Pentagon? I doubt it. No one really knows where Vice was. I think they misunderestimated how massive the attack was going to be, though, but they have definitely used that to their benefit ever since: "Let us not forget the lessons of 9/11."
Remember that clip of Bush saying, "I'm the war president?" Does anyone remember how absolutely happy he seemed at that moment? Like a kid who finally did what the grown ups wanted him to do and finally got it right.
Posted by ann at January 14, 2006 05:52 AMhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/13/AR2006011301738.html?nav=rss_email/components
The States Step In As Medicare Falters
Seniors Being Turned Away, Overcharged Under New Prescription Drug Program, republicans seem hellbent on world domanation
I spent a few minutes this morning poking around on Blogsforbush.com...usually wingnut blather... What was truly creepy is the absolute lather some of these people are in to affect an unscheduled sunrise over Tehran. They think the most effective way to deal with Iran is to obliterate their capital in a nuclear strike. Nice...very Sodom and Gomorra...
Even if Iran had nuclear weapons they would not use them against Israel because they know Israel has the ability to hit them back. So Bu$hco using this as a pretext for us bombing them is just as phony a reason for war as WMD's. Wake up America!
Roy: 9-11 was like Pearl Harbor, so now they need a Naga-Hiro event to come full circle for "closure".
Posted by TIKI AL at January 14, 2006 06:20 AMRoy,
If he does that, there is the possiblity that Al sadr would turn his militia on our troops in Iraq. I wouldn't doubt that he would do it simply because he never thinks of the consequences. This would have been a great idea if the idiot had done this kind of thing before he went into Iraq.
FDR did not need Pearl Harbor. He won 3 terms BEFORE December 7, 1941.
Posted by Daryl at January 14, 2006 06:35 AMDid'nt Japan attack because we sided with China, told them to stop their Pacific take-over, and choked off their oil supply?
Posted by TIKI AL at January 14, 2006 06:44 AMHA! CNN is funny. They get the Pakistani Foreign Minister on the phone to talk about if this guy was killed or not. Dude immediated cuts off Tony Harris and announces Pakistan is launching a formal protest over the airstrikes. Tony seems a bit shaken. Says, "bu, but, but our sources say the information came from Pakistani intel, isnt that right right?" Dude says no, that's not right and oh how bout this: Of COURSE, mass anti-American protests going on right on in the streets of Pakistan.
...hmmm hadn't seen that on any US traditional media.
Anyway, Tony tries to get back to if the guy was killed or not and dude pretty much just cuts him off and the interveiw is over.
Then, unbeleivably, they go to the Asian chick and she spends the next 15 seconds blubbering about if the guys is dead or not and they're doing DNA testing and conflcting information. Talk about ignoring the elephant in the room.
CNN running from a huge story dumped right in their lap. Pakistan says this airstrike a violation of international law and their sovreignty. Now on to house call with Jerry Willis...
OBTW, five minutes before this live bit of direct evidence that CNN is nothing but a mouthpiece for BushCoGOP, they had some stern looking white guy with a "military expert" type of title saying:
"It's a big blow to AQ that this guys is dead. It's a big blow to AQ that this guys is dead. It's a big blow to AQ that this guys is dead. It's a big blow to AQ that this guys is dead... you know.. if he's dead."
Posted by The Truth at January 14, 2006 06:57 AMOf course it was all planned. "It is the New World Order." It as a one-world government headed by US or transnationals, oppressing the public through military means and a restriction on individual freedoms like movement or speech. In the New World Order, I am sure spying on Americans was first on their list of priorities. The boy that sits in OUR White House is pure evil.
John, I think your idea is excellent. Send those letter, faxes and emails.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 07:09 AMOh hum, just another outrage. How many is that now? 250?
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 07:13 AMUm, maybe it's my own reading comprehension, but the declassified report Leopold links to says nothing of the sort. It clearly says that NSA is using warrants (indeed, when Leopold quotes from the report later in the article, he uses it to say what was supposed to happen; that is, even his quotes suggest the report says the NSA was doing things legally).
Can someone point to where in the report it says the NSA "had been eavesdropping on Americans during the course of its work monitoring suspected terrorists and foreigners believed to have ties to terrorist groups"?
Posted by emptywheel at January 14, 2006 07:24 AMann, I don't need to watch Faux News to find out what the spin is, I just watch CNN to learn the spin.(as the Truth just demonstrated why).
Yes, and just how many major media outlets have reported about the significant fact that the Shrub allowed the NSA to spy (data mine wiretap) prior to 9/11 did NOT prevent the 9/11 attack (as Darth Cheney claimed) story yet?
And the bogus Al Qaeda #2 story that was being hyped last evening....Is that the best propaganda that our tax dollars buys these days (complete with bloody dead cow on a hillside with a group of locals standing around holding up a fragment of what looks to be the remnant of a US missile)from the Lincoln Group or whatever republican friendly group Rummy is contracting with these days to do this? Did I mention how much I despise our media these days...such willing dupes, when will they EVER learn not to take any claim that comes out of the WH or Pentagon seriously? They really are enablers of this whole mess..there is no excuse...willing dishonest enablers.
Emal, well evidently a dead cow is more important than a NSA story. I'm surprised that they didn't tell how the cow died, when he died and who was around to see this terrible death.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 07:37 AMA Protest, a Spy Program and a Campus in an Uproar
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/14/national/14santacruz.html?ex=1294894800&en=5ef31752c5a539e6&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 07:51 AMActually Judith, I was wondering why they had pictures but no interviews of the locals that were standing there to ask them about who lived there, etc... and what the heck happened...but nooooo they might not have said what the bosses wanted to hear..so just pictures with the US media people left to use the WH/Pentagon description of what the pictures represented....a picture is worth a thousand words I guess....a dead cow, a piece of metal fragment with some numbers on it held by locals standing around a hole was enough proof for reporters here in the US to state that #2 probably killed there as their "sources" (aka Bushco paid propagandist) have said. Then screaming that message out to the masses (who I bet if polled in a month from now at least 30% will say the US did kill him). Call me cynical of the media and my gov't these day...You betcha!
John P, I agree I have often thought that the democrats should just walk out..walk out..stop playing this game...what do they have to lose...NOTHING.
Posted by at January 14, 2006 08:02 AMme, commenting above ^.
Posted by emal at January 14, 2006 08:03 AMMurtha will be on 60 Minutes January 15 with Mike Wallace.
“You’re going to see a plan for withdrawal,” says Murtha. He believes Congress will pass it because of mounting pressure from constituents tired of the war that could affect the upcoming midterm elections.
The political situation will force President Bush to accede to Congress, he says. “I think the political people who give [the president] advice will say to him, ‘You don’t want a democratic Congress. You want to keep a Republican majority, and the only way you’re going to keep it is by reducing substantially the troops in Iraq,’” Murtha says.
Murtha is so naive. He still doesn't get that no one tells this pResinut anything he doesn't want to hear (Rove being the only exception I suspect).
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/13/60minutes/main1208423.shtml
Emptywheel, the declassified report itself may not say it, because, according to the piece, NSA did not follow its supposed "protocol" of blacking out the identities of the US parties being surveilled and instead retained lists of names and data. And Bush knowingly authorized this, according to the piece.
Which, the piece concludes, "in essence meant the NSA was running a covert domestic spying operation in violation of the law".
Posted by euzoius at January 14, 2006 08:21 AMYet, members of the Bin Laden family were not detained after 9/11. Just how serious is Bush about this terra thingy? It's people like Matthews that feed the stupid.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: We're under attack on 9-11. A couple of days after that, if I were president of the United States and somebody said we had the ability to check on all the conversations going on between here and Hamburg, Germany, where all the Al Qaeda people are, or somewhere in Saudi [Arabia], where they came from and their parents are, and we could mine some of that information by just looking for some key words like "World Trade Center" or "Pentagon," I'd do it.
TICE [a former NSA official]: Well, you'd be breaking the law.
MATTHEWS: Yeah. Well, maybe that's part of the job.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/
http://mediamatters.org/items/200601130004
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 08:26 AMeuzoius
First of all, that's just a recycled scoop from Newsweek last year--the news that NSA was providing the names of citizens associated with intercepts to government officials--basically Bolton's surveillance writ large. It is not the same program as Risen revealed. And therefore, is not proof that Bush set up this program pre-9/11.
Moreover, the NSA document just doesn't support the claim. It says the NSA is working in the communication infrastructure. We knew that. But it nowhere does the document say it is spying on citizens. (Note, too, that part of the reason NSA is in the infrastructure is because it also is tasked with protecting against hacking.)
Leopold's article is basically a mumbo jumbo of three different types of NSA behavior.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very concerned about Risen's reporting on the NSA program. But I'd like us to be very careful about the accusations we make. Otherwise we make it very easy for Bush's supporters to claim we're a bunch of scaremongers.
Posted by emptywheel at January 14, 2006 08:29 AMWell, if the NSA had three different types of survellance of US parties going on at different points in 2001, with numerous authorizations by Nero Jr., then this is all the more reason that a serious select committee, with real lawyers, be set up to investigate the matter.
Feinstein, Kohl and Biden ain't gonna cut it.
And if Democrats don't see that they must demand AND GET such a committee in such circumstances, they have failed the nation and don't merit any further support.
Posted by euzoius at January 14, 2006 08:44 AMI have sent emails to all my local Democratic Members of Congress, urging them to quietly stand up and leave the chamber, when Bush utters his first lie of the evening.
Please, everybody do your part and send those emails and faxes. Let's get those folks talking among themselves about this notion.
Posted by Barry in Portland at January 14, 2006 08:44 AMJohn, well other people are thinking like you do. Dailykos is suggesting that the Democrats refuse to show up for the SOTU speech. I like that even better. A whole section void of Democrats. Think of it.
http://www.dailykos.com/view_poll
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 09:33 AMemptywheel, your point/concern is valid. But I will ask you about this comment here.
I'm very concerned about Risen's reporting on the NSA program. But I'd like us to be very careful about the accusations we make. Otherwise we make it very easy for Bush's supporters to claim we're a bunch of scaremongers.
First off, the other side will call us worse than scaremongers...they call us traitors and Liars even when we do have the facts in order and wave them in front of their face...but that's another issue.
But more importantly and in an ideal world where both sides share and play by the same set of rules, being extra careful with accusations would be true. But as we have seen, that is not the set of rules from which the other side plays. They cherrypick everything, tell all sorts of half truths, make all sorts of bogus inferences and fabrications, pay for propaganda, have fake news organizations/ newstories/op-eds and fake journalists and most importantly never blink and eye or stop it even when it is exposed.
complete with bloody dead cow on a hillside
Fucking terrorist bovines! This cow was obviously part of a sleeper cell in the region, about to be activated and sent on a mission in Iraq, via Iran, where she would have had a stop over to provide cream for terrorist butter! Will these bastards stoop to no low to try and end our Democratic freedoms! Fucking stealth cows!
The issue is, if the NSA was data-mining Americans was it done via warrants? No warrants, no authorization, and anyone involved with it perpetrated sedition aginst the United States Constitution. Pretty simple concept.
Can someone please roll Guckert and get proof the Chimporer got topped on AF-1? If a blowjob got their ire on Clinton, maybe a butt-fuck will blow their minds on Busch.
Posted by phidipidese at January 14, 2006 09:44 AMWhen a sitting President has no respect for the Congress of the United States, then we should not show respect for the President of the United States. WALK OUR OR DON'T SHOW UP.
I am emailing every Democrat in office who are invited to attend.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 09:46 AMJudith, the Goppers have already elevated their smear campaign on Murtha. It is really disgusting.
As for the SOTU, DNC is asking that communities host a watch party. They are asking for immediate slams of letters, faxes, emails right after the event.
Although I prefer the walk-out. There is much to write to Congress about today.
In addition, PFA has a campaign to stop Alito. This is again, a massive letter drive.
To continue, in other news, Jim McDermott has been under attack ever since he blew the whistle on Newt leading to his resignation. He is needing assistance.
The viciousness of the Goppers is neverending.
There are a whole lot of fights today. Bottom line, these fights are not just individual ones, they are all linked together to save this Country as we know it.
"Can someone please roll Guckert and get proof the Chimporer got topped on AF-1? If a blowjob got their ire on Clinton, maybe a butt-fuck will blow their minds on Busch."
No Phidipides, that won't do it either. Bush's spin will be that Guckert was a National Security risk, and he had to do it to get information on terra and keep us safe. And the audience applauded.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 09:52 AMAnjha, yeah I read where Murtha is now going to be destroyed. It was only a matter of time. Don't forget, this pResinut is very revengeful. I'm surprised that he hasn't been sent to Gitmo.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 09:55 AMphidipidese (sp?), I think that "intelligence" said al-Zawahri was supposedly hiding inside the cow...don't cows have 18 stomachs or such..one stomach for each of the 18 that were reported killed.
Hanyway, the new media spin and talking point is that the CIA is responsible for the error and bogus information leading to the attack. I know, I know, you're thinking that's original....where have we heard that excuse before.
Posted by emal at January 14, 2006 10:06 AMEmal, I grined on that one.
Hey, does anyone have an email (complete) listing of the Congress? So often, the email address on the web are incorrect. I am having trouble sending my email about the upcoming SOTU speech.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 10:19 AMJudith,
Senate
Most have web-forms that must be filled out. Many of the House members will not allow people outside of their district to send via web-form.
I have heard that faxes are best.
Posted by Anjha at January 14, 2006 10:27 AMThe great "War on Terror" was planned long before 911 and should be more appropriately called the "War For Globalization".
Read all about it in "The Pentagon's New Map" by Thomas M. Barnett. Barnett was one of the civilian planners at the Pentagon who came up with the concept of perpetual war to bring the entire world into compliance with globalization.
When the Bush/Cheney Florida putsch of 2000 was successful, Barnett and a band of like minded Generals and neocons took over in the Pentagon.
These people consider all nations, organizations and individuals who oppose globalization to be the new enemy. The military will be used to bring resisting nations into compliance and domestic law enforcement will be used to bring organizations and individuals into compliance.
This in, in a nutshell, explains the NSA surveillance of Americans that began as soon as Bush took office.
This would seem like tinfoil hat stuff if Barnett had not proudly written about his role in formulating this new policy in his book. Read it, it will make the hair stand up on the back of your neck.
Posted by Greg at January 14, 2006 10:43 AMHere's my debunking of Leopold's article.
One example of the problems with the article? Leopold bases much of his article--arguing that Bush authorized NSA surveillance before 9/11--on a December 2000 paper.
Posted by emptywheel at January 14, 2006 10:54 AMemptywheel:
Casting doubt on Leopold's is certainly within the bounds of the debate. He should have gone over his data better.
But to suggest that the opinions of your rebuttal are proof of the opposite position puts you in the same spot. Neither you nor Leopold have proven your cases beyond that shadow of a doubt that Alito is going to take away from us soon.
Posted by pessimist at January 14, 2006 01:06 PMAnjha, that is the problem I have had for a year or more when trying to send emails. It should not be that difficult to get in touch with our representatives. Thanks, I have my evening cut out for me.
Posted by Judith at January 14, 2006 01:07 PMSo perhaps this is why the FBI quashed the Minneapolis offices, ( Rowley,) FISA request on Moussai, since the NSA already had the information they were seeking, and it would have tainted any prosecution of Moussai since the FISA request was made after the spying began, which also means the Administration knew more prior to 911 than the information made public has lead us to believe.
Posted by EZSmirkzz at January 14, 2006 02:56 PM10 years ago I was a member of the American Federation of Teachers. Every summer, the AFT hosted a seminar on negotiating at our state university. I've forgotten a lot, but I came away from one seminar with an adage that has consistantly proved to be true over time: 'When they get angry and start yelling, spitting and calling you names - you're doing something right!' Let's hope Murtha ignores the spittle and keeps right on talking. The more they defile the man, the prouder he stands - the worse they look.
Posted by bboop at January 14, 2006 03:12 PMIf the Democrats do not all walk out at the SOTU, at the end of the speech, a designated democratic leader, probably Bird or Reid, but not Kennedy, should stand up and demand to have a question and answer period with the President about his usurpation of power and disregard of the law. They do it in Parliament, why not in Congress.
Posted by JWP at January 14, 2006 03:15 PMNo surprises here. Bush came into office illegally -- by fiat of the Supreme Court. More a coronation than anthing else. The Bushies distrust the American people more than they do the terrorists. Hell, they use the terrorists to maintain their sway over the citizens. The Bush administration is the real terrorists here -- they have declared war on the American people (except for their cronies & sycophants).
Posted by Jim at January 14, 2006 06:39 PMThe Dems walking out of the SOTU speech would be one thing, however: it would be better if they all remained, and booed loudly every time the President* lied.
Posted by Monz at January 14, 2006 08:16 PMCan someone explain how this works exactly?
Allegedly, Bush authorized this activity. I wouldn't doubt that he did. But the very first sentence of this piece says that the NSA "advised President Bush" that it was doing this activity, which implies that he didn't know it was going on. It might even suggest that it was going on perhaps before he even arrived in office.
In other news, the Dems still have a terrible reputation of being anti-everything and unconcerned for the safety of America. It's not an accurate portrayal, but nevertheless the Republican spin masters have painted us with big ugly stripes.
For the Dems (even one) to WALK OUT of the SOTU would push our cause back half a decade. Our cause is proving to the American people that we are focused, concerned, and actively participating in the process of both securing America and protecting American rights.
Sure, it might be entertaining (for half a second) if Sen. Kennedy stood up and walked out. But how incredibly middle-schoolish that would look. And what a terrible image to be saddle the rest of America's Democrats with.
Let's work toward connecting the Democrats with power and peace, sanity and security.
Posted by Editor at January 14, 2006 08:32 PMEmal: I do agree with you about not watching faux news, I try once after because I was told that they were first in the news of the American invasion of Iraq? My impression was a little different because I knew it was a big mistake and that we will be paying for this for a long time but I am not too crazy about CNN either. They always seem to find stories that are irrelevant because they do not want to air something that might make the WH looks bad.
There had demonstration against the War, they spend the all day on a stupid story all days for not mentioning what was really happening and the next day that big news was over. They are phonies as Fox. Cox became a monopoly in our State in the 90”s that is when I stopped to get them and replace them with the Dish. I have now Amy Goodman and INN, on free speech TV. You get more channel and it cost less that the monopoly, if you can get it. I mean that as all satellites are on the equator if you live in the Northern region, your neighbor might have a big tree that is in the way of your signal. I did have some trees trim because of it.
You can get it on the internet.
I think if you want news you will not find it on any American corporate news.
I do also think that Alito will be confirm and bush will look for the Supreme Court to let him get away with his spying, what Nixon was getting impeach on. Bush is worst then Nixon was ever. Krugman was right before Iraq began.
Bush is a man that had his live mistakes taken care by Mommy cronies. Daddies, grand fathers, was involved in helping Hitler.