Comments (36)

Denis wrote on November 14, 2007 3:26 PM:

And people wonder why the ratings for the democratically controlled congress are so low?

When are these elected officials going to actually stand up and do their oversight jobs?

EdNSted wrote on November 14, 2007 3:37 PM:

These are the Democrats. This is how they earn it.

When are these elected officials going to actually stand up and do their oversight jobs? Sadly, pathetically, never.

P J Evans wrote on November 14, 2007 3:41 PM:

And in December, you have the end-of-year holidays, which will push it back to ... well, probably never, because they'll just keep on manufacturing reasons not to do their jobs on this.

Nancy, Harry, are you planning to keep those nice offices past this year?

brian wrote on November 14, 2007 3:47 PM:

Every citizen should be alarmed that a subpoena from the congress was flouted by a White House official.

Last week another subpoena was flouted by an army officer, who said someone at the pentagon told him not to show up. Federal law was broken by the official who told the witness not to show.

All we have is our constitution and our elections and our courts. When these are destroyed we will have despotism.

Recommended reading : Montesquieu, The Spirit Of The Laws.

Anonymous wrote on November 14, 2007 4:04 PM:

Can I push back paying may taxes for 6 months? I wonder if my boss wouldn't mind me not doing parts of my job that I don't like for 6 months. Give me a freeking break. DO YOUR JOB!

David Foody wrote on November 14, 2007 4:07 PM:

Much as I hate to be a picker of nits (and a lurking one at that), I feel the need to point out that Rahm should be labeled as "D-IL", not "D-NY". I assume the typo to be a carry-over from the original quote. Just looking out for my foul-mouthed congress critter.

Anonymous wrote on November 14, 2007 4:09 PM:

cowards!!!!

Official A wrote on November 14, 2007 4:16 PM:

Yes, Rahm, it would be a real shame to distract attention away from upcoming Democratic capitulations on Iraq and FISA. You are SO pathetic.

Third party, anyone?

PBen wrote on November 14, 2007 4:18 PM:

"this week is not the time to do this"

???????????

So, how does one figure out the right week to do this? Consult the stars? Dowsing rod? Read the entrails?

Get off your lazy a$$es, and DO IT!!!

Official A wrote on November 14, 2007 4:19 PM:

David Foody wrote: "Rahm should be labeled as "D-IL"."

D-ILDO is more like it.

TheraP wrote on November 14, 2007 4:20 PM:

How much more contemptuous can they become between now and Dec?

Official A wrote on November 14, 2007 4:23 PM:

PBen wrote: "Get off your lazy a$$es, and DO IT!!!"

Triangulating asses, you mean. Rahm is a triangulator par excellence. Hillary's spawn, that one.

Official A wrote on November 14, 2007 4:26 PM:

TheraP wrote: "How much more contemptuous can they become between now and Dec?"

Contempt of Congress? Count me in.

Rocker5150 wrote on November 14, 2007 4:30 PM:

The incredibly serious charges that have been made against him on numerous websites are starting to make me wonder.

Official A wrote on November 14, 2007 4:31 PM:

In 2004 and 2006, I gave Democrats $ well beyond my means. Now I hate their guts. Go figure.

Uncle_Meat wrote on November 14, 2007 4:33 PM:

George Carlin said it best:

"They don't give a fuck about you.."

or me, or anything other than themselves..

Vote the whole damn bunch out...

Paulie wrote on November 14, 2007 4:55 PM:

I thank George Bush for pushing me to the left of center but what do I find over here? A Democratic Party FULL of cowardly, unprincipled, spineless, dishonest, pathetic losers. At least in one sense they are catching up to the repugnants!

Remember Brewsters Millions?

Vote for none of the above!!!

mbbsdphil wrote on November 14, 2007 5:07 PM:

Gutless wonders, the Democratic leadership.

If they've obtained something wonderful in exchange for failing to hold the administration to account, they are bloody good at hiding it. Which suggests they've received nothing at all, that they've just avoided a public fight which Mini-Rahm, Nancy-Me and Steny-Who? think will help them with the electorate. Fat chance. Alternatively, it suggests that what they received they are too afraid, embarrassed or corrupt to admit to.

Either way, several of them need to not have their public employment contracts renewed next fall.

Kat wrote on November 14, 2007 5:14 PM:

People calling for a "Third Party"?

Hell, I'm hoping for a "Two Party System".

Rob Heywood wrote on November 14, 2007 5:25 PM:

Rahm Emanual, I have always felt, is an unauthentic, sometimes inarticulate opportunist who has not done anything of substance for our country or the Democratic party. He and, as it turns out, Pelosi are useless!

nellieh wrote on November 14, 2007 5:26 PM:

Emanuel could screw up a two car parade. Since when did he become Speaker? Is this the order from the DLC? Pelosi better get off her ass snd start taking charge and put impeachment on the agenda. It is so predictable the Democrats will grab defeat from the jaws of victory. Emanuel and Schumer should get nowhere near Democratic election committees. They still think it was all "them" who caused the Democratic majorities. It was in spite of them.

TomJ wrote on November 14, 2007 5:30 PM:

That's it. No more money for the Democrats (or Republicans -- like I ever did that!) from me until they grow a spine.

REP wrote on November 14, 2007 5:32 PM:

Congress is doing what it needs to do to show the country that it has good policy posititions on Iraq and FISA before the country will allow them to act on the White House.
The Democrats will pass legislation that the country needs and the President will veto the bills. Then the Congress will be able to vote against the White House

Rob Heywood wrote on November 14, 2007 5:38 PM:

I hope you are right REP. But that is not how the Neo-cons have successfully bamboozaled the country.

Peregrin wrote on November 14, 2007 5:44 PM:

Any chance there is a Rep. in the US House who cares enough abought our country to start a Discharge Petition to force this issue?

acallidryas wrote on November 14, 2007 5:46 PM:

Yes, I can see how holding the administration accountable for something would step on their message of spinelessness and capitulation.

darms wrote on November 14, 2007 6:05 PM:

Here's a date for that subpoena vote we can ALL agree on, 'January 21 2009'.

Screw you Rahm & your DLC buds, you're every bit as much the enemy as Bushco.

oleeb wrote on November 14, 2007 6:09 PM:

In light of moves like this it is very difficult to understand why the public views Congressional Democrats as weak-kneed, lacking in conviction, stereotypical craven, calculating and conniving politicians isn't it? Good work Rahmmy!

SocraticGadfly wrote on November 14, 2007 6:10 PM:

"Step on their message?"

In other words, Democrats are saying they can't legislate and chew gum at the same time.

Vote Green, where available.

Bushie wrote on November 14, 2007 6:22 PM:

December: a time of carols, sleigh bells, and contempt citations [not!].

The Dem's slight of mouth fools no one. Why even bother to pollute the air with more foul air? Gives 'em something to do I guess

Anonymous wrote on November 14, 2007 7:06 PM:

Why push it to December? Because then they can bury this in the Winter; and then blame the Februrary budget-cycle as the excuse to say, "We can't press on this." Come on, American public. Let's stop wasting time thinking this DNC-controlled Congress is serious about anything. Same excuses as the GOP to do nothing.

Let' get on with a public effort to discuss removing Nancy Pelosi as Speaker; and clear the way for impeachment. This Congress refuses to lead. Time for the public to impose lawfully the 2006 voter mandate: Remove Pelosi as speaker; and give the DNC-GOP majority, that supported Kucinich, a chance to find a new leader in the Congress that will support impeachment. This Congressional crew is reckless, incomptent, and makes a mockery of the American rule of law.

Tim B wrote on November 14, 2007 7:22 PM:

WTF? Subpoena enforcement will "step on our message on Iraq and FISA[?]" The only "message" from the dems on Iraq and FISA is that they have no spines and will roll over for Bush every time.

Subpoena enforcment would be a different message though, the message being that the dems are FINALLY going to stand up to Bush. I can certainly see why Rahm doesn't want THAT message getting out.

zoyd wheeler wrote on November 14, 2007 10:51 PM:

Again, ladies and gentleman, a clear indicator of the collaborative nature of your Democratic party. You fume about Bush, but the real traitors walk amongst us wrapped in the blue garb of the Democratic Leadership. Iraq, Telco, Habeas Corpus, warrentless wiretapping, WMD's, industry driven CAFE, DOJ, CIA, FBI, 911, Banking regulation, consumer protection, Clear skies, clean water, clean toilets, lying under oath, Israel, Saudi Arabia, $100 a Barrel, Supreme Court, War, Fear and disaster capitalism....Democrats support all of these things as much as your freakiest wingnuts, just differently.

cjop wrote on November 14, 2007 11:00 PM:

The promise of an easy 2008 Democratic landslide keeps slipping away as voters look at those in Congress who are currently in power and see the complete lack of leadership. I would be surprised if they don't bend over on every important issue coming before them. Bush will get his version of FISA and it will protect the phone companies from prosecution. Bush will get every penny for Iraq that he asks for . The IG at State will tell Congress to go fuck itself, Arlen will act mad then he and Leahy will roll over. Tell me that, outside of a very few, all of these people aren't in bed together with the same money. Pathetic.

Kent Mueller wrote on November 15, 2007 12:19 AM:

The lesson here is easy to remember. From here on out congressional subpoenas don't mean a thing, regardless of which party has majority. New Rule.

The contempt citations are a "slam dunk", in the immortal words of George Tenet and hundreds of thousands of frat boys. The offense is clear to any court of law or should be. If the courts don't back it up, all the alternatives are ugly.

They've taken every careful step and offered every courtesy. They can make their case.

They should move on this now, or just come out and admit that the fix is in, that checks and balances has been replaced by checks and cash.

Mauimom wrote on November 15, 2007 5:39 AM:

Rather than the "shoot ourselves in the foot" tactic of "I'm never giving $$ to Democrats," why not get strategic about your money [however much or little of it you have]?

There are plenty of GOOD Democrats - incumbents & challengers - who need support. Help elect "More and Better Democrats" -- like Donna Edwards, who's opposing Al Wynn in MD-04, or Diane Benton who challenged the corrupt-beyond-belief Republican Young in AK.

Go to one of the "good" Democratic blogs, like Firedoglake, and read some of Howie Kline's interviews with individual Democratic candidates. None of them is supporting the war, or Pelosi or Rahm. [As a matter of fact, Pelosi held a fund-raiser for incumbent Wynn just last week.]

Give your money DIRECTLY to GOOD Democratic candidates who, once elected, will NOT support Steney, Nancy & Rahm for party leadership positions, and will vote the way REAL Democrats deserve.