This is a piece I imagined into existence four years ago.  Sadly, since that time events have shown that we have no true opposition party, only compromised enablers. I posted this back in 2004 on Smirking Chimp.  It's continued relevance has prompted me to include it in a diary today.

This diary is pure telecom propaganda.  The diarist claims that it is just her third diary when in fact it is her first second.  In addition, there is only one comment of hers that is not attached to this diary.  Folks, we're getting snowed by a professional bullshitter here.

SEE BELOW FOR UPDATE

It is primarily an emotionally charged vehicle to get people to say, I love Obama and don't mind if he abandons progressive principles as long as he gets elected.

THIS IS WRITTEN BY A TELECOM CORPORATE LAWYER.

IT PUSHES FAUX NEWS TALKING POINTS SLAMMING TRIAL LAWYERS REGARDING FISA

OK, maybe just Russ Feingold.  My point being that everybody has things in their life regarding which they should have a reasonable expectation of privacy.  And for those in public life, even trivial personal quirks can be enough to destroy their career - especially in this nasty political environment in which blowjobs are seen as an impeachable offense.  And this is the true danger of the upcoming FISA vote in the Senate.  If bu$h's illegal spying is given a pass then we will have lost any semblance of control of the political direction of the country.

Come across the fold to see why.

The enclosed opinion piece appeared in our local paper yesterday.  It was written by a Eugene resident who has worked in the public mental health system for the past 25 years.  A friend alerted me to this and asked me to  help get word out.  I'm guessing the pharmaceutical companies would report this themselves if they were genuinely concerned for our health.  Unfortunately, the only health they seem to worry about is of their bottom line.

Register Guard, Eugene, OR

Telecom immunity is an enormous issue relative to both personal freedoms and also the extents of executive power.  I am so thrilled to finally see some backbone emerge from the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives.  I fear our victory may be short lived though.  As we know, there is tremendous pressure being applied by the White House, Republicans in Congress, and sell out Democrats to get this thing done.

Their constant drumbeat is about "fairness for the companies that stepped up to help the president protect America after the horrific attacks of 9-11", or some such Giuliani-like garbage.  Meanwhile, they are trying to hide the fact that their Bush administration's domestic spying began in February 2001, a full 7 months before 9-11.

So here is the plan ...

Hi Hill,

May I call you that?  I don't mean to be presumptive, but you've been a part of my world for over 15 years now and I sort of feel like we're old friends.  There were a lot of slings and arrows thrown your way during Bill's presidency and I suffered them vicariously along with you - I felt your pain, if you will.  I truly mean that and do not intend it to be a snarky reference to Bill's use of those words.  It is a great expression and speaks to my experience of those times.

I have great respect and admiration for both you and your opponent in the Democratic primaries.  I think you are both well-intentioned and quite capable of doing the job.  And while my personal opinion is that you are the one who has a better grasp of the policy issues and ramifications, the momentum of the nomination process seems to be flowing against you.  

Please stay with me here ...

I have read a number of criticisms of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert for "strikebreaking", being "scabs", and other unflattering terms.  It is my belief that having their shows back on the air actually strengthens the writers position.  Follow my reasoning across the fold ...

Here is a gift concept for your more politically attuned friends.  The Dana Perino Box 'O Rocks is the perfect symbol for the bu$h maladministration.  [I find it telling that that last word is even in the DKos dictionary.]  To learn how to make this simple gift, follow across the jump ...

While we in the blogosphere are all over this USA firing story, the MSM's refusal to go beneath the surface has left most of the public with a vague idea that something sleazy might have happened, but probably not criminal.  The high profile of the Duke lacrosse players case provides us the perfect opportunity to frame the USA scandal in a way that most people can easily understand and relate to. Below is an opinion piece I have written tying these themes together.

Note - renamed due to confusion, see long interaction in comments.

While we in the blogosphere are all over this USA firing story, the MSM's refusal to go beneath the surface has left most of the public with a vague idea that something sleazy might have happened, but probably not criminal.  The high profile of the Duke lacrosse players case provides us the perfect opportunity to frame the USA scandal in a way that most people can easily understand and relate to. Below is an opinion piece I have written tying these themes together.

...

[Note - original diary from 4/13, updated diary published 4/15]

I wrote a diary the other day about the harsh, angry, and at times frighteningly threatening comments which were left on the Washington Post comments board related to Fred Hiatt's diatribe against Nancy Pelosi for going to Syria.

BloodLust Rising _ - ^ death threats against Pelosi at WaPo

As I reported in that diary, when I returned to gather posts as examples I saw that all of the death threats and real ugly, nasty stuff and over-the-top sexism had been cleaned out.  But there were still a huge number of anti-Nancy posts that expressed extreme positions mentioning the words traitor and treason a lot, along with more run of the mill GOP sexism, insults, and ad hominem attacks.  The first several pages of posts were like a Freeper holiday with very few pro-Nancy posts.

Not anymore  ... -[pilf]

I was directed to Fred Hiatt's Washington Post editorial on Nancy Pelosi the other day.  By the time I read the bullshit White House talking points he was spouting and got to the comments, there were already over 30 pages of them.  It was apparent right off the bat that Freeperville and all of its related suburbs had been linked there early.

Initially the comments largely were supportive of Hiatt with a good bit of typical angry GOP nastiness and sexism.  All to be expected given the crowd that showed up.  But then I noticed a trend.  The further into the comments I got the more extreme the comments.  I stopped reading around page 30-something to request a post be deleted.  It was a heated comment charging Nancy with treason and demanding she be locked up for life.

Little did I know, the fun had just begun

Flip with me

A couple of weeks ago I posted this diary which suggested that the Carol Lam investigation into Wilkes and Foggo was potentially explosive for the Vice President.

RE: Lam, follow the $ ... military budget - Duke - OVP black ops???

This was all inspired by pondering the question, Why did Cheney buy Duke the Duke-stir?

It didn't make sense at first because it's not like he's a defense contractor looking to have contracts steered his way.  But then I realized there was a much more logical reason.  To create a slush fund for his own black ops.

More below the fold

Arlen Specter was on Meet The Press on March 25th discussing USAgate.  In typical Specter fashion he made it difficult to figure out which side of his mouth to listen to.  While claiming that the White House should compromise on the conditions on Rove and Miers, he also was spouting talking points to support their position.  In particular, he said there was no need for them to be under oath because lying to Congress carries a 5 year sentence regardless of whether the witness has been sworn in.  (He also beat that dead horse about Clinton and all 93 USAs blah blah blah.)

This brought to mind several questions regarding both this case, and previous high profile cases.

It is obvious that the bu$hies are in full battle mode defending themselves in this latest scandal and cover-up.  But apparently all they have for their defense is BS and bluster.  It is almost sad (in a gleeful kind of way) to watch GOP politicians and talking heads still trotting out their excuse of "Bill Clinton fired all 93 of his USAs, we're only talking about eight."  They are shamelessly disingenuous.  And then to hear bu$h claim that the firings were appropriate and that no crimes were committed ... well that clinches it.  Crimes WERE committed.  Big Time!

It is obvious that the removal of Carol Lam was related to Dukestergate.  This may not be provable at the present, but the circumstantial case is strong.  But it appears likely that this is only the beginning of this story.  Why are they so adamant about hiding their actions and covering this up?  How far does this go and how significant is it?

So here are some considerations, some dots to connect so to speak ...