Meanwhile, as a fellow TPMerposted, we can also put our righteous indignation (oh, please don't let me be too shrill!,) to work by contributing to REAL progressive candidates. Including those Saint Barack stabbed in the back by backing their Bush-dog opponent.

Regina Thomas (GA-12) is one of those, opposed by Obama-backed Bush Dog John Barrow. The primary election is a week from Tuesday (July 15).

You can contribute here or here

And on a slightly different topic, I recommend this post.

Posted at July 6, 2008 4:17 AM in response to Obama Responds To FISA Group On His Web Site

Absolutely. I mean, God forbid you should hold your candidate accountable for his positions or anything like that.

One staunch BHO-at-any-cost loyalist has a post up at the Cafe defending BHO's "pragmatism" -- which the poster defines as "concerned with the practical consequences of actions or beliefs."

Well, guess what. We on the progressive left are giving our candidate notice of the practical consequences of his actions and beliefs.

There are a lot of you who want to shut us up and therefore protect The One from the practical consequences of his actions and beliefs.

This is how politics is played, folks. We're not going to play nerfball while the rest of the political world, including the Bush Dogs, the hard right, and the Republican-lite "mainstream" Dems play hardball.

We can bring guns to the knife fight, too.

Posted at July 6, 2008 4:02 AM in response to A Time-line Of Obama's Statements On FISA

Rec'd. A keeper. Brilliant!

Will be linking this post when the matter comes up -- which, reading the hrebendorfs and Buckeye Terrorists and liams and elliotness's of this board, will be all too frequently.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:56 AM in response to Diary of a stubborn, flip-flopping, ideological, traitorous, left wing nut, Republican loyalist Democrat

Half of the country does not agree with the liberal point of view.

And that, I submit, is bullshit.

All Americans "disagree with", at the very most, is the label "liberal". But when you poll them, solid to huge majorities support liberal positions, as Alterman and Zornick demostrate on the page I linked to.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:49 AM in response to UNCOMPROMISING POLITICS and NADERISM (How's that workin' out for ya?)

Rec'd, and just sent her $25. Regina Thomas is a great candidate, and shame on Saint Barack for backing the disgusting reactionary Barrow.

Here's another ActBlue page where you can contribute to Thomas as well as to a number of other Aggressive Progressives. The numbers on that page are much more encouraging -- she raised over $25K there.

Thanks for highlighting this, and let's put our money (literally) where our mouths are.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:38 AM in response to If you are still mad at Obama for FISA , Here's Your Chance To Take Constructive Action

The only thing that the media is reporting is that Obama is losing support from it. THAT's the damaging part. If you hear "Obama is in trouble", "Obama is in trouble", "Obama is losing support" more and more the people who do't pay attention to the issues but pay attention to the trends, (You know, the vast majority or AMERICA) it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy.

That's the part that's called "rewarding good behavior" and "sanctioning bad behavior." When you do the right thing, your support increases. When you do the wrong thing, your support decreases. Natural consequences.

That's the point at which the "pragmatic" Senator Obama, the one who, presumably, is "concerned with the practical consequences of actions or beliefs," the one who supposedly "has or indicates an awareness of things as they really are", might just wake up and realize the practical consequences of his actions or beliefs.

What's so ironic is that the Obama sycophants on the board want to shut up those who are justly incensed over his Constitutional sellout. In other words, they want to protect Obama from those pesky progressives and, therefore, from the practical consequences of his actions or beliefs.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:33 AM in response to UNCOMPROMISING POLITICS and NADERISM (How's that workin' out for ya?)

1) He can't undo immunity. Once that's granted, game over.

2) At this point, I see precious little evidence that he will want to undo anything once he's President.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:26 AM in response to A Time-line Of Obama's Statements On FISA

Not that liam was being, you know, shrill or anything.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:22 AM in response to Obama Responds To FISA Group On His Web Site

""Shrill" is the folks running around saying Obama will lose if there's the slightest bit of criticism of him."

Sure, but nobody is saying that.

Um, yes, they are.

In this very thread, in fact -- which you might have noticed had you bothered to read the comments upthread.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:21 AM in response to Obama Responds To FISA Group On His Web Site

Spencer, extremely well put. Kudos. Should be required reading for all of those who claim that any misfortune that befalls Obama as a result of his political positions is the fault of ... those who take him to task for his political positions.

Posted at July 6, 2008 3:08 AM in response to Obama Responds To FISA Group On His Web Site